The rule of law is not an idealistic or abstract concept without any real consequences for the general public. It is the notion that all are equal before the law – both individuals and the State.
However, the stark conclusion of the report is that this, and any future Government, must wake up to the country’s worrying trajectory we are on and start to reinstate the UK’s longstanding adherence to the Rule of Law, ensuring it is understood, respected and maintained if we want to preserve our reputation as a shining light for democracy around the world.
The rule of law is a set of principles, fundamental to our constitution, that seeks to ensure that everyone, including the State itself, is bound by, and entitled to the benefit of, publicly-made laws administered in the courts. It is vital, both for the public at large, who expect the State to behave in a responsible manner and for the marginalised, to ensure due respect for their rights too.
The stability created by our longstanding rule of law has wide-reaching benefits, from providing a strong system for commerce, entrepreneurship, philanthropy and democracy to thrive, to strengthening international relations.
The report finds that over the past decade and particularly in the last five years, the process of lawmaking has become less transparent, less accountable, less inclusive, and less democratic. For example:
Public consultations, valuable for ensuring the Government considers a wide range of views and evidence, are too often poorly conducted, if at all. This is clear from the Illegal Migration Act 2023, which was not subject to any public consultation or pre-legislative scrutiny despite having profound implications for the UK’s asylum system and human rights adherence. Equally, the Bill of Rights Bill consultation, which received 12,000 responses, with up to 90% of respondents opposed to key reforms, was completely sidelined.
There has been a growing legislative disregard for human rights. The health of the UK’s civic space has been downgraded from ‘narrowed’ to ‘obstructed’ by the Civicus Monitor, a platform that monitors the state of civil society freedoms globally. Laws like the Public Order Act 2023 could have a chilling effect on our rights to freedom of thought, expression, and peaceful assembly.
‘Henry VIII’ powers, which allow ministers to amend or repeal laws through secondary legislation with little parliamentary oversight or scrutiny, have become more prevalent, adversely affecting the principle of legal certainty. This is evident in the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, in which power is bounded by whether the minister thinks its exercise is ‘appropriate’, rather than it being objectively ‘necessary’.
Cuts to legal aid have decimated universal access to justice and victims, witnesses, small businesses are left waiting months if not years for a trial. This has been compounded by the ongoing courts backlog crisis, where, as of March 2023, over 340,000 cases are outstanding in the Magistrates’ courts and over 62,000 in the Crown Court. Annual public expenditure on legal aid dropped by a quarter between 2009 and March 2022, resulting in ‘legal aid deserts’, with no access to legal advice at all.
Significant systemic inequalities still need to be addressed in our society. Yet our approaches to tackling inequality and discrimination are unfit for purpose. The budget of the Equality and Human Rights Commission has plummeted from a peak of £70.3 million in 2007 to £17.1m today. Moreover, policymakers do not, as a matter of course, conduct Equality Impact Assessments, as seen most recently where the Illegal Migration Act 2023 lacked such an assessment until after its passage through the House of Commons. Often discrimination goes entirely undetected due to data being uncollected, unpublished, or of poor quality. In modern slavery cases, for instance, no data is regularly researched or published in relation to complainant ethnicity.
JUSTICE is grateful to Clifford Chance LLP and Travers Smith LLP for their pro bono research in support of the report, as well as JRSST Charitable Trust and the Legal Education Foundation for their important contribution to this work.