This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/law/2016/nov/05/barristers-urge-liz-truss-to-condemn-attacks-on-brexit-ruling-judges
The article has changed 9 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 1 | Version 2 |
|---|---|
| Brexit: barristers urge Liz Truss to condemn 'unjustified' attacks on judges | |
| (35 minutes later) | |
| Barristers have urged the lord chancellor, Liz Truss, to condemn the “serious and unjustified attacks on the judiciary” after the high court’s Brexit decision. | Barristers have urged the lord chancellor, Liz Truss, to condemn the “serious and unjustified attacks on the judiciary” after the high court’s Brexit decision. |
| The call from the Bar Council, which represents barristers in England and Wales, comes as Theresa May’s government faces accusations of failing to restrain the backlash against Thursday’s judgment on article 50. | The call from the Bar Council, which represents barristers in England and Wales, comes as Theresa May’s government faces accusations of failing to restrain the backlash against Thursday’s judgment on article 50. |
| Chantal-Aimee Doerries QC, chair of the Bar Council, emphasised that the judgment was not about the merits of leaving the EU, but rather the constitutional process of triggering article 50. | Chantal-Aimee Doerries QC, chair of the Bar Council, emphasised that the judgment was not about the merits of leaving the EU, but rather the constitutional process of triggering article 50. |
| “It is the judiciary’s role to ensure the rule of law underpins our democratic system. Without it fulfilling this vital role, the people would have very limited scope to hold the government in power to account,” she said. | “It is the judiciary’s role to ensure the rule of law underpins our democratic system. Without it fulfilling this vital role, the people would have very limited scope to hold the government in power to account,” she said. |
| “Publicly criticising individual members of the judiciary over a particular judgment or suggesting that they are motivated by their individual views, political or otherwise, is wrong, and serves only to undermine their vital role in the administration of justice. It also does no favours to our global reputation. | “Publicly criticising individual members of the judiciary over a particular judgment or suggesting that they are motivated by their individual views, political or otherwise, is wrong, and serves only to undermine their vital role in the administration of justice. It also does no favours to our global reputation. |
| “None of the parties suggested that the court did not have jurisdiction to decide the point at issue. They are simply doing their job – impartially ruling on a dispute between parties, one of whom happens to be the government in this instance. | |
| “The right to appeal is there to challenge the court’s decision if a party feels they have grounds to do so. Whilst acknowledging that this question is one of potentially significant constitutional importance, the independent role of the court should be respected, particularly by those who disagree with the outcome.” | “The right to appeal is there to challenge the court’s decision if a party feels they have grounds to do so. Whilst acknowledging that this question is one of potentially significant constitutional importance, the independent role of the court should be respected, particularly by those who disagree with the outcome.” |
| Former ministers warned that the febrile tone of media coverage – the three judges who ruled against the government were condemned as “enemies of the people” by the Daily Mail – risked poisoning public debate. | Former ministers warned that the febrile tone of media coverage – the three judges who ruled against the government were condemned as “enemies of the people” by the Daily Mail – risked poisoning public debate. |
| Politicians from all sides have condemned the attacks on the judiciary, with the former attorney general Dominic Grieve calling them “chilling and outrageous” and “smacking of the fascist state”. | Politicians from all sides have condemned the attacks on the judiciary, with the former attorney general Dominic Grieve calling them “chilling and outrageous” and “smacking of the fascist state”. |
| Hilary Benn, the Labour chair of the Commons Brexit select committee, said coverage such as the Mail’s was not helpful. He told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that the media and politicians had a responsibility not to attack those who had made the decision. | Hilary Benn, the Labour chair of the Commons Brexit select committee, said coverage such as the Mail’s was not helpful. He told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that the media and politicians had a responsibility not to attack those who had made the decision. |
| Ministers should remind their colleagues “that even if you don’t like the judgment, you have to respect it”, he said. | Ministers should remind their colleagues “that even if you don’t like the judgment, you have to respect it”, he said. |
| Bob Neill, the Conservative chairman of the justice select committee, said the attacks were “threatening the independence of our judiciary” and had “no place in a civilised land”. | Bob Neill, the Conservative chairman of the justice select committee, said the attacks were “threatening the independence of our judiciary” and had “no place in a civilised land”. |
| The hashtag #wheresLizTruss continued to trend on Twitter on Saturday, as many posted criticism of the lord chancellor’s ongoing silence on the issue. Sir Paul Jenkins, the government’s most senior legal official and permanent secretary to the attorney general from 2006 to 2014, tweeted: | |
| It is indeed deeply sad that after a day of silence and neglect of duty we are asking #WheresLizTruss https://t.co/CiC7jKKZyr | It is indeed deeply sad that after a day of silence and neglect of duty we are asking #WheresLizTruss https://t.co/CiC7jKKZyr |
| Meanwhile, Jeremy Corbyn has avoided questions about whether he would welcome an early election and accused the media of harassing him. In a speech to a leftwing thinktank in London on Saturday, the Labour leader said the prime minister must set out her Brexit negotiating terms to parliament without delay in the wake of the high court ruling. | |
| “We accept and respect the decision to leave the European Union. But there must be transparency and accountability to parliament about the government’s plans,” Corbyn said. “I suspect the government opposes democratic scrutiny of its plans because – frankly – there aren’t any plans beyond the hollow rhetoric of ‘Brexit means Brexit’.” | |
| Thursday’s legal ruling, which was followed by the resignation of the Tory MP Stephen Phillips, has fuelled speculation that May will seek a general election before 2020. | Thursday’s legal ruling, which was followed by the resignation of the Tory MP Stephen Phillips, has fuelled speculation that May will seek a general election before 2020. |
| Corbyn refused to say whether he would be happy if there was an early election when asked by ITV. As aides intervened to stop further questions from the media, Corbyn walked away saying: “Can we go outside because we are being harassed here?” | Corbyn refused to say whether he would be happy if there was an early election when asked by ITV. As aides intervened to stop further questions from the media, Corbyn walked away saying: “Can we go outside because we are being harassed here?” |