Report comment

Surely this is precisely what a 'mere judge' is there for. Not to set policy, surely, but to guard us against the prospect of executive power being abused. Judges assessing the proportionality of legislative and executive responses to apparent pressing needs is the cornerstone of the 1957 Convention so heavily contibuted to by British diplomats in post-War Europe. Lest we forget.

This does not require the judiciary to sit in judgment on the will of Parliament, but why should they not be free to warn us if it seems to them (and who better to judge this) that our constitutional values are being eroded. We can then hold Government (and Parliament as necessary) to account.