Report comment

Anon. 16.23 "Decisions are often made for example whereby an individual with a violent history is awarded a soft sentence of community service and then within 48 hours go on to commit violent offences".

Often? I'd like chapter and verse before accepting that. We have one of the highest prison populations per head in Europe.

Mr Maloney: Hardly a perverse decision. You may not like it but it is quite carefully argued and its basis is what the judges (three of the most senior judges in the English legal system) considered the weak arguments of the government. It is a question of what weight should be given to various elements of our constitution. If the Supreme Court takes a different view then so be it. I do however find it ironic that those who argued that we should 'take back control' on the basis that the UK parliament all too often found itself overruled or unable to legislate because of executive decisions made at a European level should now be arguing that the national executive should be free to do whatever it wants free of parliamentary scrutiny, merely because in this particular instance they hope that the executive will do what they want. What happens if on a different occasion the executive wishes to do something different that you don't happen to like? You should be very careful what you wish for; you may get it.

Mr Leonard: This was a Judicial Review. The issue was whether the govt. had the legal power to rely on the royal prerogative to take an action which would have significant effects on domestic law. The motivation of those asking the question is neither here nor there, and has never been a basis for refusing to consider a justiciable question. It would be an abuse of the judiciary's position to refuse to consider a case on purely political grounds.

Mr Hotep Thomas: Sorry but I have no idea what point you are trying to make. Who or what is acting way outside the scope of their authority here?