A v SSHD [2005] 2 AC 68
This case, which has been brought before the House of Lords by nine men, who were issued a certificate of a suspected international terrorist under the Section 21 of the Anti – Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 and who were detained under Section 23 of that Act.
Their Lordships have answered the questions of law, forming the ratio decidendi.
Firstly, did Article 15 apply in the Belmarsh case in order to allow the derogation from Article 5 and the suspension of the right to liberty of the suspected terrorists?
Article 15 states that in the time of war or other public emergency threatening the life of the nation the state can derogate from the convention however only to the extent, strictly required by the exigencies …show more content…
Ralf Dahrendorf believes there could not be a clear separation of powers but co – ordination and sometimes confusion. Madison agrees with this point ‘’great departments of power should not be unconnected’’, this could relate to the idea of checks and balance that all three organs are bound by. Tomkins had a different idea about the principle. He believed that ‘tripartite division did not reflect the historical development of the English Constitution’. Tomkins refers to the English Civil War (1641 – 51) between Charles 1 who stood for the nation of ‘divine right of Kings’ and the Parliament led by Oliver Cromwell. Charles 1 wanted to rule without the influence of Parliament, however, he lost and was charged with treason. It has been agreed after that no single person should have the whole power. The principle of the separation of powers can be seen in practice through the creation of the Supreme Court of United Kingdom. The government of Tony Blair adopted the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 which stated that there should be an institutional separation of the judicial and legislative work of the House of Lords. Article 6 of the Human Rights Act required a ‘’stricter view taken of anything which might undermine the independence or impartiality of a judicial tribunal.’’ In the case of A v SSHD, Lord Bingham underlined the principle of the separation of powers ‘’great weight should be given to the judgement of the Home Secretary, …show more content…
It is one of the fundamental doctrines of the Constitution of the United Kingdom which both the citizens and the government are expected to act in accordance with, otherwise they will be punished. This is where the judiciary role is enforced. Dicey states that it is only the court of law that can enforce the punishment. He explains that equality before law, where everyone is equal in the light of law whether they are a judge, politician, teacher, police officer etc. indicates the extent to which rule of law guides the workings of the three branches of government, and it indicates justice and fairness in a democratic
This case, which has been brought before the House of Lords by nine men, who were issued a certificate of a suspected international terrorist under the Section 21 of the Anti – Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 and who were detained under Section 23 of that Act.
Their Lordships have answered the questions of law, forming the ratio decidendi.
Firstly, did Article 15 apply in the Belmarsh case in order to allow the derogation from Article 5 and the suspension of the right to liberty of the suspected terrorists?
Article 15 states that in the time of war or other public emergency threatening the life of the nation the state can derogate from the convention however only to the extent, strictly required by the exigencies …show more content…
Ralf Dahrendorf believes there could not be a clear separation of powers but co – ordination and sometimes confusion. Madison agrees with this point ‘’great departments of power should not be unconnected’’, this could relate to the idea of checks and balance that all three organs are bound by. Tomkins had a different idea about the principle. He believed that ‘tripartite division did not reflect the historical development of the English Constitution’. Tomkins refers to the English Civil War (1641 – 51) between Charles 1 who stood for the nation of ‘divine right of Kings’ and the Parliament led by Oliver Cromwell. Charles 1 wanted to rule without the influence of Parliament, however, he lost and was charged with treason. It has been agreed after that no single person should have the whole power. The principle of the separation of powers can be seen in practice through the creation of the Supreme Court of United Kingdom. The government of Tony Blair adopted the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 which stated that there should be an institutional separation of the judicial and legislative work of the House of Lords. Article 6 of the Human Rights Act required a ‘’stricter view taken of anything which might undermine the independence or impartiality of a judicial tribunal.’’ In the case of A v SSHD, Lord Bingham underlined the principle of the separation of powers ‘’great weight should be given to the judgement of the Home Secretary, …show more content…
It is one of the fundamental doctrines of the Constitution of the United Kingdom which both the citizens and the government are expected to act in accordance with, otherwise they will be punished. This is where the judiciary role is enforced. Dicey states that it is only the court of law that can enforce the punishment. He explains that equality before law, where everyone is equal in the light of law whether they are a judge, politician, teacher, police officer etc. indicates the extent to which rule of law guides the workings of the three branches of government, and it indicates justice and fairness in a democratic