Roger Smith (London, JUSTICE): The Queen's Speech promises us more from the Government on constitutional reform. Next year, we are to have legislation on citizenship, a draft bill on ‘constitutional renewal' and a further consultation paper on a bill of rights. Meanwhile, David Cameron is limbering up with proposals for referenda on Europe (or not); rearranged voting on English bills (or not) and a Bill of Rights (or not). This might be just the moment to reflect on what you could do to improve our constitution without any legislation.
Suppose you wanted to improve the accountability and good governance of the executive but wanted to foreswear further legislation. What could you do? Since much of the UK's constitution is contained in non-statutory conventions, you can, of course, just change them with sufficient agreement without need of statute. In particular, you could make enormous strides simply by announcing that, henceforth, the UK government would conduct itself in accordance with the dictates of a broad definition of the rule of law. Such a modest-sounding measure might have rather profound effects.
For a start, you would stop playing tricks with evading current Parliamentary supervision in making laws properly. No statute would ever again be as long as the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (338 sections), pushed through as quickly as the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 (18 days) or seek to authorise secondary legislation to take the place of primary (early drafts of the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act 2006). Adequate Parliamentary supervision needs time and opportunity.
You might follow this by ceasing to introduce overbroad offences (ASBOs, restrictions on demonstration within a kilometre of Parliament, incitement to religious hatred); seeking to evade judicial supervision (Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants) Act 2004); and forswearing overseas military adventurism without backing from the United Nations. Above all, in foreign affairs, a UK government committed to the rule of law would disassociate itself from a US administration so amoral as to put forward a nominee for Attorney General who will not even condemn simulated drowning as an acceptable interrogation technique.
So, there is much that could be done simply by a change of policy and a renewed commitment to the rule of law. For more, read ‘The Future of the Rule of Law' published by JUSTICE and downloadable at http://www.justice.org.uk/inthenews/index.html.
