← Back to context

Comment by amiga386

1 day ago

I'd propose that Parliament bind itself and say "UK Government cannot create THESE types of law".

The courts can then adjudicate on whether Government did or didn't stray into self-prohibited territory.

This already exists in the Scottish Parliament, which has the power to legislate on devolved matters, but not reserved matters and excluded matters. If it does legislate in these latter areas, or the UK Government thinks it has legislated in these areas, off to the Supreme Court they go.

The issue being that if the concept of Parliamentary supremacy as currently understood is maintained then current Parliament cannot bind future Parliament.

The best that Parliament can do under the current definition is things like passing an interpretation law that includes various rules, and which permit courts to strike down other laws that violate these rules, unless said other law amends this one. Then Parliament could propose rules not allowing the government to propose such legislation unless (some conditions), etc. This would be with the intention of future Parliments keeping the rule.

That is all technically fine as long as future Parliament can simply drop the rule by majority vote, and can modify the law by sinple majority vote. But that means this is not really binding, just a relatively modern tradition.

If they tried anyway, a future Parliament (led by a different government) would likely just ignore it citing Parliamentary supremacy, and the courts would almost certainly concur if challenges arise.