*/
The President of the Supreme Court criticised politicians for not speaking out quickly enough to defend judges following the media storm over the Brexit ruling.
Speaking to BBC Radio 4’s Today Programme, Lord Neuberger defended as ‘perfectly lawful’ the press headlines that branded the three High Court judges who ruled on the Art 50 challenge, ‘Enemies of the people’.
But he said some of the things that were said risked ‘unfairly undermining the judiciary – and therefore undermining the rule of law’.
After the initial divisional court ruling Neuberger said politicians acted ‘slower than one would have hoped’ and expressed themselves ‘more pallidly’. But, he said they learned, and after the Supreme Court’s judgment they ‘reacted with exemplary speed and said exactly what they should have said’.
He said: ‘The rule of law together with democracy is one of the two pillars on which our society is based.
‘If, without good reason, the media or anyone else undermines the judiciary, that risks undermining our society. The press and the media generally have a positive duty to keep an eye on things. But I think with that power comes the degree of responsibility.’
He spoke on the day that broadsheet newspapers ran the advertisement for the three vacancies at the Supreme Court which arise following the retirement last summer of Lord Toulson and the forthcoming retirements of Neuberger and Lord Clarke.
Applicants will have to submit a 2,000-word essay, on which they will address the selection panel. The subject will be given to those who are successfully shortlisted.
Would-be justices also have to cite three of their recent judgments or cases and state why they are important in the development of the law and provide evidence establishing that they meet the selection criteria.
The court, made up of 10 white men and one white woman, has instituted measures to create a more diverse bench. Applicants can attend familiarisation sessions and apply to sit part-time, and for the first time provisions will enable the appointment of a candidate from an under-represented group, where two are equally well-qualified.
The President of the Supreme Court criticised politicians for not speaking out quickly enough to defend judges following the media storm over the Brexit ruling.
Speaking to BBC Radio 4’s Today Programme, Lord Neuberger defended as ‘perfectly lawful’ the press headlines that branded the three High Court judges who ruled on the Art 50 challenge, ‘Enemies of the people’.
But he said some of the things that were said risked ‘unfairly undermining the judiciary – and therefore undermining the rule of law’.
After the initial divisional court ruling Neuberger said politicians acted ‘slower than one would have hoped’ and expressed themselves ‘more pallidly’. But, he said they learned, and after the Supreme Court’s judgment they ‘reacted with exemplary speed and said exactly what they should have said’.
He said: ‘The rule of law together with democracy is one of the two pillars on which our society is based.
‘If, without good reason, the media or anyone else undermines the judiciary, that risks undermining our society. The press and the media generally have a positive duty to keep an eye on things. But I think with that power comes the degree of responsibility.’
He spoke on the day that broadsheet newspapers ran the advertisement for the three vacancies at the Supreme Court which arise following the retirement last summer of Lord Toulson and the forthcoming retirements of Neuberger and Lord Clarke.
Applicants will have to submit a 2,000-word essay, on which they will address the selection panel. The subject will be given to those who are successfully shortlisted.
Would-be justices also have to cite three of their recent judgments or cases and state why they are important in the development of the law and provide evidence establishing that they meet the selection criteria.
The court, made up of 10 white men and one white woman, has instituted measures to create a more diverse bench. Applicants can attend familiarisation sessions and apply to sit part-time, and for the first time provisions will enable the appointment of a candidate from an under-represented group, where two are equally well-qualified.
Chair of the Bar reflects on 2025
Q&A with criminal barrister Nick Murphy, who moved to New Park Court Chambers on the North Eastern Circuit in search of a better work-life balance
Revolt Cycling in Holborn, London’s first sustainable fitness studio, invites barristers to join the revolution – turning pedal power into clean energy
Rachel Davenport, Co-founder and Director at AlphaBiolabs, reflects on how the company’s Giving Back ethos continues to make a difference to communities across the UK
By Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs
AlphaBiolabs has made a £500 donation to Sean’s Place, a men’s mental health charity based in Sefton, as part of its ongoing Giving Back initiative
Professor Dominic Regan and Seán Jones KC present their best buys for this holiday season
Little has changed since Burns v Burns . Cohabiting couples deserve better than to be left on the blasted heath with the existing witch’s brew for another four decades, argues Christopher Stirling
Six months of court observation at the Old Bailey: APPEAL’s Dr Nisha Waller and Tehreem Sultan report their findings on prosecution practices under joint enterprise
Despite its prevalence, autism spectrum disorder remains poorly understood in the criminal justice system. Does Alex Henry’s joint enterprise conviction expose the need to audit prisons? asks Dr Felicity Gerry KC
With automation now deeply embedded in the Department for Work Pensions, Alexander McColl and Alexa Thompson review what we know, what we don’t and avenues for legal challenge
