|
Post by cato on Sept 27, 2019 20:43:31 GMT
A letter in Thursday's Daily Telegraph asked the question how many of the 11 UK Supreme Court judges voted to remain in the 2016 referendum? A valid question but we will probably never know the answer. Various commentators have informed us judges are impartial and never allow their biases and political views to influence their verdicts. Really?
In an age of mainly leftist radical legal activism is it so outrageous to query the impartiality of judges some with a long history of agitation and one sided campaigning ? I noticed in the build up to the Repeal referendum in Ireland various female judges chaired the commitees and citizens assemblies and were on paper "impartial". Virtually all of them campaigned for repeal when the referendum was held but naturally the media never queried this.
If judges are to interfere in politics perhaps 1) they should be appointed to certain posts by vote ( either by the public or by parliament as in the USA). This wouldn't make them impartial but we would know their views openly. 2) Judges should be forbidden to favour any political cause and should not be permitted to vote or have any political links while in office. This is radical but if they want to claim impartiality it would be a small price to pay. Besides they are more than generously compensated already for their labours on our behalf.
|
|