Judges to face tougher scrutiny as Boris Johnson plans 40 new laws

Boris Johnson will pave the way for sweeping changes to the constitution that could include making judges more accountable.

Boris Johnson outside Downing Street after receiving permission to form the next government during an audience with the Queen last week. Picture: Getty Images

Prime Minister Boris Johnson will pave the way for sweeping changes to the constitution that could include making Britain’s most senior judges more accountable to parliament as he unveils his legislative agenda for the next year.

The Queen’s Speech overnight Thursday was expected to contain 40 bills — 18 more than the program announced on Octobe­r 14 but abandoned when Mr Johnson finally won Commons backing for an election.

The Prime Minister wants the focus to be on an National Health Service funding bill, which writes into law commitments to increase spending made during the campaign for the December 12 election. The bill will be the first to be introduced as the government seeks to reassure voters of a domesti­c agenda beyond Brexit that reflects their own priorities.

The Queen’s Speech will also include Mr Johnson’s new Brexit bill, which MPs will vote on overnight Friday. It will enshrine in law his pledge to end the transition period in December next year and also give British judges more powers to overturn rulings by the European Court of Justice.

The full list of new laws will revea­l the breadth of his ambitions and his determination to use Brexit to reshape the political landscape. It will include a bill settin­g up a new “constitution, democracy and rights commission” promised in the Tory manifesto. “After Brexit we need to look at the broader aspects of our constitution,” it stated, listing the relationship between parliament and the courts and the House of Lords as areas needing reform.

Mr Johnson was enraged when the Supreme Court ruled in September that his suspension of parliament was unlawful because it prevented proper Brexit scrut­iny. He said this opened the ­prospect of a US-style system of political oversight of the appointment of judges to ensure they were democratically accountable.

In a parting shot, Baroness Brenda Hale of Richmond warned against that late on Wednesday as she stood down as head of the court. In a strong defenc­e of the bench’s independence she said, “we do not want to turn into the Supreme Court of the United States — whether in powers or in process of appointment”.

Lady Hale said the court’s judges “do not know one ­another’s political opinions — althoug­h occasionally we may have a good guess — and long may that remain so”. The court’s president said “judges have not been appointed for party political reasons in this country since at least the Second World War”.

The manifesto also signals new moves to provide further legal exemptions for the security services and curbs on judicial review­s. In the past year the ­governemnt has fought judicial reviews on national security, immigrati­on and tax. “There is a concern that judicial review is being used as a political weapon, particularly when it comes to ­applications for national security content,” a source familiar with the plans said. “We will be looking at updating the Human Rights Act to provide greater protections for national security.”

The Times