On 7 July, the main conclusions of a book co-authored by Graham Gee, a Senior Lecturer in the Law School, were cited in a debate in the House of Lords on the office of Lord Chancellor.
Speaking for the Government, the Minister for Civil Justice and Legal Policy, Lord Faulks, referred to the main findings of The Politics of Judicial Independence in the UK’s Changing Constitution, which Graham Gee co-wrote with Robert Hazell, Kate Malleson and Patrick O’Brien and which was published earlier this year by CUP. In his speech in the House of Lords, Lord Faulks commented that the debate,
... comes at a time of considerable interest in the office of the Lord Chancellor. Among others, a recent publication … on The Politics of Judicial Independence concerned itself with the issue. That study reached a number of conclusions, including the fact that the judiciary and judicial independence emerged stronger from the 2005 changes with the inclusion of tribunals in the courts system, a more independent and visible Supreme Court, and greater autonomy of the Lord Chief Justice as the head of a more professional judiciary. The report recognised the change in the role of the Lord Chancellor and saw it as providing a political guardian of judicial independence with sufficient channels of communication to allow a new relationship to evolve between judges and politicians.
The argument that post-2005 Lord Chancellors serve as “political guardians” of judicial independence was one that Graham Gee developed in an article last year that asked “What are Lord Chancellors For” [2014] Public Law 11.