The Politics of Judicial Independence in Britain's Changing Constitution

法院的权力比过去大得多，这加剧了政治家和法官之间的紧张关系。这反过来又引发了关于司法独立和司法问责制的日益激烈的辩论。法官在体制上更加独立，有一个单独的最高法院，首席大法官取代大法官担任司法机构的首脑。但他们仍然感到不安。在他们的坚持下，2005年《宪法改革法》规定部长们有维护司法独立的法定义务。该法没有界定司法独立。如果要维护司法独立，就必须让所有需要保护司法独立的行为者清楚地了解司法独立。因此，本项目要解决的两个问题是：-司法独立的含义是什么？它如何得到最好的保护，由谁来保护？新的安排也提出了问责制的问题。大法官在政治上对整个司法系统负责。现在谁负责，对谁负责？研究问题-不同的政治和法律的行为者如何理解司法独立和司法问责制？司法独立和问责制作为问题出现的日常背景是什么？谁是司法独立和问责制的监护人？他们之间有多少协调？关于法官、政府和议会之间不断变化的关系，新的安排告诉了我们什么？在英国，关于司法独立的著作很少，也没有公认的理论体系。我们打算发展一套理论，解释英国司法独立和问责制的基本原理，其适当的限制和实际要求。我们的报告将深入研究司法独立和问责制如何在一个具体系统内运作。它不仅将审查引人注目的冲突，而且将审查有关法院服务预算和管理、司法人员薪酬和养老金、投诉和纪律、评估和培训的日常决定。在这个过程中，它将确定行政部门、议会和司法部门中所有的“隐藏监护人”，他们的日常决定决定了英国如何解释司法独立和问责制。十年的宪法改革改变了宪法格局，三权分立程度大大提高。首席大法官有80名工作人员支持他履行新职责。议会已邀请法官解释新制度如何运作。所有行为者-政治家、法官、议员和官员-都在质疑新制度的不同方面，并在制定一套新的规则。这是一个很好的时机，可以抓住正在制定的正式和非正式公约;探讨新出现的意见分歧及其背后的原因;并就如何解决其中一些分歧提出建议。产出主要产出将是--一本书--一份供政策制定者使用的中期和最终报告--三篇学术文章--在从业者期刊上发表文章。影响在整个项目期间将举办一系列高级别的从业者研讨会;公开讲座;一个网站和博客;电台和电视台的采访;为新闻界、法律的和政治杂志撰写文章。研究团队拥有与政府、议会和司法部门合作的长期经验。教授罗伯特哈泽尔（宪法单位，伦敦大学学院）将领导该项目，与教授凯特Malleson（女王玛丽）和博士格雷厄姆吉（伯明翰）。这将是一个为期三年的项目，从2010年9月到2013年8月。

IntroductionThe courts have a lot more power than they used to, which has heightened tension between politicians and the judges. That in turn has triggered a growing debate about judicial independence, and judicial accountability.The judges are institutionally more independent, with a separate Supreme Court, and the Lord Chief Justice as head of the judiciary in place of the Lord Chancellor. But they still feel uneasy. At their insistence, the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 places a statutory duty on Ministers to uphold judicial independence. The Act does not define judicial independence. If it is to be upheld, it must be clearly understood by all the actors who are required to protect it. So two questions addressed by this project are:- What is the meaning of judicial independence, and its proper limits?- How is it best protected, and by whom?The new arrangements also raise questions about accountability. The Lord Chancellor was politically accountable for the whole judicial system. Who is now accountable, and to whom?Research questions- How do different political and legal actors understand judicial independence and judicial accountability?- What are the day to day contexts in which judicial independence and accountability arise as issues?- Who are the guardians of judicial independence, and accountability? How much coordination is there between them?- What do the new arrangements tell us about the changing relationship between the judges, government and Parliament?Academic importanceThere is little writing about judicial independence in the UK, and no accepted body of theory. We intend to develop a body of theory which explains the rationale for judicial independence and accountability in the UK, their proper limits, and practical requirements.Most books on judicial independence are comparative, edited collections. Ours will be an in depth study of how judicial independence and accountability operate within a specific system. It will examine not just high profile clashes, but the day to day decisions on the budget and management of the court service, judicial pay and pensions, complaints and discipline, appraisal and training. In the process it will identify all the 'hidden guardians' within the executive, parliament and the judiciary whose everyday decisions define how judicial independence and acccountability are interpreted in the UK.Political importanceThe project is very timely. A decade of constitutional reform has transformed the constitutional landscape, with much greater separation of powers. The Lord Chief Justice has 80 staff to support him in his new role. Parliament has invited the judges to explain how the new system works. All the actors - politicians, judges, parliamentarians and officials - are questioning different aspects of the new system, and developing a new set of rules. It is the perfect moment to capture the formal and informal conventions which are being developed; to explore emerging differences of view and the reasons behind them; and to suggest how some of those differences might be resolved. OutputsThe main outputs will be - a book- an interim and final report for policy makers- three academic articles- articles in practitioner journals.ImpactThere will be a series of high level practitioner seminars running throughout the project; public lectures; a website and blog; interviews for radio and TV; articles for the press, and for legal and political magazines. Project team and timetableThe research team have long experience of working with government, Parliament and the judiciary. Prof Robert Hazell (Constitution Unit, UCL) will lead the project, working with Prof Kate Malleson (Queen Mary) and Dr Graham Gee (Birmingham). It will be a three year project, running from Sept 2010 to August 2013.