Reblogged from Another Angry Voice:
In February
2012 I reported on the Court of Appeals judgement that Iain Duncan Smith's
mandatory unpiad labour ("Workfare") schemes were unlawful on the grounds
that the rules were unintelligible, and because Iain Duncan Smith had exceeded
his powers by applying the rules without first seeking the approval of
parliament.
Little did I know at the time
that Iain Duncan Smith (with the collusion of the Labour party so-called
opposition) would attempt to undermine the Appeal Court ruling by retroactively
changing the law. The hastily scribbled piece of legislation (which was
rushed through parliament in a single day) changed the rules so that had they
been written that way at the time, they would have been intelligible, and they
would have had parliamentary approval.
It is quite clear that using
retroactive laws to undermine the courts opens the door to fascism, because
it sets the appalling precedent that if the courts declare the government has
acted unlawfully, the government can simply rush through legislation to
retroactively change the law to make their unlawful actions lawful and nullify
the judgement of the courts. This precedent essentially puts government
ministers above the law of the land. It is absolutely appalling that (apart
from a few objectors that defied the party whip to vote against it) the
Labour so-called opposition went along with this appalling attack on the legal
system.
Instead of simply undermining
the court by retroactively rewriting the law of the land, Iain Duncan Smith also
decided to go even further in order to put the courts in their place. On the
very same day that his rotten piece of retroactive workfare legislation was
rushed through parliament, he launched a Supreme Court appeal against the
Appeal Court ruling that his schemes were unlawful. He was clearly working on
the assumption that the courts would have to accept that his retroactive 2013
laws applied, meaning that they would have to eat humble pie and declare his
vicious mandatory labour schemes lawful.
Subverting a court judgement by
retroactively changing the law of the land was bad enough, but attempting to
humiliate the courts in order to demonstrate to all that he himself is
absolutely above the law of the land was the act of a man that has absolute
contempt for any authority other than his own.
The problem for Iain Duncan
Smith and his minions at the DWP is that the Supreme Court defied him and upheld
the Appeal Court ruling. Here is the full transcript of the Supreme Court
judgement.
The Supreme Court explicitly
recognised that the 2013 Retroactive Workfare Bill was a deliberate attempt to
undermine the courts: "The 2013 Act was plainly intended to 'undo' the
decision of the Court of Appeal" . They also reiterated that scheme was
unlawful at the time "what Ms Reilly was told about her obligation to take
part in the [workfare] scheme, as a condition of receiving Jobseeker's
Allowance, was unauthorised and wrong as a matter of domestic
law".
At the conclusion of the judgement the judges returned to
Iain Duncan Smith's retroactive law, stating that had it not been for the
retroactive lawmaking exercise, the ruling of the appeal court would have been
fully upheld "Accordingly, were it not for the 2013 Act and the 2013
Regulations, we would have affirmed the order of the Court of Appeal"
(which shows how much of a spectacular own-goal the Labour party scored by
colluding with Iain Duncan Smith to rush the retroactive laws onto the statute
book). The judges admitted that the passing of retroactive legislation adds a
significant complication, and that they have yet to work out an appropriate
response: "In the light of the 2013 Act and the 2013 Regulations, however,
a more subtly expressed form of order will be required, and we would invite
counsel to try and agree the appropriate wording".
Whatever the
case, Iain Duncan Smith's decision to appeal the ruling of the Appeal Court now
looks like a spectacular case of hubris, because not only was his appeal
rejected, but there now exists a court ruling which explicitly states that he
deliberately attempted to undermine the law of the land with his retroactive
lawmaking exercise.
This leaves us with the question of what Iain Duncan
Smith will do next. Given the brazenness of his response to the ruling of the
Appeal Court, it wouldn't surprise me if Iain Duncan Smith and the Tories
attempted to rush through legislation to retroactively abolish the Supreme Court
so that this judgement never happened, and it would hardly be surprising if the
Labour so-called opposition colluded with the Tories to help them rush their
retroactive abolition of the courts through parliament in a single day, as they
did with the Retroactive Workfare Bill in March 2013.
