Summary
As both a politician and an independent legal adviser, the Attorney General's roles in enhancing the administration of justice, the maintenance of the rule of the law, and the protection of the public interest have the potential to create tension with each other.
This Report, 'Draft Constitutional Renewal Bill (Provisions Relating to the Attorney General)' (HC 698), examines the Draft Constitutional Renewal Bill to see how far its provisions put into effect the recommendations of the Constitutional Affairs Committee's July 2007 Report.
In July 2007, the House of Commons Constitutional Affairs Committee recommended that the duties of the Attorney General be split. In it's Report, 'The Constitutional Role of the Attorney General' (HC 306), the Committee suggested that the purely legal functions should be carried out by an official who is outside party political life, whilst a minister in the Ministry of Justice should carry out the ministerial duties.
In April 2008, the House of Lords Select Committee on the Constitution took evidence from Baroness Scotland of Asthal, the present Attorney General, and set out the main arguments for and against reforming the role, hoping that its Report, 'Reform of the Office of Attorney General' (HL 93), would prove useful as a 'handbook' to the continuing debate on the role of the Attorney General.
In this Report, the Justice Committee finds that the Draft Bill makes no substantial change to the current situation: the Attorney General remains both chief legal adviser to the Government and a Government minister. The Committee believes that transparency requires separating the political functions from the legal functions. The Draft Bill fails to achieve the purpose given to constitutional reform by the Prime Minister: it gives greater power to the Executive and it does not add to transparency.
Found this story interesting?
Spread the news by
clicking below to add it to your bookmarking service: