Dominic Grieve begins his lecture on current challenges to the rule of law in the UK @TheLawSociety 
Grieve illustrates concerns about the rule of law with a story of a constituent whose spouse was subject to a deprivation of liberty order in May, but the matter has yet to be legally resolved in September
Grieve: The state has now abandoned access to justice as a fundamental right. Notes role of legal aid in providing access to justice
Grieve focuses on importance of the attitude of Government to the rule of law. UK has taken pride in being at the centre of an international rules based order. Yet express reference to international law was removed from the Ministerial Code
Grieve: if Government was sensible, they would recognise that the rule of law is their friend not their enemy and seek advice on how to comply with the law
Grieve moves on to automated decision-making and the challenge of ensuring such processes are transparent and accountable when they produce unfair outcomes
Grieve: asks questions about the automated checks of DWP and HMRC data as part of settled status process for EU citizens — what information will applicants be given on these automated checks?
Grieve now onto Brexit and the EU (Withdrawal) Act, and the Henry VIII powers in the Act for the Executive to change the law—this is a process that Grieve calls on all lawyers to watch closely
Grieve notes the loss of EU General Principles and the Charter as protections from abuse of power, and of concern for the rule of law
Grieve focuses on the future of data protection law in the UK—need a legal framework to facilitate sharing of data across countries, but what will happen if the EU changes data protection law after exit? Does the UK simply have to adopt those changes?
Grieve turns to corruption as a threat to the rule of law that is being swept under the carpet. This is leading to loss of trust in institutions, and linked to overly broad administrative discretion
Grieve: limited resources mean Government authorities cannot enforce the law consistency, which gives the impression of bias
Grieve: UK very well advanced in addressing cyber crime — a positive for us to be proud of
Grieve: concludes that some kind of written framework needed for the UK, perhaps in the form of a written constitution or a bill of rights
Grieve’s final point is on Parliament: in a parliamentary democracy subject to the rule of law, Parliament is the ultimate protector of the rule of law. Parliament needs to be encouraged to use its power to protect the rule of law
@SarahLudford notes a paradox that the UK will have to comply with more EU law as a nonmember than as a member. Matters such as national security is an exception under the EU treaties for members, but UK may have to comply w EU security law to have a security treaty w EU
Grieve: more constitutional education needed. As Brexit unfolds, UK will have to negotiate a series of matters with EU in which UK will be on the receiving end of EU laws. Written constitution or bill of rights may be needed to act as counterweight in these processes
Grieve: Brexit is the biggest accretion of power to the state that we have had in ages
In answer to question raising concern that written constitution could lead to the “rule of judges”, Grieve agrees that court decisions have imposed constitutional and rule of law principles, eg Evans. But reason courts are doing so is to uphold the rule of law
Grieve on litigants in person: difficulty is the court process is daunting; and cost benefit analysis of taking lawyers out of the process needed in context of LASPO review
