Menu
Fri, 26 April 2024

Newsletter sign-up

Subscribe now
The House Live All
Partner content
Home affairs
Home affairs
Rt Hon Rachel Reeves Mais lecture hits the nail on the head for construction. Partner content
Communities
By Baroness Fox
Home affairs
Press releases
By UK Sport

Law Society raises concerns over Queen’s Speech

PoliticsHome | Law Society

2 min read Partner content

The effect of the Government’s proposals for the coming parliamentary session on the UK justice system have raised some concerns for the Law Society. 

The organisation highlighted three areas raised in today’s Queen's speech on which it will seek to inform policymakers: the British Bill of Rights, the Europe Union Referendum Bill and the Investigatory Powers Bill.

Following the address, Law Society president Andrew Caplen said: "British people believe in fundamental principles such as freedom of speech, the right to life and the right to a fair trial. This makes the legal system in England and Wales respected throughout the world. We have always supported the retention of the Human Rights Act. We look forward to working with the government to ensure that these fundamental principles are protected as it consults on any proposals for change.

"Now that a referendum on Europe is firmly on the government’s agenda, it is important for the profession to look at the implications for the legal sector of any decision by the UK to remain in or withdraw from the EU. We will be publishing a report on the implications for the legal sector this summer as an initial contribution to the national debate. We will be seeking the views of our members about the implications for them and their clients as that debate develops.

"Communication between a lawyer and their client should be given explicit protection. We are concerned that the Investigatory Powers Bill could include measures that would allow surveillance of data communications. We expressed a number of serious reservations about the original draft Communications Data Bill in 2012. The last government failed to make a convincing case for the original Bill which was overly intrusive and lacked sufficient safeguards."

PoliticsHome Newsletters

Get the inside track on what MPs and Peers are talking about. Sign up to The House's morning email for the latest insight and reaction from Parliamentarians, policy-makers and organisations.

Categories

Home affairs