The decision of the House of Lords in Shaw v PDF

Preview

Summary

Download The decision of the House of Lords in Shaw v PDF

Description

The decision of the House of Lords in Shaw v. Director of Public Prosecutions has raised issues of wider significance than the particular forms of conduct to which the case related. The essay which follows is not an examination of all the points raised by the decision and is concerned solely with the implications of the findings of the Court of Criminal Appeal and the House of Lords on the first of the three counts in the indictment. Conspiracy to corrupt public morals. Particulars of offence; conspired with certain persons who inserted advertisements on divers days between the dates mentioned in the Particulars of Offences a magazine or booklet which was called " Ladies Directory ". It contained the names, addresses and telephone numbers of prostitutes with photographs of nude female figures and to induce readers thereof to resort to the said advertisers for the purposes of fornication and of taking part in or witnessing other disgusting and immoral acts and exhibitions, with intent thereby to debauch and corrupt the morals as well of youth as of divers other liege subjects of Our Lady the Queen and to raise and create in their minds inordinate and lustful desires. 1Shaw v DPP [1961] UKHL 1 (04 May 1961) However, this is in spite of the fact that that there was no crime of conspiracy to corrupt public morals established in law. Lord Reid further stated, but I am at a loss to understand how it can be said either that the law does not recognise a conspiracy to corrupt public morals or that, though there may not be an exact precedent for such a conspiracy as this case reveals, it does not fall fairly within the general words by which it is described. Lord Reid, dissenting, stated ‘Parliament is the proper place, and I am 1 Shaw v DPP [1961] UKHL 1 (04 May 1961)

firmly of opinion the only proper place, to settle [whether law should cover conspiracy to corrupt public morals]. When there is sufficient support from public opinion, Parliament does not hesitate to intervene. Where Parliament fears to tread it is not for the courts to rush in.’2 Shaw v DPP [1961] UKHL 1 (04 May 1961). At this point I propose to examine how laws are made and the process.

2 Shaw v DPP [1961] UKHL 1 (04 May 1961)

It is within my intentions to break down this task into its constituent parts, explaining exactly what is required for this assignment. As you proceed to read through this essay we will look at how Separation of Powers has been applied to Shaw v. Director of Public Prosecutions, House of Lords [1962] A.C. 220 and how it is relevant to this case, I also believe that the Human Rights Act will be required for the critical examination of this cases as well as we well look at the Judicial Review and its process. The concepts and key themes this task engages with the Appellant, Frederick Charles Shaw, was, on the 21st September, 1960, convicted at the Central Criminal Court on an indictment containing three counts which alleged the following offences: (1) Conspiracy corrupt public morals; (2) Living on the earnings of prostitution contrary to section 30 of the Sexual Offences Act, 1956; and (3) Publishing an obscene publication contrary to section 2 of the Obscene Publications Act, 1959.3Shaw v DPP [1961] UKHL 1 (04 May 1961). The House of Lords handed down a decision which caused great consternation amongst lawyers and commentators.

Constitutional Conventions are “practices relating to the exercise of their functions by the Crown, the government, Parliament and the judiciary that are not legally enforceable but are commonly followed as if they were” –

4

Oxford Dictionary of Law. It can be

argued that Shaw’s case was directed under the following of Constitutional Conventions which is known within the United Kingdom this is because in Shaw case there was no crime of conspiracy to corrupt public morals established in law. Lord Reid, dissenting, stated ‘Parliament is the proper place, and I am firmly of opinion the only proper place, to settle [whether law should cover conspiracy to corrupt public morals].

3 Shaw v DPP [1961] UKHL 1 (04 May 1961) 4 Oxford Dictionary of Law

However, for a Bill to become law it must receive Royal Assent this legal power of the monarch is a Prerogative Power possessed by the monarch and no other therefore, by convention the monarch will not refuse to sign a Bill into law if it has passed through the correct political process and is presented on the advice of the Prime Minister. The following outline of this essay will address what is meant by the ‘United Kingdom constitution’ and how it is relevant the Shaw V DPP case; it will then examine what is meant by a ‘separation of powers’, how it works and the pros and cons;

Judicial Review It will then analyse how far Barendt’s “network of rules and principles” in the constitution can control the potential danger in these areas, examining in particular the control exerted by the government over parliament. Finally, it will evaluate the judiciary’s attempts to counterbalance this executive power and the recent boost they have received from the Human Rights Act 1998.

Separation of Powers in Respect of the Judiciary There is a strong separation of powers between the judicial arm of the state and executive due to the fact that the United Kingdom judiciary in impressively independent. This in particular is illustrated in the mechanism of judicial review. A second component or illustration ensures job secur

Conclusion The Separation of Powers in the United Kingdom The question here is does the United Kingdom follow a pure separation of powers or do they follow a less that pure separation of powers? Well, is can be argued that based on my research and findings in Shaw V Director of Public Prosecutions the United Kingdom do not follow a pure separation of powers. However, base on constitutional conventions and precedent the United Kingdom is connected by their norms. My research has enable me to guide my thoughts towards the following; It has been established and understood that Conspiracy to corrupt public morals is not a known legislation and as Lord Reid stated ‘Parliament is the proper place, and I am firmly of opinion the only proper place, to settle [whether law should cover conspiracy to corrupt public morals].’ The first {1 st} charge “Conspiracy to corrupt public morals” made against Shaw in the case Shaw V Director of Public Prosecution has to go through the correct channel in order for it to be admissible and interpret by a judge in a court house.

However, it is quite clear by constitutional convention before legislation in the instance {“Conspiracy to corrupt public morals”} is interpret by a judge is must go through the executive function, the executive or governmental function is performed by the government or administration. The executive administrates the functions, powers and duties contained in general legislative provisions, the legislative function, this function is performed by the legislature and it involves the enactment of general laws, the judicial function is performed by the judiciary and it involves the determination of the law laid down in statutes or in the common law, in relation to disputes arising from that law. It is a forum for resolving legal conflicts. and check and balances as, ‘in the United Kingdom the three functions of the state are not isolated and completely separate from one another.

Instead,

they

interrelate

with

each

other.5Ryan,

Mark,

and

Steve

Foster. Unlocking Constitutional and Administrative Law, Taylor & Francis Group, 2018. ProQuest

Ebook

Central,

http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/anglia/detail.action?

docID=5582779. Created from anglia on 2020-04-28 19:03:23, before attaining Royal Assent, which is consent of the sovereign to a Bill which has been passed by Parliament, and which thus becomes an Act of Parliament. Royal assent by the sovereign is required before a Bill can come into force as law. ity of the judges irrespective of their decisions.

5 Ryan, Mark, and Steve Foster. Unlocking Constitutional and Administrative Law, Taylor & Francis Group, 2018. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/anglia/detail.action?docID=5582779. Created from anglia on 2020-04-28 19:03:23...