Judicial Review- public law - Essay Example

In the Prolife case the appellate court considered the extent to which a broadcaster could curtail a PEB or Party Election Broadcast. In that particular case the BBC had conceded that it was a public authority, in a narrow sense for the specific purpose of the appeal in the House of Lords. However, it did not accept this classification in a wider context (R (ProLife Alliance) v BBC , 2004 ). The House of Lords, in their judicial review of this contention, held that the BBC had been justified in refusing to broadcast the election manifesto of an anti – abortion party, deeming its manner of presentation to be in bad taste.

This decision accorded greater deference to the BBC than to a court, which was subordinate to it (Tugendhat & Christie, 2006). This issue of deference invited a significant amount of disagreement after the enactment of the Human Rights Act. Some authorities have contended that the judiciary should take cognizance of the following, while deferring to the other branches of the government. The degree to which political, economic or social issues are involved; the degree to which courts have the necessary proficiency in the matter under consideration; the nature of the rights and the extent to which these rights are afforded protection by the constitution.

The manner, in which the judiciary has set about deference under the Human Rights Act, indicates the extant legal traditions. In addition, it elaborates upon the well established administrative law tenets, which state that the judiciary should abstain from supplanting the decision maker’s judgment with its own ruling. The courts are required to apply, the principle of Wednesbury irrationality, which does not require a repetition of the detailed judicial hearing into the facts of the case. Moreover, this situation is exacerbated by the inadequate constitutional law principles (Reported Decisions of