MPs may need to decide whether UK Supreme Court appointments need Parliament’s approval, AG says

Members of Parliament may need to decide soon whether Parliament needs to approve appointments of UK Supreme Court justices, according to Attorney-General Geoffrey Cox.

The comment was made as MPs returned to the House of Commons after the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s prorogation of Parliament was unlawful.

“We are proud that we have a country that is capable of giving independent judgments of this kind,” Cox said. He also said that he “completely and firmly” supported the judiciary’s independence.

When asked, however, about the possibility of Supreme Court appointments being subject to parliamentary approval, Cox said the House needs to ponder the need to do so.

“I think it is a matter which this house may need to reflect upon in the coming months and years, depending on the status of our constitutional arrangements,” he said. “As we leave the European Union, a great gap opens up, whereby we take away from legal integration all this European Union law, and we need to think about the implications. I therefore agree that there may very well need to be parliamentary scrutiny of judicial appointments in some manner. I have to say that I am not enthusiastic about that.”

Cox was also questioned about the legal advice given to the Queen on prorogation. He maintained that the Queen was given “sound advice.” He said that the Supreme Court made new law by handing down its ruling on the prorogation.

“From now on, the prerogative power of Her Majesty, advised by the prime minister, can be the subject – the justiciable subject – of the court’s control,” Cox said. “That was a judgment that the Supreme Court was perfectly entitled to make.”