You may use the following materials: Blackstone’s Statutes on Public Law and Human Rights Questions
1.“A satisfactory definition of the royal prerogative has eluded very learned people. Yet the notion of the royal prerogative is one of major significance in British constitutional law and practice, because from it flow many of the most important powers possessed by government ministers.” (Brazier)
Explain this statement and assess whether prerogative powers exercised by government ministers are subject to sufficient political and legal scrutiny.
2. Patrick is a successful actor. Last Tuesday night at 10.00 pm he was returning home after a performance of the play Waiting for Godot, in which the characters are tramps. He was still in costume: bedraggled beard, threadbare trousers and jacket, holes in his shoes, and an old bowler hat. He was also carrying a brand new rucksack full of scripts for plays that he was considering acting in as well as some items he had picked up earlier from his local DIY store.
As he approached the driveway of his very large house, Patrick was stopped by P.C. Chaplain, a plain-clothed police officer. “What are you doing in this part of town, matey?” asked PC Chaplain.
Patrick explained that this was his house. “Really?” said P.C. Chaplain “And I bet your second home is Buckingham Palace.” P.C. Chaplain then grabbed Patrick’s rucksack and rummaged through it.
P.C. Chaplain then ordered Patrick to take off his jacket, bowler hat and shoes in order to be searched. He then felt inside Patrick’s pockets, socks, around his collar and ran his fingers through his beard and hair.
On completion of this search, which yielded a new iPhone, a pair of latex gloves, a screwdriver and a hacksaw blade as well as a number of scripts, P.C. Chaplain said to Patrick “You’re nicked. At least you’ll get a bed and meal at the station tonight.” At this point Patrick panicked and pushed P.C. Chaplain to the ground exclaiming: “Not before I have called my solicitor. I have no idea who you are. I am a famous thespian for goodness sake!” P.C. Chaplain then tripped up Patrick and he fell to the ground.
Hearing the commotion Patrick’s wife, Sunny, came out of the house and thinking Patrick was being attacked she attempted to hit P.C. Chaplain with a bottle of expensive wine that she was about to open. P.C. Chaplain avoided the blow and wrestled Sunny to the ground and told her she was “also nicked for affray”.
At the police station Patrick was charged with obstructing a police officer in the execution of his duty under section 89 of the Police Act 1996. Sunny was charged with affray under section 3 of the Public Order Act 1986.
Advise Patrick and Sunny.
Blackstone’s Statutes on Public Law and Human Rights
1. Royal Prerogative Powers
The statement shows that their lacks a clear understanding of the royal prerogative in the society. The aspect of royal prerogative is critical in understanding and checking the powers of the government minsters. The prerogative powers exercised by the government ministers are usually subject to political and legal scrutiny and review. The government ministers must always act and work based on the political and legal guidelines and confinements. It is because the government ministers are appointed based on the legal and political frameworks.
2.
I advise Patrick and Sunny to file a case against P.C Chaplain for failing to introduce him to them. Both Patrick and Sunny will have a strong defense in arguing that they were not aware whether P.C Chaplain. Legally, the police officers are expected to introduce themselves and show their credentials before going ahead to arrest any person in the UK. Under the Public Order Act of 1986, Sunny will have the opportunity to explain that they did not understand whether P.C Chaplain was a police officer. Based on the argument, Sunny cannot be liable for committing affray against a police officer.
In addition, Patrick has a good defense for denying being arrested. It is because P.C Chaplain did not introduce himself as police officer and only started demanding Patrick should obey and wait to be searched. P.C Chaplain did not act within its responsibility and duty of care as when Patrick explained that he heading to his house, P.C Chaplain did listen and went ahead to search him without proper consent from him. Based on the case facts, I would Patrick and Sunny to file charges against P.C Chaplain for the violation of their fundamental rights and privileges as provide in the UK constitution. The exceptions would protect Patrick and Sunny from prosecutions relating to the rejecting arrest and affray respectively.
