The danger to the separation of powers that is posed by the appointment of Suella Braverman as attorney general cannot be overemphasised. It is not a question of guessing her views on the rule of law – they are clearly on record, as Daniel Trilling sets out (For the panto authoritarians, overt cruelty is a winning hand, Journal, 18 February).
If Ms Braverman uses her powers to politicise her role, rather than acting as the defender of the law and the advocate for legal judgment, if necessary against government wishes, the country will have taken a further giant step towards authoritarian rule, untrammelled by the crucial counterweight of independent legal judgment.
It will be the supreme irony if the Conservatives’ continual electoral warnings about Jeremy Corbyn’s wish to create the all-powerful state finished up with the Boris Johnson government doing precisely that.
Michael Meadowcroft
Leeds
• Suella Braverman obviously has a sense of humour, writing last month for ConservativeHome that “elected decision-makers” needed to “take back control” from “unelected, unaccountable judges”. What are her views on unelected, unaccountable chief advisers to the prime minister?
Phil Curley
Washingborough, Lincolnshire
• The new attorney general believes the judiciary needs to be restrained as it has usurped the role of parliament based on two recent cases (Report, 14 February). In the first, the courts compelled the executive to consult parliament on the exercise of article 50 and in the second, they refused to allow the executive to prorogue parliament in order to prevent it debating issues of critical national importance. Am I missing something?
John Robertson
Liverpool
• Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com
• Read more Guardian letters – click here to visit gu.com/letters
• Do you have a photo you’d like to share with Guardian readers? Click here to upload it and we’ll publish the best submissions in the letters spread of our print edition
