Britain/Executive,Legislature and Judiciary.
QUESTION: Dear Sir,
Greetings! Hope things good at your end. Some checks and balances functions of following institutions needs to be verfied.
1. Can Uk court declare laws unconstitutional made by the Parliament?
2. Does parliament confirms Prime Minister's nomination?
3. Can parliament impeach judges and remove them from the office?
4. Does a Prime minister nominates Judges??
5. Does the Courts declare Prime Minister's acts Unconstitutional?
6. Does Parliament approve Prime Minister's nomination??
7. Does Parliament controls the budget?
A Simple Yes or No can suffice my questions.
ANSWER: 1) No, because the UK does not have a constitution
2) No, the Prime Minister is the leader of the party / coalition who is able to command a majority in the House, there is no vote to confirm a Prime Minister
7) Yes, every year a Budget is held which has to be voted on by the Commons. If a Budget is defeated, then the Prime Minister tables a motion of no confidence.
---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------
QUESTION: 1. Uk consitution mostly unwritten
2 . On general elections british voters determine for the desired government through votes
3 . Who impeach judges and remove them from the office?
4 Who nominates the judges?
5 . Who and how it could be ascertained that Prime minister's acts are unconventional rephrasing from the word unconstitutional?
6 . Prime minister himself is the government voted by people and doesnt require any approval
For 1 ,2 and 6 Yes or no would suffice but 3.4 and 5 are awaiting a response from your end.
ANSWER: 2) Yes and No. It can be a little complicated to explain but the votes cast in a general election bear no resemblance to the government that is created. As an example in 2010, the Conservative Party won 36% of the votes and yet did not have half the seats, this time they polled 37% and did have half the seats. I could explain more fully if you would like
3) Judges cannot be impeached or removed from office (because they are appointed, not elected)
4) Judges are appointed by the Home Secretary after a certain time in law
5) That is impossible to answer. One Prime Minister's actions may be legal at the time, but a decade later could be found to have been illegal
6) No, the Prime Minister is the leader of the party with enough seats to command a majority. In 1990, John Major replaced Margaret Thatcher as Prime Minister (but the UK did not vote on that change) just as in 2007 Gordon Brown replaced Tony Blair. People only vote for a Prime Minister at a general election (held every four to five years)
---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------
QUESTION: Coming towards 3 & 4 , the semantics for the term "appointment" denotes judges are the offshoots of Executives.
5th one suffice. Inferring illegality doesnt make sense since Prime Minister himself is acting under a policy .
2nd and 6th implies an important fact that opposition party, Intelligence agencies, international collaboration and Royal Prerogative has something to do with it behind the scenes
Correct me if i am wrong
When it comes to matters of the judiciary, as I am not involved in the judiciary I can only say what I know to be the case. The Prime Minister is often asked to make a decision where no policy exists, a case in point being the Iraq War in 2003. Labour's 2001 manifesto made no reference to Iraq and therefore the Prime Minister had to decide with no policy background.
The British Intelligence Agencies, International Organisations, International Governments and the Monarchy have NO effect on a general election result. It is the settled will of the British population casting their votes (or refusing to) in a free and fair election.