The most senior judges in England and Wales wrote to Kiel Starmer about his “unacceptable” exchange with Kemi Bardenok in the prime minister's question.
Women's Secretary Sue Kar criticized the Conservative leader's questions about the incident that Gaza families applied through a scheme designed for Ukrainian refugees.
She also said it was unacceptable for the Prime Minister to respond by saying the decision was wrong and saying the Interior Secretary is “working on closing this loophole.”
A priority spokesman said he has the greatest respect for the independence of the judicial department is evident from his past as director of public prosecutors.
“The Prime Minister made it clear that the legislation is for the government to make the policy decisions. If the law is not functioning as we think we should, then the government will make the rules. We will take action to reinforce it – that's what we do,” they said.
Badenok fought back at criticism from the female director general and said it was essential for politicians to discuss the outcome of such cases. “Congress is sovereign. Politicians must be able to discuss the issue of important citizenship importance in Congress,” she said.
The exchange referenced last week a report of family appeals against a decision by an immigration court judge in September and dismissed their claims. Further appeals were granted by a senior judge in January.
Carr told reporters he “is deeply troubled to know the exchange” on PMQS and wrote a letter about concerns about the judicial decision. “I think it started with questions from the opposition suggesting that the decision on a particular case was wrong. Both the question and the answer were unacceptable,” she said.
“It's about the government respecting and protecting the independence of the judicial system. If parties, including the government, oppose their findings, they should do so through the appeal process.”
Kar said she wrote to Starme and Attorney General Shabana Mahmoud.
The incident involved a family of four children whose Gaza homes were destroyed by Israeli airstrikes. They applied to enter the UK using the Ukrainian family plan and joined the brother of their father, who has been living in the UK since 2007 and is a British citizen. The application was first rejected last May after the Ministry of Home Affairs concluded that the requirements for the scheme were not met.
The Superior Court judges then allowed families to come to the UK based on their rights to family life under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
Starmer told Commons: “I don't agree with this decision. She's right, that's a wrong decision.
“But let me be clear, it should be the parliament that makes rules about immigration. The government is the one who makes the policy, it should be the principle, and the Secretary of the Interior will already be shut down in this particular case. We are considering the legal loopholes that are needed.”
Badenok wrote in X's post that she had no issues with her questions. “This does not compromise judicial independence. The decision to allow Gaza families to come to the UK was outrageous for many reasons,” she wrote.
After the newsletter promotion
Shadowhome secretary Chris Philp said politicians “have a full comment on the judge's decision.” Robert Jenrik of Shadow Justice Secretary also said it was wrong. He said: “The principle of the rule of law is being misused. It needs to be recovered. There is no control by a lawyer.”
Carr's intervention also prompted criticism by several senior laws. Richard Ekins KC, who heads the Jurisdiction Project for the Right-wing think tank policy exchange, said it was a “very wise intervention.”
He states: Neither the independence of the judiciary nor the rule of law gives judges the right to be free from criticism, and it is wrong for the female secretary to try to curb criticism. ”
Former Attorney General Robert Buckland told the Guardian that the context of his remarks was a personal attack environment in which many judges operate. “It's not certain that politicians cannot oppose or criticise judicial decisions, but they need to be responsible,” Buckland said.
At her annual press conference, Kerr said something broader about public safety in the judicial world. Senior judges were often criticized directly by conservative administrations, particularly the Supreme Court's intervention on Brexit.
Carr said: Their job is to find facts about their previous evidence and apply laws that endure those facts. ”
She said the attack on Judge Patrick Persco, where the radiator was thrown in 2023, brought problems to a very “dramatic and worrying head.”
It is understood that the government is going to respond to Carr's letters soon, but has not yet done so. Secretary of the Interior Yvette Cooper is tasked with examining the application of Article 8 of the ECHR in this case.
