Alan Beith MP

Plans to overhaul the judiciary were rushed and should be delayed, senior MPs have concluded.

The government's proposals to abolish the historic post of lord chancellor and change the way judges are appointed should be looked at again, members of the constitutional affairs committee said on Tuesday.

They also warned that the government would have to ensure safeguards with the new system for appointing judges, to avoid claims of political interference.

As part of a Cabinet reshuffle in June last year, the prime minister created a new Department for Constitutional Affairs and overhaul the way top judges are selected.

But MPs have raised concern that the series of sweeping changes that go with the overhaul are so far-reaching they should not be hurried through.

Wait

They urged Blair to wait until the new supreme court has been established before pressing on with his plans.

The committee concludes that the reason for such haste "appears to be primarily political".

MPs argued the consultation process has been too short and the legislative timetable too restrictive to enable proper scrutiny of fundamental changes.

Plans for a new supreme court should also clarify how far it is a UK court as opposed to a final court of appeal, the committee warned.

Current system

They pointed out that the current system of appointing judges works well and that any changes must lead to "identifiable improvements".

"Whatever the precise nature of reform, the eventual system must command public confidence, guarantee the judiciary's independence and ensure rigorous standards are maintained," said committee chairman and Liberal Democrat MP Alan Beith.

"It is a matter of considerable regret that these proposals were formulated and announced in a way that was hurried and evidently without the knowledge of many of those who should have been extensively consulted.

"It has created anxieties amongst senior members of the judiciary and has not helped the case of those who support genuine reform and progress."

Step back

But the Conservatives attacked the decision to create a supreme court.

Shadow constitutional affairs secretary Alan Duncan described the proposals as a "perilous step backwards because it will extend the influence of the executive over the judges".

"A supreme court is there to judge whether something conforms to a written constitution which we don't have," he said.

Duncan also condemned the new appointments system.

"They say it is to help the separation of powers. Then they have devised a system, an inter-relationship between the secretary of state for constitutional affairs and the lord chief justice, that has no end of political involvement in things like judicial appointments and consultations," he said.