|
''Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service'' () (UKHL 6 ), also known as the ''GCHQ case'', is an English administrative law and UK labour law case that held the Royal Prerogative was subject to judicial review. In 1984 the British government under Margaret Thatcher decided that employees of the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) would not be allowed to join any trade union for national security reasons. This was enforced through an Order in Council, an exercise of the Royal Prerogative. The Council of Civil Service Unions chose to bring this matter to court through judicial review, first to the High Court of Justice, which ruled the Order in Council was invalid. The case then went to the Court of Appeal, which decided that the national security issues trumped any problems of propriety. From there the case went to the House of Lords, where it was decided on 22 November 1984. In their decision, the Lords found that exercises of the Royal Prerogative were generally subject to judicial review, with certain exceptions such as matters of national security. This was a significant break from the previous law, which held that prerogative powers were not in any way subject to judicial review. The GCHQ case served to identify that the application of judicial review would be dependent on the nature of the government's powers, not their source. ==Facts== The Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) is a British intelligence agency that provides signals intelligence to the British government and armed forces.〔(【引用サイトリンク】title=GCHQ Post War )〕 Prior to 1983 its existence was not acknowledged,〔 despite the fact that it openly recruited graduates. Following a spy scandal in 1983, the organisation became known to the public, and the government of Margaret Thatcher decided a year later that employees would not be allowed to join a trade union for national security reasons. The Minister for the Civil Service is a position held ''ex officio'' by the Prime Minister.〔Bradley, Ewing (2011). p. 261.〕 This was enforced through an Order in Council, an exercise of the Royal Prerogative. Despite an extensive publicity campaign by trade unions, the government refused to reverse its decision, instead offering affected employees the choice between £1,000 and membership of a staff association or dismissal. Those employees dismissed could not rely on an industrial tribunal, as they were not covered by the relevant employment legislation. As such, the Council of Civil Service Unions decided judicial review was the only available route.〔James (1997) p.206〕 The decision to ban workers at GCHQ from trade union membership had been taken following the meeting of a select group of ministers and the prime minister rather than the full Cabinet. This is not unusual, even in relation to high-profile decisions: a decision was similarly taken to authorise the Suez operation of 1956 and the decision to transfer the ability to set interest rates to the Bank of England in 1997.〔Bradley, Ewing (2011). p. 106.〕 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|