JUDGES made clear yesterday that they would not bend the rule of law in response to the Prime Minister’s calls to the judiciary to heed public concern over suicide bombings.

Senior figures said that the judiciary would take “not the slightest notice” of remarks by Tony Blair lamenting the blocking by courts of moves to deport radical clerics.

Lord Donaldson of Lymington, a former Master of the Rolls, said that judges would not be bothered in the least by what the Prime Minister said. “It is the job of governments to put forward measures which make the work of the police and security services easier — and it is the job of judges to resist that where necessary [to uphold the rule of law].”

Judges, he added, would always take account of public opinion when it came to sentencing options. It was right and proper that they did so. “But that is a different matter from suggesting that they reach different opinions on whether an exportation or specific government order is lawful or not.”

“We still must take action against terrorism and there is great momentum to do so,” Lord Donaldson said. “But equally the judges must maintain the law, and they will.”

Lord Ackner, a retired law lord, said that judges would not alter their behaviour “one bit”.

“I think, however, that the present atmosphere has changed, as shown by the shoot-to-kill policy, which people accept. And I think there is greater realisation of the danger we are all in. But I don’t see how judges can reflect that in their judgments.”

The comments came as the chasm between the judiciary and politicians over the role of the courts in the fight over terrorism was exposed by the Prime Minister’s wife.

In remarks that apparently conflicted with Mr Blair’s approach, Cherie Booth, QC, urged the Government not to undermine civil liberties after the London bombings. Ms Booth, a barrister and part-time judge, cautioned the Government against a too-authoritarian reaction which would “cheapen our right to call ourselves a civilised nation”.

Speaking in Malaysia as a human rights lawyer, she said: “Nothing I say here could possibly be construed as making light of those horrible acts of violence [the London attacks], or of the responsibility imposed on the UK and other governments to keep the public safe, or of the difficult and dangerous task performed by the police and intelligence services.” But she added: “It is all too easy for us to respond to such terror in a way which undermines commitment to our most deeply held values and convictions and which cheapens our right to call ourselves a civilised nation.”

She praised the way that the House of Lords blocked recent anti-terror legislation that could have seen foreign suspects detained without trial. “What the case makes clear is that the Government, even in times when there is a threat to national security, must act strictly in accordance with the law,” she said.

By contrast Mr Blair appeared to focus on remarks by Lord Hoffmann, one of the law lords in the 8-1 ruling last December, who said that the real threat to the life of the nation came not from “terrorism but from laws such as these”. The Prime Minister said that he doubted whether those words would be uttered now.

In a press conference at Downing Street yesterday, he insisted that he was not embarrassed by his wife’s remarks. “I think I have said myself that it is important that we balance these things — civil liberties for people,” he said. “It is very important to protect our way of life and it is important to protect our security. I think probably, to be fair, if you read the whole of the speech she was saying the same thing.”

The Bar Council backed the judges last night. John Cooper, barrister and member of its public affairs committee, said: “The most important aspect of a democratic society is the independence of the judiciary.”

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• UK regional accents thrive against the odds
• ‘Scarecrow’ wind farms put rare birds to flight
• What an anti-climax: G-spot is a myth