Law
A law that looks backwards
Parliament passes a law today making something a crime and says it applies to anyone who did it last year. Is that acceptable?
- Hint 1What does a citizen need from the law to plan their life?
- Hint 2Can you think of a case where looking backwards might seem justified?
- The rule of law requires that people can know the law in advance and act on it.
- Punishing conduct that was lawful when done defeats that, and Article 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights forbids it for criminal offences.
- Retrospective laws in other areas, such as closing a tax loophole, are more often accepted.
- Some argue the gravest wrongs were never truly permitted, a debate raised by the Nuremberg trials.
- Distinguish criminal punishment from civil or tax rules in your answer.
Where it lands: For criminal punishment, generally no; elsewhere it depends on how far people relied on the old law.
The trap: Saying 'Parliament is sovereign, so it is fine' without asking whether it is just.
What a tutor might ask next: Is closing a tax loophole from the day it was announced, before the law passes, retrospective?
Now do one out loud. In the interview you think aloud with a tutor. Try a Law problem with hints, follow-ups and Mia's feedback on how you think.