Overruled: Confronting Our Vanishing Democracy in 8 Cases

by Sam Fowles

British democracy is on trial. We can no longer hold our leaders to account; the state has too much power; and the truth doesn’t matter at all. Those we voted into government have nothing but contempt for the democratic
system that got them there.

When the Prime Minister illegally prorogued Parliament, barrister Sam Fowles was part of the team that took him to court, and won. The scenes of the police violently restraining women
at a vigil for Sarah Everard shook the nation. In a high-profile parliamentary inquiry, Fowles proved the Met’s actions fundamentally breached our right to protest. For decades, the Post Office pursued criminal prosecutions against its own employees, knowing the evidence was dodgy all along. Fowles helped reveal the rot at the heart of a trusted national institution.

We shouldn’t have to take our rulers to court just to get them to follow the rules. At a crucial juncture for British governance, Fowles urges us not to take our freedoms for granted.

Genres: Law, Politics, Society

240 pages, Kindle Edition

Published June 23, 2022

Reviews

[baibai · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very interesting book, but as I had already read "How Democracies Die" I found that it was quite similar to that book, mostly taking the argument and general principles of the Levitsky/Ziblatt book and applying it to the UK + providing cases to support the argument. There were a couple of areas which I thought were a bit misleading which I thought was a bit lazy and undermined the authority of the overall argument. E.g. implies that after the prorogation of parliament MPs who were expelled from the tory party could not do their job, ("third of MPs effectively excluded from parliament") which is misleading.

Overall, really interesting and makes you concerned about the state of the UK government which I think is the whole purpose of the book.

[Zachary Barker · Rating 4 out of 5]

Dr Sam Fowles is a barrister specialising in constitutional law who has worked on many significant political cases.

The author’s case is that the historical arc of British Constitutional development has been reversed. After years of power gradually being dispersed and brought further down to the hands of the citizenry, modern government has seen a consistent thrust for centralised power. Perversely this has been brought on by governments spouting Populist rhetoric, promising to do the very opposite and empower people.

There were some very interesting insights into some very current cases. For myself, hearing about the government literally racing to send their envoys to see the Queen before her official courtier to advise on (illegally) proroguing Parliament gave me pause for thought. Our Parliament staying open literally rested on something so crude and arcane. But what gives even more pause for thought is the Government continuously justifying their actions that often defy constitutional law in terms of channelling the “will of the people”. As the author points out this has chilling parallels to full blown autocracy, which begs the question; how far are we really from it?

I found the author’s writing style quite refreshingly direct. I was also impressed with how they daringly ventured into exploring how the political field has come to disturb the legal field. This was particularly striking in the distinction, which he borrowed from academia, between lying and “bullshit”. The latter being essentially weaponised lying that makes no effort to even acknowledge the existence of a reality different from the one they are portraying. This is a chilling reminder of the emergence of the world where the truth is too often seen as either not worth fighting for or just simply an expendable commodity. This the author points out has an ultimately corrosive effect on the justice system since it relies heavily on what truth is or seen to be.

One thing readers may find a bit jarring, but I respected is that the author is not afraid to give their own frank observations. They also give certain big hints to where their political sympathies lie with some of these observations. For example, while the author accepts that parties of the left wing of the political spectrum in the past have been guilty of acting undemocratically, the latest wave of it in British Politics has been almost exclusively pursued by the right wing who currently hold power.

A book with so chilling an outlook on the state of the rights of citizens and our political and justice systems in general, is not necessarily a book to be “enjoyed” in so many words. But it is vital, clearly communicated and stark in it’s warnings. At the times it offered some solutions it seemed to weave between the arguably politically naïve to the genuinely radical and thought provoking.

In terms of the latter I was struck by the author’s suggestion of separating ministers from being local representatives. The author argues that our cabinet system should be more like the US’s where the cabinet is unelected but chosen by an elected political party and confirmed by Parliament. This is to stop Party Leaders who become PM’s from buying loyalty. This is especially interesting when one considers that 100 MPs make up the full cabinet. There is more than one way to achieve it. And it potentially has advantages and drawbacks. But it is definitely a brave intervention in the discussion about how we professionalise our ministerial positions and make them more focused and expert orientated.

They make an interesting intervention on the written constitution debate, which gave myself (a long time advocate of a written constitution) serious consideration for reflection and self-examination. To avoid the danger of trapping the UK into a dated constitutional prison like the US, the author recommends substituting it for a short written set of constitutional principles. I find this idea intriguing and would welcome more discussion on it. I was also intrigued at his idea of scrapping parliamentary rules against calling other members out for lying to the house, although I imagine specific rules may have to be made to qualify that.

One thing that does bother me a bit about this book is that it was made too soon. It being published a couple of years ago it is very centred on Boris. I wonder if the author ever considered how Suella and Rishi would carry on down the path of power grabbing with him out of the picture? In the light of the rise of the prospect of more punitive laws against asylum seekers and the homeless, it is a shame we didn’t get the chance to see the author’s perspective on this.

I would say that the author pulled their punches too much on another area which I feel should have been mentioned more. Human Rights. Myself, and many others believe that not only are Human Rights being treated as expendable, certain sections of the right (many within our government) are challenging the very notion of the existence of inalienable and universal rights. The author is determined that “bullshit” as he calls it is called out. From my perspective this is the most dangerous bullshit of all.

This book was passionate, to the point and gave me some serious points to re-examine my own views. It restated the important case that British Democracy is a developing project that needs improving, not a perfect sacred cow to be defended by those who pose as patriots as they take our rights. I only hope the author makes a follow up to catch up with the continuing unravelling of British Democracy.

[Victoria Cousins · Rating 5 out of 5]

Every citizen of the UK should read this book. That is all.

[Paul Snelling · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a very worrying book. It's short and accessible and therefore lacking in detail, but the narrative direction is clear and compelling and should worry anyone concerned about the erosion of liberty and democracy - the sort that worries the woke, guardian reading tofu eaters rather the spittle speckled Brexit libertarians. The country is drowning in bullshit, and Fowles does a good job of pointing it out. We all have to see it before we can clean it up.

[Alisha · Rating 3 out of 5]

A very accessible short little book which effectively outlines the threats to democracy in Britain. However as this is not an academic text it assumes no prior knowledge on the political process / our constitution and thus some concepts were over simplified and didn’t offer much beyond a surface level discussion (which again makes sense since this is clearly intended to be an accessible introductory level book !! )

[Freyja]

I liked this book and I think ultimately it changed the way I think about politics.