The three judges who ruled that the UK government would have to pass an act of parliament before it could trigger article 50 to leave the EU have come in for intense criticism domestically.

But in examples from around the world this week, the judiciary has been on the frontline in the defence of freedom. Far from being seen as the enemy of the people, judges are often viewed as their most trusted allies.

An independent judiciary can be a last bulwark against corruption, press censorship and an overweening executive, whereas a weakened judiciary subjected to political influence gives governments a free hand.

In Hong Kong, for instance, many people hope the judiciary will help their fight against Beijing’s growing encroachment on the city’s autonomy. A judge there will shortly rule on whether two young pro-democracy politicians who have refused to swear an oath of allegiance to Chinese rule can be recognised as legislators.

The judgment will determine the independence of the legislature, assuming the Chinese government does not in effect overrule the courts.

In South Africa, a country still learning to love its constitution, high court judges and the former public protector Thuli Madonsela have played a key role in exposing corruption allegations against the president, Jacob Zuma, and the ruling ANC party. This week Zuma dropped his opposition to the publication of a report by Madonsela that recommends a commission of inquiry headed by a judge be set up within 30 days to investigate alleged influence peddling in government.

Pro-Beijing supporters outside the high court in Hong Kong. Photograph: Jerome Favre/EPA

Similarly, in Zimbabwe, independent judges have repeatedly challenged Robert Mugabe’s efforts to ban public demonstrations.

In Brazil a federal judge, Sérgio Moro, could topple the recently installed president, Michel Temer. Moro has become the public face of the battle to uncover corruption across Brazil. He ordered the arrest of four members of the senate’s own internal police force, who have been accused of obstructing an investigation into the Petrobras scandal.

In India, journalists and media organisations are asking judges to intervene after the government was accused of censorship reminiscent of the country’s 1970s emergency. A network was ordered off the air over its reporting of an attack by Pakistan-based militants.

Federal judge Sérgio Moro has become the public face of the battle to uncover corruption across Brazil. Photograph: Rodolfo Buhrer/Reuters

In an example of the dangers of a non-independent judiciary, Venezuela’s supreme court, which is controlled by government sympathisers, this week allowed President Nicolás Maduro to remove budgetary authority from the congress, the country’s main source of political opposition.

And in Turkey, where opposition MPs were arrested early on Friday, the chances of judges intervening are slim. A law passed this year has gutted the bulk of the judiciary. A total of 3,700 judges have been arrested or prosecuted. MPs have lost their immunity from prosecution and press censorship has been imposed.



Meanwhile, the rightwing attack on the British judiciary comes at a time when the role of Britain as an international legal beacon is under pressure. Theresa May in her brief leadership campaign may have shelved plans to remove Britain from the European convention on human rights and introduce a British bill. But the persistence of the attack on the ECHR by ministers has had an impact.



Equally, the government has removed a reference in the ministerial code to the requirement that ministers comply with international law. The government said it was merely an innocent tidying-up process, but it comes at a time when the foreign secretary, Boris Johnson, frequently makes reference to plans to bring Russian or Syrian perpetrators of war crimes to justice in international courts.

Moreover, the current attorney general, Jeremy Wright, like his predecessor, Dominic Grieve, underlines “the intense public scrutiny that the UK’s government actions attract on the world stage and the importance of international law to both frame and defend those actions.”

With African nations from South Africa to Gambia rushing to leave the international criminal court, it is arguably even more important that British ministers, starting with the lord chancellor, Liz Truss, speak out to defend the rule of law, as is their statutory duty, rather than through silence connive in judicial intimidation.

For all its faults, the UK judiciary is seen as fair and predictable. It is the international gold standard, and one of the key sources of the UK’s soft power.