Lesson video

Hello.

My name's Ms. Ikomi and I'm a teacher from London.

I'm gonna be taking you through today's citizenship lesson.

We've got lots to get through, so let's get started.

Today's lesson is called What is the Rule of Law and How Does It Support a Fair Society?

It is part of the wider unit: The Rule of Law at key stage three.

By the end of today's lesson, you will be able to explain how laws are applied fairly, how judges make fair decisions, and how people can get help if laws are unfair.

We've got lots to get through, so let's get started.

As today's topics could be seen as sensitive, we're going to discuss some ground rules for taking part in this lesson.

First of all, it's important to listen to others.

It's okay to disagree with each other, but we should listen properly before making assumptions or deciding how to respond.

When disagreeing, it's important that we challenge the statement, not the person.

We must respect privacy.

We can discuss examples in a general sense, but please do not use names or descriptions that identify anyone, including yourself.

We listen without passing judgment.

We can explore beliefs and misunderstandings about a topic without fear of being judged.

And last, you can choose your level of participation.

Everyone has the right to choose not to answer a question or join in with a discussion.

We'll never put anyone on the spot.

Let's get started.

These are some of the key words that we're going to hear coming up in today's lesson.

The first of these is judicial.

This is relating to the branch of the state, the judiciary.

This is the branch that's responsible for interpreting and implying the law.

Independence.

This is the idea that judges are free to make decisions based only on the law and the evidence without being influenced or pressured by the government or another powerful group.

Justice.

This is fairness as a result of the application of the law, usually by a judge in society.

And legal certainty.

Laws are clear, consistent, and predictable so people understand their rights and know how the law will be applied.

Keep an eye out for these keywords as we move through today's lesson.

We're going to start by thinking about how do judges make fair decisions?

The judiciary we heard in our key words is the branch of government that is responsible for interpreting and applying the law.

It sits separately from the executive and the legislature.

It is made up of judges, magistrates, and other legal officials who are responsible for making judicial decisions.

Together, they ensure in their roles that the law is applied fairly and consistently across different cases no matter who they are or who it's involving.

Judges and magistrates make judicial decisions by applying the law to the facts of a particular case, rather than using their personal opinions.

This is a really important principle when it comes to lawmaking and application of the law to make sure that it's fair across all the people who come into the system.

In court, judges and magistrates have to follow rules about evidence and legal procedures.

This is to ensure that justice is served fairly.

There's another one of our key words.

This helps to make sure that everyone is treated equally under the law.

Judicial independence means that judges are free from pressure or influence by the government, politicians, or other powerful groups.

They as a group sit independently.

They still have to follow other rules, but they're not influenced by other powerful people.

Laura's asking a really good question.

"How do judges make sure that the decisions that they make are fair?

" There are lots of processes in place to ensure that this is possible.

To protect the rule of law, judges must follow an important rule.

They can't use evidence if it would make the trial unfair, especially if it was obtained by the state through illegal or improper methods.

This was made law in Section 78 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 and is an important part of judicial independence and legal certainty.

This is one way that judges' decisions are kept consistent and fair across all cases.

Evidence that is brought to a court is examined from both sides.

In some criminal cases, juries decide on guilt based on the evidence, whilst judges will make sure that the law is applied correctly.

A jury is made up of normal citizens like you and I who are responsible for listening to the evidence and coming to a decision based on all of that evidence that they have heard.

Lots of people will be called up to do jury duty at some point in their life if they meet certain criteria.

This is to keep the judicial system fair.

This process protects people who may be wrongly accused and supports legal certainty so people can trust that outcomes are based on clear rules and not just something that the judge or magistrates are making up in that moment.

Let's do a quick check of what we've done so far.

I'd like you to match the word on the left with its definition on the right.

Pause your video and have a go at this now.

Then we'll check our answers in a couple of minutes.

Let's check our answers.

The first one, judicial.

The definition is the work of judges and legal officials.

Independence means that judges are free to make decisions without being pressured.

Justice means fairness as a result of the application of the law.

And legal certainty is that laws are clear, consistent, and predictable.

Well done if you got those right.

Laura's asking us another really good question.

She said, "How else do we ensure the judicial system is fair?

" There are other processes that also go along with evidence.

One of these is that judges clearly explain their reasons when passing sentences.

This makes court decisions transparent, meaning that everybody knows what's going on and how that decision has been made.

This supports public trust in justice because judges are expected to justify how they have applied the law in a way that's fair.

They've not just done what they want to do based on personal opinion.

For example, in June, 2025, the sentencing council updated their guidelines, clearly explaining how sentences are decided to ensure fairness and consistency across all groups in society.

This shows that decisions are not random.

They follow clear rules helping the judicial system to deliver justice.

The sentencing council creates clear guidelines that judges follow when deciding sentences.

This makes the law predictable, so similar crimes like theft or assault receive similar sentences.

They're not necessarily changing based on the judge who is in court that day or based on the person who has done the crime.

This also helps ensure justice and protects judicial independence by guiding judges without controlling them.

Judges can consider individual circumstances, but they're not influenced by media or political pressure, and this is really important for ensuring fairness.

This judge is telling us that these guidelines help me decide a fair sentence.

I can follow the law, treat similar cases similarly, and still consider each person's circumstances.

Let's do another check.

Who must follow the sentencing counsel's guidelines?

Is it A, the prosecutor, B, the accused, C, judges and magistrates, or D, the government?

Pause your video and choose your answer now.

Can you also think about why you've chosen that answer?

The correct answer is C.

This is because only judges and magistrates decide sentences, the other people wouldn't.

Judicial independence means judges make decisions based on the law without outside influence so that they're fair and unbiased.

For example, we can imagine this in a different context.

Imagine a pupil is accused of damaging school property.

A fair decision would involve looking at CCTV cameras, witness statements, and the school rules.

The school wouldn't guess or use favoritism to decide who had done it or what the outcome of that would be.

In a similar way, courts rely on evidence and the law ensures justice is fair and consistent.

Another quick check, true or false, judges can be biased when applying the law.

Pause your video and choose your answer.

Can you also think about why you've chosen that answer?

Let's check our answer.

The correct answer is false.

This is because judges cannot be biased because they base their decisions only on the law and the evidence, not on their personal opinions, pressure, or outside influences.

Also, the rule of law states that the law should be applied consistently and equally.

Well done if you got that correct.

Let's do a longer task now to practice what we've learned so far.

I'd like you to work in pairs.

One person will be the judge and the other will be someone accused of damaging play equipment in a local park.

I'd like you to decide what evidence a judge would need to see.

The judge must then decide whether the accused is guilty or not guilty based only on this evidence.

Afterwards, write one paragraph explaining how justice and legal certainty was shown in the decision.

Pause your video and have a go at this now.

Let's check our answers.

Your paragraph explaining your decision might have looked like this.

The judge looked carefully at the evidence such as CCTV footage and witness statements.

The CCTV showed the event and clearly showed the person was guilty of damaging the park.

The guilty verdict showed justice because the decision was fair and based on the law.

There was legal certainty because the rules were applied clearly and evidence used so everyone knows what consequences follow if someone breaks the law.

Alternatively, your answer might have looked like this.

The judge looked carefully at the evidence such as the CCTV footage and witness statements and decided the person was not guilty because there was no proof they caused the damage.

The witness statements showed they just walked through the park innocently.

This shows justice because the decision treated the person fairly based on the evidence and it demonstrates legal certainty by showing that people are only held responsible for a crime when the evidence supports it.

Next, we're going to think about how do laws help people understand their rights.

Laws are written and made public so people know what they can and cannot do.

This creates legal certainty and helps everyone understand their rights and duties.

In the UK, for example, employment laws set minimum wage and working conditions.

This means that there is a certain amount that you have to be paid based on your age per hour and also you have to be kept safe and healthy within your workplace.

It also protects young people.

For example, the Management of Health and Safety Work Regulations 1999 stops people from working with harmful substances if they're under a certain age.

These laws support justice and prevent people from being exploited, which means taken advantage of in a way that could be harmful to them but benefit someone else.

It also keeps workplaces safe.

Clear laws help people solve problems and disputes more easily in the situation that something might go wrong.

Consumer rights laws explain when someone can get a refund or replacement if a product is faulty.

Knowing your rights when it comes to buying things, consuming things lets people to act confidently and reinforces legal certainty.

This doesn't just apply to buying things, but it can also apply in lots of other contexts within society.

Alistair's giving us an example of this.

He says, "I wish I'd known there were rights we had as consumers.

A shop wouldn't give me a refund even though I had a receipt.

Does anyone know what law is that could help me get my money back?

" This is a good example of whereby knowing your rights is really important to make sure things don't go wrong.

Clive is telling Alistair that it's the Consumer Rights Act and it was passed in 2015.

The act states that if the item is faulty, you can return it within 30 days for a full refund.

This applies to sale items too.

It's called your right to reject.

Laws are regularly updated to reflect changes in society.

A good example of this is the recent changes to laws around online safety.

As we live in a society where changes online are happening very rapidly, it's really important for laws to keep up with that to make sure that everyone is kept safe.

The Online Safety Act 2023 began to be implemented in January, 2025.

This was to protect young people from accessing or seeing by accident harmful content online.

This is important because it means that laws have to evolve to maintain justice and protect rights in modern situations.

If we still only had laws that were written in earlier times to think about online safety, it wouldn't apply to all of the different contexts people find themselves in online today.

Let's do another check.

I'd like you to match the law to the right example of people understanding their rights.

Pause your video and have a go at this now.

Let's check our answers.

Employment law.

The example of this is knowing the minimum wage and working hours.

Consumer law, knowing you can get a refund if a product is faulty.

Online safety law, knowing how to stay safe on social media.

Really good.

When laws are clear, they prevent confusion and reduce conflict.

In the UK, we have an age of criminal responsibility, which is 10 years old.

This means that when people are over the age of 10, they are held to be criminally responsible for their actions.

Knowing this and having this clarity means that the judiciary can decide cases consistently.

This ensures legal certainty and fairness.

Everyone knows how the law is applied and everyone can understand their rights.

The law sets the age of criminal responsibility to protect younger children from being treated as fully responsible for crimes that they may not understand.

This supports justice by balancing accountability with protection.

Clear laws and rules like this give families, schools, and communities confidence in how the law will be applied and make it easier to understand their rights.

Let's do a quick check.

I'd like you to complete the missing words in the sentences below.

Pause your video and have a go at this now.

We'll read through the sentences completed together in a couple of minutes.

Let's check our answers.

In England, children under 10 years old cannot usually be held criminally responsible.

Clear rules like this give people legal certainty about how the law will be applied.

The law balances holding people accountable with protecting them, supporting justice.

Let's do a longer task.

Using an example, I'd like you to explain how laws help people understand their rights.

Pause your video and have a go at this now.

Let's check our answer.

I asked you to explain how laws help people understand their rights.

You might have included some of the following: laws help people understand their rights by being clear, written down, and easy to access.

This creates legal certainty.

For example, the Consumer Rights Act makes it clear that if a product is faulty, you have the right to return it within 30 days for a full refund, even if it was on sale.

This is called your right to reject.

The law explains exactly what people can do, ensuring justice by protecting buyers from being treated unfairly.

Clear laws like this also give people confidence to challenge businesses or claim their rights, showing how legal certainty and justice work together in everyday life.

Last, we're going to think about how people can challenge unfair laws.

People can challenge unfair laws through the courts, which is a key part of judicial independence.

Courts can review decisions made by the government and ensure that they're lawful and judicial reviews are the way of doing this.

They allow judges to check whether decisions follow the law properly and make sure that it's fair to everyone.

This protects justice by holding power accountable.

An example of this, in January, 2026, the government made a decision to allow the expansion of Gatwick Airport.

This was challenged in the high court.

The high court is one of the courts that deals with civil matters in the UK.

Community campaigners argue that the decision may not have been properly considered and thought about issues such as climate impact, noise, and environmental effects of this expansion.

This meant that the government isn't able just to make decisions without them necessarily being held accountable in the case that they hadn't done the correct thing.

Individuals can use human rights laws to challenge unfair treatment by public organizations.

For example, cases under the Human Rights Act 1998, let courts check whether laws or government actions respect people's basic rights.

This upholds the rule of law by showing that legal certainty applies to everyone, even when challenging authority.

An example of this is that in 2025, two migrants took the UK Home Office to the High Court, again, that's one of our civil courts, arguing that they had not been properly protected whilst being held in an immigration center.

The court found that systems meant to protect vulnerable detainees from inhumane or degrading treatment were failing.

This was going against their human rights.

Judges ruled that this was unlawful because it breached human rights protections under Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Let's do another check.

What does judiciary review allow judges to do?

Is it A, make new laws for the government and parliament?

B, check whether government decisions follow the law?

C, decide which laws to ignore and which to follow?

Or D, give advice to the government about the law?

Pause your video and choose your answer.

The correct answer is B.

Courts can declare that laws do not comply with human rights, showing the government that they need to be changed.

An example of this is in 2018, the UK Supreme Court ruled that the Civil Partnership Act 2004 was incompatible with human rights as it only allowed same-sex couples to enter civil partnerships.

The court ruled this as discriminatory under the European Convention on Human Rights, putting pressure on the government to change the law.

In response, in 2019, parliament amended the law so that opposite sex couples could also enter into civil partnerships.

This demonstrates how judicial systems and the rule of law support fairness and protect citizens.

People can also campaign and raise awareness to change laws.

Public pressure and campaigns have influenced environmental and safety rules in lots of different areas.

For example, the UK single-use vape ban introduced on the 1st of June, 2025 followed widespread concern about waste and fire risks with over 250,000 people signing the petition, supporting the decision.

Therefore, justice is not only decided in courts, but it's also shaped by society and the concerns of people within communities.

Let's do another check.

Read the three statements and decide your answer below by ticking one box for each answer.

The statements are, "Courts can challenge decisions and laws based on human rights.

" "In January, 2025, the UK started to ban all vapes.

" "Over 250,000 people signed a petition which urged the government to act.

" Pause your video and choose the box that most aligns with what you think about these statements.

Let's check our answers.

The first statement is correct, the second statement is incorrect, and the third statement is correct.

Let's do our final longer task.

Laura is unhappy because the local government have introduced a new bylaw in her area that young people under 18 cannot use the park after 4:00 PM, even though there've been no problems.

What could Laura do to challenge this decision?

I'd like you to write a paragraph thinking about what Laura could do to challenge this based on some of the things we've thought about in today's lesson.

Pause your video and have a go at this now.

Let's have a think about what we could have included in our answer.

You might have said a young person could challenge this unfair rule through a judicial review in the courts, where judges check the council acted within the law and made a fair and reasonable decision.

This protects people from rules that are unfair or applied inconsistently and supports legal certainty because everyone can see how rules should be applied.

In addition to using the courts, young people could campaign to raise awareness about the issue such as writing to local counselors, starting a petition, or speaking at community meetings.

Campaigning alongside legal action helps show that rules should be fair and clear, giving the community confidence that both justice and legal certainty are upheld.

Well done if you included some of that in your answer.

Today, we have been thinking about who decides what is fair under the law.

We've learned judges and magistrates make fair decisions using evidence in the law, which shows justice and legal certainty.

They act independently without being influenced by politicians, the media, or the public.

This is judicial independence.

Laws are clear, publicly available, and easy to understand so everyone knows their rights and duties.

Fair and independent judicial systems build trust in society because everyone can see that rules are applied consistently and fairly.

People can challenge unfair laws or decisions through the courts.

This might be a judicial review or by campaigning.

That's the end of today's lesson.

Thank you for joining me.