Skip navigation

Law Commission Tenth Programme of Law Reform Forum

Method(s) Used


Name of person who posted the project:

Kerry Ryan


Location of project:

United Kingdom


Date when the project started:

2007


Date when the project ended/project ongoing:

2007


Background to project:

The Law Commission was established to keep the law of England and Wales under review with a view to its systematic development and reform. Its stated aim is to achieve more accessible, intelligible and modern law.

Purpose of project:

The Tenth Programme of Law Reform was opened on February 5, 2007. In formulating this Programme, the Commission wanted to identify projects that would benefit the public.
Anyone can suggest to the Commission an area of the law that is in need of reform. The Law Commission tends to consider reform of particular branches of the law, but will consider any proposal within a set of basic criteria. The online forum was established to give key stakeholders and the public an opportunity to propose and discuss reforms of existing law in a structured manner.
The forum began with an open space for initial suggestions. Once several discrete areas of law had been identified by contributors, separate topics were established to allow deliberation on each: these included:
  • Family law;
  • Public law;
  • Property law;
  • Employment law;
  • Commercial law;
  • Criminal Law.
    The reform programme impacts on residents of England and Wales.

Project activities:

Online deliberative forum.

The forum was readable by anyone, but registration was required to contribute.
The forum was pre-moderated by Law Commission policy staff.
Representatives from the Commission logged into the forum to promote deliberation, respond to queries and to summarise discussions.


Project results:

Strengths
  • The forum encouraged participation of lay public;
  • The Commission approached the exercise with a genuine openness to suggestions;
  • The Commission provided a criteria framework to guide submission content and structure;
  • The case study team generated support for public engagement (and the online forum) throughout the Commission;
  • The Communications division developed a promotional strategy and implemented it;
  • The forum and Tenth Programme were positioned within the context of previous Programmes and engagement activity;
  • The case study team undertook their own research into online engagement theory and techniques and attended seminars and workshops to supplement those offered by the Digital Dialogues initiative.

Potential for improvement

  • The forum had a low registration and participation rate;
  • The extent of engagement of expert stakeholders with the forum was limited;
  • The participation on the part of Commissioners was too infrequent and lacked depth;
  • Partnerships with media organisations, and taking advantage of media coverage that generated public interest, could have improved the visibility of the Programme and encouraged participation in the forum.

Contact details:

http://forum.lawcom.gov.uk/

Source:Digital Dialogues Second Phase report - Hansard Society/Ministry of Justice 2007
eDemocracy Programme,
Hansard Society,
40-43 Chancery Lane
London WC2A 1JA
e - edemocracy@hansard.lse.ac.uk
t - 020 7438 1222

Recommended Case Studies
Act on it (Forum Theatre)
GM Nation
Taking it on (Online Consultation)
The Walsall Participatory Appraisal Network
Udecide Newcastle
Your Health Your Care Your Say