Jennifer To is a JURIST correspondent for the UK and a law student at the University of Birmingham.
On June 22, Keir Starmer stepped down from his role as Prime Minister of the UK. As the sixth prime minister the UK has seen within 10 years, the current political climate of the UK is uncertain. Andy Burnham, who has recently been sworn in as a Member of Parliament (MP), is a popular candidate to replace Starmer as the leader of the Labour Party.
Starmer’s resignation ended after his MPs lost faith in him. According to the Cabinet Manual at paragraph 3.1, the Prime Minister’s unique position of power comes from the support in the House of Commons, and his position as the head of government is held “by virtue of his or her ability to command the confidence of the House of Commons,” and it is central to the authority given to the Prime Minister.
The Prime Minister’s resignation demonstrates how the UK’s unwritten constitution ensures democracy is maintained. The Cabinet Manual is an example of the codification of constitutional conventions which have traditionally existed as unwritten rules of the game. Constitutional conventions are a source of the UK’s unwritten constitution, setting standards of conduct for government ministers, including the Prime Minister. While not legally binding, they are politically binding.
Despite their legal unenforceability, constitutional conventions remain a critical democratic link from ballot to government. The UK system hinges on the Prime Minister’s ability to command the Commons’ confidence—something Starmer could no longer do. Starmer had thus been expected to resign to ensure the new leader would be held accountable to their responsibility. The operation demonstrates the power constitutional conventions hold over the UK constitution and democracy.
Before Starmer’s resignation and Burnham’s by-election win on June 18, the public’s preferred choice to replace him was Burnham as he was seen as the most likely candidate to do a better job as leader, according to a recent poll. There were previous comments stating that Burnham could become Prime Minister without winning a by-election or an MP. However, these assumptions are far from the reality of the working legal framework which underpins Starmer’s ground for resignation. Burnham must be—and now is—an MP to stand as a candidate for Prime Minister according to paragraph 2.7 and 2.8 of the Manual. The constitution’s concern for the legitimacy of government leadership operates through political accountability and democracy. The unwritten constitutional framework governing the resignation and appointment of new leaders reinforces the rule of law requiring that leaders are subjected to accountability. Burnham would not have been able to bypass this, rendering those above comments misleading.
During Starmer’s ministerial responsibility as Prime Minister, there was no doubt that the legal developments under his authority were significant. Amongst many notable changes in the law, the Renters’ Rights Act 2026 signified an overhaul of previous tenancy laws towards a rights-based regulation in housing.
Significantly, the progression of the Hillsborough law has been monumental for victims of the Hillsborough disaster in that it imposed a duty on public authorities and offices to act with candour, transparency, and frankness to prevent institutional coverups by public bodies. Starmer’s support for the Hillsborough law is significant for upholding accountability, the rule of law, and justice in the UK. However, his resignation raised concerns that the bill might not pass in full, despite his earlier promise at the start of his premiership.
The most notable legal development was the announcement of cutting jury trials in the UK, sparking national concern from the legal profession. Starmer faced pressure from 80,000 backlogged cases in the criminal justice system, with many adjourned to 2029.
Many legal professionals have criticized the reform proposal, arguing it would undermine a fundamental part of the constitution, democracy, and the rule of law. The Chair of the Bar Council has stated, “there is little evidence to support the government’s decision,” further eroding trust in his government.
The decision to proscribe advocacy group Palestine Action became one of the Starmer government’s most controversial moves in UK history, raising rule-of-law concerns, igniting nationwide protests, and fueling political and social pressures already brewing beneath the surface. The mounting political, social, economic, and legal developments shattered the Commons’ confidence in Starmer’s leadership.
Starmer will remain in his post until the contest for leadership is complete, while Burnham remains on course to become the next UK Prime Minister. Starmer said during his resignation speech, “I will do everything I can to ensure an orderly handover of power.”