Why has the SC become more important?

In 1998, the ECHR was incorporated into UK law by Blair gov, stating that all legislation, actions and decisions made by any decision makers had to conform to the convention.
This has meant citizens can assert their rights more forcefully.
In cases where human rights have been abused, it has resulted in important court cases with political significance.
A and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department(2004) held that the indefinite detention of foreign prisoners in Belmarsh without trial under the Anti-terrorism Act (2001) was incompatible with ECHR.

The position of Lord Chancellor was retained, but its role changed. It is no longer the head of the courts system, nor the House of Lords. The Lord Chief Justice became head of the judicial system (a non-political post). In addition, the post for Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs was created in cabinet, advising to the government on constitutional issues.
A new Judicial Appointments Commission was set up to propose candidates for promotion to senior judicial positions. The Commission ensures that there is no political influence over the decision.
The 12 law lords who sat in the House of Lords were removed to a new Supreme Court in 2009. Though the powers of the new court remained the same, it helped to establish independence, so the change was largely symbolic.

SC able to question the lawfulness of decisions made by public bodies, such as local councils, government departments, police forces or health authorities.
However, it’s limited by parliamentary sovereignty.
Al Rawi v Security Service (2010) – gov wanted to use ‘closed material procedure’, SC said it would undermine civil liberties, parliament passed Justice and Security Act (2010) to allow it.