Court calls Johnson’s suspension of parliament ‘improper’ and ‘unlawful’

Court calls Johnson’s suspension of parliament ‘improper’ and ‘unlawful’

Mr. Grieve has been the M.P. for Beaconsfield since 1997 but last week, along with 20 fellow Conservative party M.P.s, he had the whip removed when he voted with the opposition to facilitate the process of passing legislation created to block the United Kingdom leaving the European Union without a deal on October 31, 2019.

Last week, a court in Edinburgh rejected the lawmakers' challenge, saying it was a matter for politicians, not the courts, to decide.

The ruling added that all three First Division judges decided that the PM's advice to the British monarch was motivated by the improper objective of stymying Parliament and that it, and what has followed from it, is unlawful.

Three judges accused the Prime Minister of suspending the Commons for the "improper goal of stymying Parliament" over his Brexit plans and said last Monday's prorogation was "null and of no effect".

Last week, his government lost control of Parliament to an informal coalition of the main opposition and Conservative rebels, who then passed a bill on Monday to block a "no-deal" Brexit within the current deadline.

The UK government said it was "disappointed" by the decision and would be appealing to the UK's Supreme Court.

The government objected to the court's ruling and said it would file an appeal. That contradicts the prime minister's stated motive for the move - that his new government needs the time to lay out its agenda in a speech in the middle of next month.

But the Supreme Court could rule that Parliament was never prorogued and is still in session, meaning that there is no need to recall Parliament.

Suspending parliament to start a new legislative session is normally a routine event that takes place most years.

More news: Frankfurt Motor Show: The concepts revealed
More news: Remembering the 9/11 attacks, 18 years later
More news: Team USA basketball vs. France, score

Tommy Sheppard, Scottish Nationalist Party (SNP) MP at Westminster, said: "The buck stops with Boris Johnson".

"The Court will accordingly make an Order declaring that the Prime Minister's advice to HM the Queen and the prorogation which followed thereon was unlawful and is thus null and of no effect".

"It is absolutely central to our constitution that the relationship between the Prime Minister and the Queen is one of the utmost confidentiality and the utmost good faith". The UKSupreme Court is also due to hear a separate challenge to the prorogation next Tuesday.

In essence, the court said Johnson intentionally misled the monarch, an official ruling that was the first in British history.

And Dominic Grieve, the former Conservative MP and attorney general who now sits as an independent, said the prime minister should "resign very swiftly" if he has misled the Queen.

"This was a pretty unexpected judgment from the Inner House of the Court of Session and strongly overrules the findings of Lord Doherty's ruling last week", he said. "So I can only assume the evidence against Boris Johnson was overwhelming".

Yes, but this would have to be agreed by MPs who vote on whether or not to go into recess.

- What happens if the Supreme Court rules prorogation was unlawful?

Related Articles