Connect with us

Brexit

#Brexit - Supreme court to rule today on Johnson's parliament suspension

SHARE:

Published

on

We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you've consented to and to improve our understanding of you. You can unsubscribe at any time.

Britain’s top court will rule today (24 September) whether Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s decision to suspend parliament was unlawful, a judgment that could lead to the recall of the legislature and give lawmakers more chance to obstruct his Brexit plans, writes Michael Holden of Reuters.

Johnson advised Queen Elizabeth to prorogue, or suspend, parliament on 28 August, a move his opponents said was made to stymie challenges to his promise to take Britain out of the European Union on 31 October with or without a divorce deal.

Johnson says the aim of the suspension - from 10 September 10 until 14 October - was to allow him to bring in a new legislative agenda.

The Supreme Court said its 11 justices would hand down their judgment at 10.30 a.m. (0930 GMT) today.

During three days of hearings last week, the Supreme Court was told by lawyers for anti-Brexit campaigners and opposition lawmakers that the five-week shutdown was the longest in 50 years.

Under Britain’s unwritten constitution, the power to suspend or dissolve parliament formally remains with the monarch, a politically impartial figure who acts in accordance with the advice of the prime minister.

The Supreme Court will have to decide if the issue is one that judges should even be involved in or if it was simply a political issue.

The High Court of England and Wales ruled earlier this month that the issue was indeed not “justiciable” but Scotland’s top court concluded Johnson had acted illegally and that the prorogation should be declared null and void.

Advertisement

If the top court agrees the suspension was illegal, it could say that Johnson should recall parliament or that as the prorogation was unlawful, the legislature could simply be reconvened by its speakers.

“As we have heard, it is not a simple question and we will now consider carefully all the arguments that have been presented to us,” Brenda Hale, the court’s president, said at the end of the hearings on Thursday (19 September).

Share this article:

Share this:
Guest Contributor - Opinion

Opinions expressed are purely those of the author and not endorsed by EU Reporter. The article was unsolicited by EU Reporter, and the author guarantees the truthfulness of the contents of the article. No payment was made by EU Reporter to the author

EU Reporter publishes articles from a variety of outside sources which express a wide range of viewpoints. The positions taken in these articles are not necessarily those of EU Reporter. Please see EU Reporter’s full Terms and Conditions of publication for more information EU Reporter embraces artificial intelligence as a tool to enhance journalistic quality, efficiency, and accessibility, while maintaining strict human editorial oversight, ethical standards, and transparency in all AI-assisted content. Please see EU Reporter’s full A.I. Policy for more information.

Trending