Home / News / World News / Article /
'Boris regards Parl as handicap to his plans'
Updated On: 18 September, 2019 09:12 AM IST | | Agencies
England's High Court said the suspension was a political rather than legal matter, but Scottish court judges ruled last week that Johnson acted illegally to avoid democratic scrutiny
Listen to this article :
Demonstrators protest outside the entrance to the Supreme Court in central London, on the first day of the hearing on Tuesday. Pic/AFP
London: Britain's Supreme Court opened proceedings Tuesday to decide whether Prime Minister Boris Johnson broke the law when he suspended Parliament just weeks before the UK is due to leave the European Union, in a case that pits the powers of elected lawmakers against those of the executive. Johnson sent lawmakers home from September 9 until October 14, which is barely two weeks before the scheduled Brexit day of October 31. The decision outraged many lawmakers, who say it's designed to prevent them from challenging his plan to take Britain out of the EU next month, with or without a divorce deal. The suspension sparked legal challenges, to which lower courts have given contradictory rulings. England's High Court said the suspension was a political rather than legal matter, but Scottish court judges ruled last week that Johnson acted illegally to avoid democratic scrutiny.
The UK's top court is being asked to decide who was right, in a case scheduled to last up to three days. Johnson says the suspension is routine, and will allow his government to launch its domestic agenda with a new session of Parliament. Government lawyers argue in a written submission that the issue is "intrinsically one of high policy and politics, not law." "There are no judicial or manageable standards by reference to which the courts could assess the lawfulness of ministerial decisions," they argue. Opponents, who include opposition lawmakers and transparency campaigner Gina Miller, accuse the government of an illegal abuse of power designed to sideline lawmakers. In a written submission to court, Miller's lawyers argue that Johnson had "sought to frustrate" Parliament.
Read Next Story
Trending Stories
Latest Photos
Latest Videos
Latest Web Stories
ADVERTISEMENT
Mid-Day Fast
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT