“They (the justices) have simply restored on a legal basis constitutionall principles that where previously a matter of political convention…it’s the job of the supreme court to determine what the constitutional rules are?”
– Lord Jonathan Sumption
The Justices have converted “Political Convention” into precedent law. They have given themselves the power/authority to intervene in future issues between parliamentarians and the executive branch of the state.
Their reasoning was the “extreme effect” of the prorogation. The justification was the effect of the government’s actions after the fact?
Have they now created a new principle? An act can be ruled ‘”unlawful” it it creates an “extreme effect” on society or statist mechanisms.
Here is the pretense of the Justices. Their ruling was a political choice, with political effects/ramifications. All 11 Justices were well aware of which side of the political divide their ruling would impact.
Lady Hale in her reading of their decision could have clearly stated their increased supervisory powers over the executive branch of the state. Why? It was televised for public consumption, hence clarity and brevity are important for easy comprehension of their reasoning and ruling.
No obfuscation. A direct, overt statement of their increased powers to intervene!
The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom rules on the lawfulness or not of prorogation – the suspension of parliament.
Essentially the argument of the remainers is that the “intention” was dishonest or the “effect” caused harm.
If the BAR members retrospectively decide on an “unlawful” act, can we revisit the frauds and crimes of the financial priests in the 2008 financial crisis.
If a crime was NOT committed, the motivations or effects are irrelevant. Are the motivations or end result relevant in any legal proceedings if the court has no jurisdiction?
On this singular point we can judge the integrity of the UK’s judicial system regarding this issue.
The BAR members are in a pickle. Will they open this can of worms? How many UK prime ministers have lied to the Queen in receiving her approval for new legislation or executive actions?
@9:34 GMT 24/09/19
Published on Jul 14, 2016
Brian Gerrish and Mike Robinson with today’s UK Column News, including:
START Orgiastic political bloodlust : a reshuffle for a rebranded Fascism
03:56 Newspapers ridicule PM & new Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson
05:02 Further unsavory characters to disgrace the British establishment
11:34 Smart Meters & the First Utility organisation : corporate intrigue
13:28 Big Society lies tied into origins of the deceptive ‘living wage’ con
14:37 Hillary “is like a sadistic nurse in a mental hospital…” : says Boris
16:41 Farewell to Oliver Letwin : the financier slave with a task finished
17:52 Brexit Minister David Davis proclaims relentless transnationalism
19:45 European Union : a totalitarian schematic to destroy real Nations
22:51 The full repeal of the 1972 European Communities Act is essential
24:32 An Enemy of Jeremy : the Ambitions of one devious Tom Watson
32:15 The Church of England apologises for sadistic Kendall House ring
35:23 Systematic child abuse blackmail throughout British halls of power
36:04 Role of Home Secretary May in State persecution of abuse victims
38:14 Transhumanism Rising : sinister developments in tech & contracts