Suspension Of Parliament Ruled Unlawful.

[Bigbad]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-49661855

Not much info so far.

[Old_Geezer]

I expect they're fed up of some using any half chance to delay or stop progress using the law. If they played the game they'd not attempt to thwart what is right by underhand tactics, nor complain to the high heavens when they suspect similar counter measures are being used against them.

[Spicerack]

It's Lawfare, og. The vanquished will be punished.

[jim360]

I'm not aware that there *was* a prorogation in 1945 -- source please?

But in any case, it probably wasn't. The Court found that this particular prorogation is unlawful because its purpose was "to prevent parliamentary scrutiny of executive action", particularly with regards to Brexit, as opposed to merely winding up for a Queen's Speech.

The best historical precedent I can find is probably from 1831, in the run-up to the 1832 Great Reform Act. Can also find examples in 1948 and 1997.

[jim360]

Rule of law is at the heart of our constitution. We dispense with it at our peril. I don't care how frustrated the public are -- I don't blame them for being angry, but to dispense with legal process is not remotely a sensible response.

[Old_Geezer]

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/pms-plan-to-suspend-parliament-aimed-at-evading-scrutiny-of-mps/ar-AAGs5PH

[dannyk13]

Jim, Exactly what law has Boris broken ?

[craft1948]

Didn't John Major prorogued parliament for 5 weeks...

[dannyk13]

Major prorogued parliament from 21st March to 1st May.

[Old_Geezer]

Legal process follows after someone kicks something off to query it. This is an example of why I claim judges make law. If the law was clear when created there would be no need to appeal, and verdicts would simply be confirmed if an appeal was made.

Here we see what we all believed the law was and should be being confirmed by lower courts because someone wanted to try it on and kicked the process off. Now we have the highest Scottish court trying to make the law different as a different interpretation is their preferred one. But ultimately the public are right to condemn the chancers querying the accepred situation in the first place. It'll encourage it to happen frequently and then where will we be ?

[jim360]

From the judgement, danny: "prorogating Parliament... would nevertheless be unlawful if its purpose was to stymie parliamentary scrutiny of the executive, which was a central pillar of the good governance principle enshrined in the constitution; this followed from the principles of democracy and the rule of law."

So, that law.

http://www.scotland-judiciary.org.uk/9/2261/Joanna-Cherry-QC-MP-and-others-for-Judicial-Review

[dannyk13]

Jim that is not law it is an opinion. There are two kinds of law, common law and statute law, and prorogation does not fall into either category.

[jim360]

Well, it's not a specific law per se, but as I say the idea is that it might run counter to the principles of law.

[dannyk13]

Jim //it might run counter to the principles of law.//
And then again it might not. If there was a law or any other rule that stated how long a prorogation should run for fair enough, but there isn't. I think that it is a misuse of the word lawful.

[jim360]

The unlawful element here, if there is one, is the advice provided to the Queen. No-one is claiming that prorogation itself is unlawful.

But, regardless, you'll have to take it up with the courts.

[dannyk13]

Jim, //But, regardless, you'll have to take it up with the courts.//
Don't need to, Boris has already stated he is appealing to the Supreme Court.

[vetuste_ennemi]

Prorogation is not unlawful because no law governs the exercise of priministerial power in such cases. The session court determined that its exercise in this case was cynical (which it was).

But the judges are there to uphold law, not to punish legal behaviour which is immoral, otherwise half of Parliament led by the Speaker would be heading to the tower.

[dannyk13]

Succinctly put VE.

[pixie374]

Well yes... whatever they "suspect" the reason was (and I'm sure they are right), doesn't make it unlawful?
Clearly Boris is dealing with immoral, devious people and needs to fight fire with fire. Let's hope if everyone else can get away with it, he can too.

[Old_Geezer]

If a judge finds something unlawful when it is not, is it not time they retired ?

[hereIam]

Totally agree with last para. at 15:29.