This is a very short
post about a critical matter. It will not be a 'on the one hand, on the other' type of discussion because there is one overwhelming argument. It is about protecting our
parliamentary democracy, a democracy that in one area in particular
relied on norms of behaviour that have now been broken. The Prime
Minister has shut down parliament for his own political reasons, and
the only institution that can stop both that and a Prime Minister
doing it in the future is the UK’s legal system.
According
to David Allen Green, Scottish judges are less disinclined to get
involved in political matters than English judges. If this is
correct, then the decision of three senior Scottish judges that
Johnson had lied to the Queen in asking to suspend (prorogue)
parliament may be overturned. That, to put it plainly, would be a
disaster for the UK constitution.
Why am I sure
parliament was suspended for political reasons? Because shutting down
parliament for 5 weeks is not necessary before a Queen’s Speech.
The excuse that parliament normally suspends itself for the party
conference season will not wash because (a) Johnson knew full well
parliament was thinking of not doing so because of the gravity of the
current situation, and (b) it was suspended well before that season. The three top Scottish judges also thought the motivation was clear.
Why is this so
important? The reason is obvious. If the executive can suspend
parliament whenever it likes, for purely political reasons (it
doesn’t like what parliament is doing), then the executive have the
power to end our parliamentary democracy. First it is for a few
weeks, and then it is for a few years. It is simply nonsense to say
that this is a political matter, because politics has been shut down.
Parliament cannot even vote no confidence in the Executive because
parliament has been suspended. The argument that the law should not
get incolved in political matters does not wash on this occasion.
The first best
solution to this loophole in our constitution is to do what other
countries do, and let parliament vote on its suspension, much as it
does if it wants a recess. But until that happens, our courts are the
only line of defence against a Prime Minister who suspends parliament
against its will for his own political reasons. If the Supreme Court
cannot defend our constitution when parliamentary politics is shut
down, who can?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Unfortunately because of spam with embedded links (which then flag up warnings about the whole site on some browsers), I have to personally moderate all comments. As a result, your comment may not appear for some time. In addition, I cannot publish comments with links to websites because it takes too much time to check whether these sites are legitimate.