Attorney General slams High Court for saying referendum vote was ‘irrelevant’ and says Government must implement Brexit
HANDING Parliament the decision to leave the EU would make the EU referendum “legally irrelevant”, the government’s law boss has told Britain’s top judges.
Attorney General Jeremy Wright issued the warning as a landmark four day-long Supreme Court hearing over Brexit began yesterday.
Theresa May is fighting to overturn a High Court ruling that she fears could end up delaying Brexit for months.
The judges’ decision last month gave MPs the right to authorise ‘Article 50’ talks to leave the EU.
Yesterday’s hearing is deemed so constitutionally important that all 11 judges of the Supreme Court are sitting to hear it for the first time since its creation in 2009.
Senior Tory MP Mr Wright also called on the bank of law lords to recognise that the PM was not planning to begin the UK’s exit “on a whim, or out of a clear blue sky”.
RELATED STORIES
Instead, she is acting under a Royal prerogative with a very clear mandate given to her directly by the British people on June 23.
That is “in line with Parliamentary sovereignty and legitimate public expectation”, he added.
Tackling the stand-off between the Commons and No10, Mr Wright said: “But if this is all about standing up for Parliament, I say Parliament can stand up for itself.
What is going on in the Article 50 Supreme Court case?
What’s it about?
THE hearing is all about who decides when and how Britain leaves the EU, the Government, Parliament or the people. The public voted for Brexit in the referendum but High Court judges ruled that MPs and lords should get a vote before the PM can trigger Article 50, which begins our exit. The Government is challenging that ruling.
Who’s involved?
THE original case was brought by an 11-strong group of Remainers led by financier Gina Miller. Her supporters raised £170,000 online to launch the hearing in October. Today's appeal is a fight between lawyers for the Government, led by Attorney General Jeremy Wright, above, and the 11, who are represented by Dominic Chambers, QC.
What’s next?
THE judges are expected to deliver their decision in the New Year. If the appeal is allowed, the PM can start the Brexit process before the end of March as planned. But if not, it will throw her timetable into chaos. If MPs and peers start deliberately stalling the process, she may have no option but to call a snap General Election.
“When it comes to leaving the European Union, Parliament has had full capacity and multiple opportunities to restrict the executive’s ordinary ability to begin the Article 50 process and it has not chosen to do so.”
At the start of the historical hearing, President of the Supreme Court Lord Neuberger was forced to insist he and the other 10 judges will consider the case “impartially” after a wave of criticism about some of their links to EU institutions.
The nation’s top judge also revealed to the packed court room that some of the claimants who brought the original case have been threatened with “serious violence”, and he made an order that bans the publication of their names and addresses.
The bid to give Parliament the final say is being lead by wealthy investment fund manager and philanthropist Gina Miller, 51, who was born in British Guyana.
The judges gave Mr Wright a hefty grilling during yesterday afternoon’s session, with boss Lord
Neuberger at one stage having to call a halt to their repeated questioning.
A fight broke out outside the Supreme Court between pro-and anti Brexit protesters as tensions over the hearing ran high yesterday.
Police were forced to intervene as two men scrapped over a placard one was holding outside the building on Parliament Square.
In another move dubbed by Brexiteers as a bid to derail Brexit, the Scottish Government’s appeal to have Article 50 authorised by the Holyrood parliament will also be heard tomorrow.
Senior Leave campaigners backed the government’s stand last night, and warned the judges to butt out of the Brexit process.
Former Tory leader Iain Duncan Smith said: “The territory is constitutionally very grave indeed. This is not their business”.
Ministers have already drawn up a very short bill to be introduced to Parliament immediately if the Supreme Court refuses the government’s appeal.
The verdict is not expected until the New Year.
[youtube //www.youtube.com/watch?v=y60wDzZt8yg]
READ MORE:
- What is the Article 50 Appeal?
- Theresa May will still trigger Article 50 by end of March 2017 despite High Court defeat, says No10
- Brexit ‘could be delayed for FOUR YEARS by Remainers, warns QC
- Theresa May’s plan for leaving the EU in tatters after judges rule Parliament needs approval on Article 50 in Brexit legal challenge
- What is Article 50, why is it key to EU Brexit and will Parliament get to vote on it?
- Theresa May uses first Tory conference speech as PM to vow Britain will quit the EU by April 2019
- Conservatives could QUADRUPLE their majority in the Commons if Theresa May called a snap election