Speaker Bercow could bypass Boris and recall MPs NEXT WEEK if PM loses Supreme Court battle over Parliament shutdown
SPEAKER John Bercow could bypass Boris Johnson and recall MPs NEXT WEEK if the PM loses his Supreme Court battle over the Parliament shutdown.
In an extraordinary demand yesterday, lawyers for ‘Remain’ campaigners demanded Parliament is reopened “as soon as possible” if the highest court in land declares prorogation was illegal – and Boris misled the Queen.
Lord Pannick QC added that Speaker John Bercow – and Lord’s Speaker Lord Fowler – could even bypass No.10 and recall Parliament themselves.
Government lawyers warned the court they were entering “forbidden territory” by seeking to pass a judgment on a political matter.
It came in a dramatic final day’s hearing where Supreme Court President Lady Hale revealed their historic judgement on the PM would be made “early next week”. Experts believe it will come Monday.
The Supreme Court is being asked to determine whether Boris Johnson acted unlawfully when suspending Parliament for five weeks until October 14.
Critics claim it was done to silence MPs over Brexit.
Any nuclear ruling demanding MPs come back could force the PM to cut short his high profile trip to the UN in New York.
And it would ruin Labour’s party conference, which runs from Saturday to Wednesday.
‘MINEFIELD’
Lawyers acting for the Government yesterday pleaded with the Court to recognise that demanding MPs are recalled early would cause chaos given the need for a Queen’s Speech to formally reopen Parliament.
They said: “Extensive arrangements would have to be made, including as to security, to enable this to occur.”
And the PM last night refused to rule out proroguing again. Challenged on a trip to Salisbury, he said: “I will wait and see what transpires.”
Lord Keen QC – for the Government – had earlier once more insisted the case was not a matter for the Supreme Court to rule on.
He said ‘prorogation’ was a political matter ruled by convention.
And he told the 11 judges they were being dragged into a “minefield” by being asked to make unprecedented rulings on what they believed the PM’s motives to be when he asked the Queen to suspend Parliament.
Never before has the court been asked to rule on such an emotionally charged political matter historically governed by ‘convention’.
Lord Keen said: “How is the court to opine on the issue of proper or improper purpose, of legitimate or illegitimate political purpose?” he said.
“How are these concepts to be defined and applied in this context?”
He added: “The applicants are inviting the courts into forbidden territory and an ill-defined minefield that the courts are not – with the greatest of respect – properly re-quipped to deal with it.”
‘NONE OF THIS IS EASY’
Summing up after three days’ of exhaustive testimony, Supreme Court President Lady Hale insisted: “None of this is easy”.
But she insisted the arguments for and against Brexit would not come into the judges’ thinking.
“We are solely concerned with the lawfulness of the Prime Minister’s decision to advise Her Majesty to prorogue Parliament on the dates in question,” she said.
“As we have heard, it is not a simple question and we will now carefully consider all the arguments that have been presented to us.”
Experts last night claimed they believed the Court will almost certainly criticise Mr Johnson. But they were split over whether they may go as far as ruling his act unlawful.
One MP said: “I still think Boris will get his way and be left in charge of what happens next. But he’ll get a pretty big slap on the wrist.”
The Sun says
LET no one pretend that this week’s Supreme Court charade is some noble defence of our democracy.
It is a stunt by rich Remainers whose only concern for democracy is that it must always deliver what they want.
Failing that, their money, fancy QCs and our courts must do so instead.
This weekend our top judges will ponder whether Boris Johnson suspended Parliament unlawfully, not to set up a new programme for Government but to avoid scrutiny of his Brexit strategy.
But courts should have no veto over political decisions. Not unless we want to be ruled by unelected judges and unelected millionaire litigants, on top of unelected peers and unaccountable Speakers.
And if these judges do now demand Parliament’s recall, what will Remainer MPs do with all their new sitting time?
They have already passed their law to “prevent No Deal”. And they are too terrified of voters’ rage to topple the Government and face an election.
What else is there? Unless they intend to go for broke and deploy their own Bercow-backed pseudo-Government to revoke Brexit entirely.
This case has been an act of stupid, reckless constitutional vandalism — undermining the PM just as progress towards a new deal IS being made, as even Jean-Claude Juncker concedes.
As for the spurious arguments against Boris, we recoil at the hypocrisy of John Major claiming that letting a PM suspend Parliament could enable future ones to axe elections or scrap the Army.
Such scaremongering fantasies didn’t trouble him in 1997 when HE did it — and swerved scrutiny over a bribery scandal engulfing his MPs.
“This case is not about Brexit,” claims Supreme Court president Lady Hale.
Pull the other one.
Ex-Tory party leader Iain Duncan Smith insisted: “I think it would be completely wrong for them to try and rule in this area. Their job is to rule on the law.
“If Parliament wanted to limit prorogation it could have passed a law at any point in the 100 years to try and do so.”
He added: “This is another example of the Establishment trying to stop Brexit.”
- GOT a story? RING The Sun on 0207 782 4104 or WHATSAPP on 07423720250 or EMAIL exclusive@the-sun.co.uk