Decision of the British Supreme Court: Johnson's Humiliation

United Kingdom and Gibraltar European Union membership referendum

all articles

It was on Monday evening, on his flight to the UN General Assembly, when Boris Johnson was asked if the impending Supreme Court ruling would make him nervous. "It takes a lot these days to make me nervous," the British Prime Minister replied. Incidentally, he does not intend to resign, no matter how the Supreme Court will decide in London.

What followed was a very short night. Then, around 5:30 am New York time, Johnson - 5500 kilometers away from home - had to take note of the next defeat in the Brexit final. And this should make him more sensitive than any other before. Because the highest British court on this Tuesday morning condemned not only Johnson's decision to send Parliament to a five-week compulsory break, as "unlawful and void". It also accused the prime minister of abusing Her Royal Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II, for an unconstitutional political maneuver.

And if most Britons can agree on anything these days, then let the fun stop if the Queen gets damaged.

Video: Supreme Court ruling verdict - compulsory break for parliament illegal

Video

REUTERS

From New York, Boris Johnson's birthplace, was initially heard only silence. Quite obviously, in Johnson's inner circle, no one had expected this supreme humiliation.

A hard-won victory for Parliament

In London, on the other hand, the anti-Brexit troops formed in no time. Parliament President John Bercow has already scheduled for Wednesday morning the next session of the House of Commons. Whether and what will be decided in it is almost incidental. It is the opposition and the rebels in Johnson's Conservative party for a power demonstration. They want to show that they can not be silenced by anyone - not even by a head of government, who has lately compared with the great-grossed comic hero Hulk.

It was a hard-won victory for Parliament. And one for whom there is no historical example. Johnson himself had been formally involved in the lawsuit when he asked the Queen to leave Parliament for five weeks from mid-September. His reasoning: As a new prime minister to be able to develop a new government program, it was now time for the usual in the British parliamentary system "prorogation" (adjournment).

However, why this should take five weeks, instead of the usual four to six days, not everyone in London. The suspicion was that Johnson wanted to muzzle Parliament in the possibly most important phase of the Brexit process in order to have a free hand. The United Kingdom will leave the EU on 31 October 2019, on Halloween, without a divorce treaty, should no new agreement be negotiated or an extension of the deadline requested. However, precisely in the face of this impending no-deal Brexit, Parliament passed a law in early September - putting the prime minister under pressure.

"Extreme effects" on the foundations of British democracy

Parliament's compulsory break was therefore brought in all four parts of the Kingdom. While the highest Scottish civil court acceded to the plaintiffs, its English equivalent ruled contrary. And so the case went to the Supreme Court.

There, government attorney James Eadie argued in a three-day hearing that Johnson's decision was "fundamentally political" and therefore "not a territory to enter courts." Claimant Aidan O'Neill countered that it was the "essence of our constitution" that the government was accountable to Parliament. But that was impossible after "the mother of parliaments was shut by the father of lies".

Since then, it has been eagerly awaited in London whether the Supreme Court, which was founded under Tony Blair - whose jurisdiction is not well defined - would authorize itself to judge the contentious allegations. On Tuesday morning, Baroness Brenda Hale's ten judges made it crystal clear: they not only feel competent but, in case of doubt, have the right to hog an unlawful government.

Henry Nicholls / REUTERS

Protest against parliamentary break in London: lawsuit from all four parts of the kingdom

The unusually long suspension, according to Lady Hale, has "extreme repercussions" on the foundations of British democracy. However, the court was presented with "no justification". It therefore had to state "that the decision to ask the Queen for a prorogation was unlawful." According to the unanimous verdict, the government was concerned with overcoming Parliament's constitutional rights.

The London Evening Standard, edited by longtime Johnson colleague George Osborne, summarized the verdict on its front page in one word: "Guilty."

What will Johnson do?

What impact the verdict for Johnson and the Brexit process would have, was for the departed PM on Tuesday morning is not yet in sight. In New York, the head of government has a tight-paced program to complete. In addition to his admirer Donald Trump, he should meet six other heads of government, make his first speech before the UN General Assembly and spread before business leaders his Brexit vision.

When he finally let himself be seen, after hours, he was outwardly unconcerned. He believes that the ruling is wrong, according to Johnson, it limits the possibilities to negotiate a good agreement with the EU. When asked if he was running out of options, he replied nebulously: "On the contrary" - without, however, explaining exactly what he meant by that. He also called for new elections before he got on the plane to London.

There is now helplessness. What exactly will Johnson do? In the few weeks of his tenure, he has proved that in case of doubt he is prepared to ruthlessly violate every rule and every political decency. Does he retire and go into an election campaign in which he is the only upright representative against a phalanx of EU bureaucrats, political collaborators and willing judges staged? Is he suspending Parliament a second time? Or is he giving in? Nobody can say it at this moment.

But if the past few weeks have taught one thing, then this head of government is capable of any surprise. Success achieved with the help of the Supreme Court may have decided a battle. But not the Brexit war. He will now be led with even greater hardness.

Still 37 days until Halloween.