UK Supreme Court rules against Boris Johnson – what happens next? | FT

UK Supreme Court rules against Boris Johnson – what happens next? | FT

Britain’s Supreme Court has delivered a devastating
defeat to Boris Johnson. In a unanimous
ruling, 11 judges have ruled that his
decision to suspend Parliament, which was
deliberating on Brexit, was unlawful. Here with me is Matthew
Garrahan, the News Editor, to discuss this,
frankly, epic moment in the history of Britain as
a constitutional democracy. MATT GARRAHAN: It
was epic, Lionel. How– on a– the scale
of it, and the language, the harshness of the
language in this ruling was quite unprecedented,
wasn’t it? LIONEL BARBER: Well,
Britain’s Supreme Court is only 10 years old. It’s not like the US Supreme
Court that goes back to 1787. But in a way, this was as big as
a very important judgement back in 1801, called Marbury versus
Madison, where, essentially, the US Supreme Court ruled
against the executive, and set out the parameters
of power for the executive and the legislature
and the courts. And this was this
moment, even though we have an unwritten
constitution in the UK. MATT GARRAHAN: Mm-hm. And what do you think the
immediate repercussions of it will be? LIONEL BARBER: Well,
for Mr Johnson, given the language, which
was, again, ruthless, it argued contrary to
what the government said, that this was a
matter for the courts, not just a matter of politics,
that the executive had clearly abused its powers, and that
Parliament’s role as holding the executive to account,
deliberating in public on matters of state, that
this– all these matters had been infringed. So for Mr Johnson
as prime minister, he has some very hard
questions to answer about whether his position as
prime minister is tenable. MATT GARRAHAN: Which
is quite something. I mean, he’s waking
up in New York. Currently, he’s
there on a visit– LIONEL BARBER: To the UN. MATT GARRAHAN: To the– what does he do next? I mean, Parliament will
presumably reopen tomorrow. And MPs will sit again. What happens after that? LIONEL BARBER:
Well, first of all, the court made clear that the
Parliament had not actually been prorogued because
it was unlawful. So they should, in
fact, be sitting. But they left it to the Speaker
of the House of Commons, John Bercow, to decide. MATT GARRAHAN: Huge victory
for him, isn’t this? LIONEL BARBER: A big
one, and for Gina Miller, by the way, who brought
the suit in the first place with Jo Cherry. And by the way, another
very important point, that the Supreme Court ruled
in exactly the same way as strongly as the Supreme Court in
Scotland, the Court of Session. MATT GARRAHAN: Right. LIONEL BARBER: So
you have a sort of unanimity between
England, Wales, and Scotland. That’s important for
the United Kingdom. But what next? Well, I think Mr Johnson’s going
to deliberate at the United Nations with his inner circle. And he’s going to face
a Parliament come back. And he will have
to answer questions about whether his
position is sustainable. He’s let it be known last night
that he intended to stay on, whatever the ruling. MATT GARRAHAN: He
also said he was going to study the ruling carefully. But we are in untested
waters, aren’t we? I mean, for a British
prime minister to have been called in
court that his actions were unlawful is something we– this is a new ground for us. LIONEL BARBER: It definitely is. And, you know, there is
a history on Mr Johnson’s part of brazening things
out, facing controversy, from plagiarism to other
matters, shall we say. This, of course, is
on a different scale. This involves matters–
high matters– of state, constitutional propriety. And just the way this
thing was managed– I mean, remember, he
and his circle prorogue. They decide to prorogue
Parliament, ask the Queen’s support,
which they got, the royal assent for
suspending Parliament. I mean, essentially, the
ruling supports the fact that he misled the Queen. MATT GARRAHAN: Yeah. LIONEL BARBER: He
said it was just to– he wanted a new Parliament to
discuss his new legislative programme. MATT GARRAHAN: Do you think,
given this ruling, I mean, the approach of
his administration, of his advisors– Dominic Cummings, the key one– has been to ride fairly
roughshod over convention? Do you think that this
necessitates a change if he stays? LIONEL BARBER: I think it’s
important to recognise that Mr Johnson and his Svengali
adviser, Dominic Cummings, said that in order
to achieve Brexit, we must get it by October
the 31st, come what may. MATT GARRAHAN: No ifs or buts. LIONEL BARBER: No ifs
or buts, because there’s been too much delay–
three years already since the referendum. And that’s why they wanted to
put pressure both on Parliament and on the EU to get a deal. There doesn’t seem to be much
progress here, by the way, on that deal. But my final point is
that it’s really important to distinguish between
constitutional propriety and the Brexit question. In effect, the judges
were not saying whether it was right to
respect or not the referendum result. They were saying
the executive, Mr Johnson, has infringed and abused
his power regarding Parliament’s role. And so that is quite different. There will be people
in the country– and I’m sure some
conservative newspapers– who will denounce the judges
as enemies of the people. MATT GARRAHAN: Yes,
enemies of the– LIONEL BARBER: I think
this is completely wrong. It’s very damaging
for our democracy. And they should respect
the fact that this was a unanimous judgement
by the top judges in the land on matters of
constitutional propriety. It goes to the heart of how our
democracy can and should work. MATT GARRAHAN: And
finally, Lionel, this case was so electric
because it was in a sort of grey area of our
unwritten constitution. There were some calls
outside the court that I heard just now for a more
codified, formalised written constitution. Do you think that
that is something that we’re going to get
anywhere near in the– LIONEL BARBER: I
think it’s premature– MATT GARRAHAN: –coming months? LIONEL BARBER: –to be moving
towards a written constitution. That’s a very big move. I think what you’ve seen
today is the court adumbrate, delineate the limits of
power for the executive and the role of democracy, of
Parliament in our democracy. That should be enough. It should be enough
to reflect on. Let us just say this, though. Given other matters
of the constitution, we know the strains
within the United Kingdom. We also know about the fact
that maybe the House of Lords isn’t the most efficient– it’s a powerful
scrutiny– there are other questions–
powerful scrutiny of legislation, et cetera. But there are some
problems that we have. But I think that’s
for another day. What we should
today celebrate is that the judges stood up
very clearly and unanimously for the rule of law. MATT GARRAHAN: Lionel,
thank you very much.

100 Replies to “UK Supreme Court rules against Boris Johnson – what happens next? | FT

  1. Get the damn brexit done. 52% voted for this "once in a life time opportunity". Its like parliament do not represent the population. But they're too scared for a snap election because every leave majority constituent will kick out the mps that dont follow their views.

  2. So the Supreme court rules not the Eu court after all one more lie.
    Doesn't matter Eu makes all the laws and want straight bananas.

  3. We wouldn’t be suffering this debacle, with our economy and the Pound going down the toilet if the moronic public voted with their brains to remain instead of their arses for Brexit. It has cost us dear and will for a long time.

  4. Any judge wearing a giant spider on her shoulder cannot be taken seriously. In fact her vile taste make her judgement unlawful.

  5. A legislature that defies the consent of the governed and which seeks to violate the mandate of the election has no legitimacy. Such a legislature ought to be disbanded. PM Johnson should rule by Executive Order as the House of Commons has abdicated their duties.

  6. Now to the traitors in our Government that have ruined our country listen to this from 33:36 you dirty mfs!

  7. Can our PM please declare a state of emergency and take charge of the military and state affairs and lead us through to Brexit? The world need strongmen now, not weaklings

  8. This is not "new ground" ministers actions are found unlawful in UK courts all the time – with no consequences other than ministerial decisions may be set aside. The court in this case has waded into the political arena by its actions and provided a remedy where none was needed. Parliament had the power to deal with this itself by refusing to accept a prorogation.

  9. Ok first. Who the hell are these two robots. I wonder if they could be reading from scripts hmm?
    Second, the UK supreme court is not the US supreme court so you can't say this is so in the US so it must also be so in the UK.

    You bots!

  10. I just hope the dilapidated Houses of Parliament with its crumbling masonry and leaky rooms , manages to hold out and not entirely collapse, afore Brexit is finally, finanally, finally ! Resolved. I thank ye !

  11. The globalist nation destroyers are trying their hardest to squash the will of the people. A no deal brexit is the only way to get rid of them.

  12. The supreme court has engaged in a constitutional coup no less 11 – 0 is ridiculous if impartial. Its a coup by law courts putting meaning to an "unwritten" constitution pure and simple. Every judge on the panel is surprise surprise pro EU.

  13. What happens next? You fire the racist, islamophobic lunatic and get rid of his power money hungry soon to completly destroy the country then blame the poor. And let's not forget the legalisation of mass murder called universal credit introduced by vince cable and Iain Drunken Smith. A party infiltrated by israhell and no one seems to realise.

  14. They didn’t know what they’re on about we will get out no they they want to learn to read England don’t want to play don’t want to play for them people build it out the others as it can they let us down

  15. All those default MPs haven’t a clue how economies or societies function. Thats why they gave decision to the EU in the first place.

  16. Tony Blair created the "supreme court" 20 years ago. It is a very new thing in our country and I think it has shown itself to be incompatible with our system and should be abolished.

  17. The unanimous decision, that Parliament was prorogued for an unlawful purpose by preventing Parliament from doing its' duty, without just cause, means that many prorogations in the past have been unlawful. Among those is the prorogation by ardent Europhile John Major in 1997 for three weeks.

  18. Except it isn’t unlawful because all Parliament was doing was negotiating a bad deal AND even trying to stop us leaving the EU.

  19. Mess up our democracy, turn it into a PC and use kids as climate change activists…delay Brexit indefinitely.
    Yep well done Great Britain !!! 😤

  20. 17.4 million people wants brexit to happen now, the remainers are giving us the finger and now the legal system seems to be on their side in this matter, together they have turned brexit into a game of chess with only 2 kings left on the board, they don`t need to win the game anymore, they only need to not lose, and guess who is paying for this loss, and the longer the game goes on the more we pay, without the no deal option there can be no brexit because europe will never voluntary let us go.

  21. If you gatekeeper elites think the British public will continue accepting the blatant disregard for their wishes to leave the EU you all are in for a big shock.

  22. Over 17 million people voted to leave the EU over 3 years ago now, and still it rumbles on. quite shocking to see how these people are being treated. I think they voted to leave. the deal was never mentioned in their vote. I dont think.

  23. Before parliament was prorogued the government asked a member of the Supreme Court about the legality of the prorogation and its in writing that the member of the Supreme Court said the prorogation would be lawful. That same Supreme Court justice has now said it was unlawful

  24. I'm not sure why Boris Johnson hasn't taken the decision of the Supreme Court and appealed it in the European Court of Justice.

  25. The Queen gave her permission for Parliament to be suspended, so if they're going against the temporary suspension then aren't they going against the Queen as well? Because going against the Queen's signature is basically a way of saying they're above the Queen's word. But my problem is, that the Queen is above Parliament and pretty much everyone, and has supreme authority. So why is it that these remainers think they're better than that? I guess the pressure from a guaranteed Brexit is making them desperate and pretty delirious.

  26. "I think it's premature to be moving towards a written constitution" = We want to be able to take advantage of the ambiguities of the unwritten constitution when it works for us

  27. The judge is a black which freemason, she got plane clothes on but a big spider brooch, very strange.
    We all know the lefties capable for everything, now they using black magic against as.
    This can create a case, as got some old law about witches from 1600 something. Clearly is not just Travis stock institute created lefties propaganda, but also they using supernatural forces what is tottaly illegal by thos old law, and anyway disgusting.

  28. Someone should take parliament to court as remain MP are breaking constitutional law blocking Brexit. After all it was parliament that legislated for a referendum and legislated a leave date. Is parliament above the law 🤔 democracy is dead in the UK and the quangos are seizing power.

  29. To be honest I still wish we weren't leaving, But let's just at least GET A DEAL and a bloody good one at that, else our trade will go down the pan. #WeNeedADeal

  30. ironic is it not? Britain voted out of the EU to make its own laws and decisions. So when the UK Supreme Court and not the EU does exactly what the leavers want and makes a decision, they all get grumpy,. throw toys out the pram and get huffy! Democracy? Ha, these Gammons have no clue – wankers the lot of them.

  31. Unlawful ? The parliament is unlawful. The law is unlawful. The whole system is unlawful.
    "Unwritten constitution in the UK" ?
    Magna Carta anyone?
    Just delaying Gesara as long as possible. Those who have the most now, have the most to loose on return to gold standard.
    We the people have everything to gain.

  32. what happens next? they thwart brexit AGAIN ofcourse,
    we have a remoaner government, with remoaner courts and a remoaner speaker.
    they've made laws to prevent us from getting a true brexit, they rule it unlawful to prevent the remoaners from thwarting brexit,
    its all one big stitchup, we're never f%%king leaving like we voted for…

  33. Borris Johnson is brain rot and he’s in charge of getting us a deal😂😂😂uk for you people🇬🇧god seriously god save our queen and nation

  34. Boris is a gonna not if but when and the opposition or those within his party will decide. There is no way he is even interested in negotiating a deal – all his strategy is based on an election.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *