Two of the three court actions being brought to try and stop parliament being prorogued until the 14th of October have been delayed until next week and the third is due to start soon.


At the moment there are three court actions due against the Boris prorogation of parliament.

One in the Edinburgh Court of Sessions brought by Remainer MPs, one in the Belfast High Court being brought by Troubles victims' campaigner Raymond McCord and one in London being brought by Gina Miller.

Miller's case has yet to be brought to the courts but that is, as I understand it, imminent. And some of the usual suspects are lining up to be a part of it, like former PM John Major and the Labour party deputy leader, Tom Watson.

The case in Edinburgh trying for an emergency injunction to prevent the prorogation was rejected today, but there is a full hearing on the matter due next week anyway.

And the Belfast case has been adjourned until next week.

Isn't it strange that a Remainer only has to cough and the lawyers line up and judges are found, while the courts are instantly prepared with ink wells filled and quills at the ready.

But it isn't strange at all, is it?

The establishment, most MPs, most Lords, the Civil Service, the courts and the fourth estate – the press – are completely wedded to the European Union.

They have and will continue to work tirelessly until Brexit is just a bad memory for them.

But for this they will have to once again extend the Article 50 process. An excuse must be found – any excuse, however weak.

However, the decision by the Queen, acting properly on the advice of the Privy Council, to prorogue parliament has potentially shattered their plans.

Now the most pressing matter for them is to get this prorogation reversed and have Parliament sitting until an Article 50 extension is agreed with the EU – at the very least.

And getting the prorogation reversed will be difficult, because it was a decision taken by the Queen under her personal Royal Prerogative.

So, the aim would be, it seems, for the courts to undermine the advice given to the Queen to justify the prorogation.

And Boris was not at that meeting!

But even if they were able to show that, what then do they do?

They cannot order the Queen to recall parliament, they courts have no jurisdiction over her in this matter.

What are they going to do? Inform the Queen that they believe she was incorrectly advised and ask her to reconsider? Or maybe order the Privy Council to go through the decision making process again – but as the Queen is herself the head of the Privy Council, how could a court order the Privy council to reconvene for this matter, without bossing the Queen about?

As far as I, as a layman, am concerned all three cases should have been or be rejected on application.

But having already accepted two for a hearing, I fear that machinations are in progress to come up with some sort of hymn sheet that all three courts can sing from that stops the prorogation while keeping the hands of the Queen squeaky clean – after all most, if not all, judges at the higher echelons of the judiciary hold the title of QC – Queen's Council, don't they?

And what on earth would they do, if the Queen just turned round and said, 'I've prorogued parliament and that's the end to it!'

And even if the courts did find a way to stop it, Boris could always go to the Queen the next day and use different advice to prorogue parliament – or are they going to stick an ASBO on him or something?

I've got to say that had it been for any matter other than Brexit, those cases would not, I think, have seen the light of day.


Comment Here!