Section:GDN 1N PaGe:8 Edition Date:190830 Edition:01 Zone: Sent at 29/8/2019 20:49 cYanmaGentaYellowbl
- The Guardian Friday 30 Aug ust 2019
(^8) National
Politics
Johnson accused of abuse
of power as prorogue move
is challenged in three courts
Severin Carrell
Lisa O’Carroll
Boris Johnson’s decision to prorogue
parliament is an unlawful abuse of
power, a Scottish court has heard in the
fi rst of three legal challenges against
the manoeuvre.
Aidan O’Neill QC , acting for a cross-
party group of 75 MPs and peers, told
a court in Edinburgh that the prime
minister had trampl ed on more than
400 years of constitutional law by ask-
ing the Queen to prorogue parliament
solely for political gain.
“We have a constitution ruled by
law,” O’Neill told Lord Doherty in the
court of session, urging him to issue
an interdict – a Scottish court order
equivalent to an injunction – forcing
the UK government to quash the pro-
rogation order signed by the Queen
on Wednesday.
“That is what a constitutional
monarchy means,” he said. “It is not
some form of autocracy or divine right
or that ‘the king can do no wrong’.”
The UK government’s lawyer,
Roddy Dunlop QC , argued the applica-
tion was invalid and itself unlawful. He
said prorogation was clearly a policy
decision properly within the powers
of a prime minister.
Dunlop said the Queen clearly had
the legal authority to suspend parlia-
ment if requested by a government,
under the crown prerogative , and the
courts could not interfere. “It’s the act
of the sovereign herself exercising a
privilege which is hers alone,” he said.
The hearing yesterday was arranged
at short notice in response to John-
son’s decision to suspend parliament
early next month. Legal challenges
were also fi led in Belfast and London.
Doherty said he would rule on
the application this morning. If it
is upheld, O’Neill believes John-
son will have to reverse the decision
Civil service
Morale badly
damaged by
Brexit crisis,
insiders say
Dan Sabbagh
Civil service morale has been ham-
mered by the Brexit crisis, Whitehall
insiders say, with senior officials
increasingly asking whether it is worth
remaining in government amid the
escalating political controversy.
A former senior offi cial who left
in 2018 told the Guardian that they
received “a steady stream of inquiries”
from colleagues who felt their work
was “no longer purposeful” because
the focus on Brexit over the past year
had strangled policymaking.
“What’s changed is that Brexit pol-
icy has become incredibly centralised,
while the government’s loss of con-
trol of parliament means offi cials can
no longer be certain any other policies
are going to be enacted,” they added.
The sense of offi cial frustration
began in the later stages of Theresa
May’s premiership as it became clear
that Brexit had become the domi-
nant issue in British politics, and has
continued as there is still no sign of
a solution.
“The other thing making people
want to leave is the realisation that
they’ll have to spend 10 years cleaning
up the mess,” the former offi cial added.
Union representatives said a
handful of civil servants had got in
touch yesterday specifi cally to voice
concerns about Boris Johnson’s con-
troversial plan to suspend parliament
for fi ve weeks.
They were told that they had little
choice but to carry on and advise min-
isters – or resign from the civil service
because they did not agree with John-
son’s “do or die” plan to leave the E U
with or without a deal on 31 October.
Some high-profile officials
announced their departure as it
became increasingly apparent that
Johnson would enter Downing Street,
and union leaders said the Brexit crisis
would have been a factor. “These are
people who are able to make choices
in their careers,” a public sector union
leader added.
They include Jon Thompson , chief
executive of HM Revenue and Cus-
toms, and Tom Shinner , who had led
planning for no deal at the Department
for Exiting the European Union.
The insiders’ warnings came a day
after Robert Kerslake, a former head of
the civil service, had controversially
warned that offi cials must consider
putting their “stewardship of the
country ahead of service to the gov-
ernment of the day”.
Defending his comments yester-
day, Lord Kerslake, who has previously
advised Labour, said he was not advo-
cating that civil servants try to subvert
Johnson’s Brexit plans, before adding
“these are exceptional times”.
“I want civil servants to be pro-
viding robust advice because it is
important to recognise what a seri-
ous position we are in,” Kerslake said.
hearing yesterday morning. Northern
Ireland’s lord chief justice, Sir Declan
Morgan , interrupted his summer holi-
day to hear the prima facie arguments.
He instructed O’Hare and the gov-
ernment’s defence barrister to return
today at 10am with expanded legal
arguments for a full hearing.
In London, Gina Miller, the cam-
paigner who mounted a successful
legal challenge in 2016 to Theresa
May’s attempts to use crown preroga-
tive powers to invoke article 50, lodged
papers seeking a judicial review, which
is expected to be heard next week.
Decisions in these parallel cases
are expected to be appealed against
immediately by whichever side loses,
and the cases will soon be heard by the
supreme court, potentially grouped
together. It is the fi rst time in UK legal
history that the Queen’s decision to
prorogue a Westminster parliament
has been challenged in court.
In Edinburgh, O’Neill told the court
that Johnson was suspending par-
liament solely to prevent MPs from
properly debating and voting on his
Brexit strategy before 31 October,
sabotaging parliament’s constitutional
role. That was “unlawful, unwarranted
and unconstitutional”, he said.
O’Neill came close to calling John-
son a liar for claiming Westminster
would have enough time to debate a
no-deal Brexit. “He knows it is wrong
and he says it anyway,” O’Neill said.
“That’s what one might call a lie.”
to prorogue – pending an appeal.
In Belfast, the high court held a hearing
for an emergency injunction brought
by Raymond McCord , a victims’ rights
campaigner who has argued that a no-
deal Brexit would be a breach of the
Good Friday agreement.
“We are seeking an urgent injunc-
tion to compel Johnson to reverse
his advice to the Queen to prorogue
parliament,” said McCord’s lawyer,
Ciaran O’Hare, after the 20-minute
▲ A protester wearing a defaced Boris
Johnson mask in London yesterday
RELEASED BY "What's News" vk.com/wsnws TELEGRAM: t.me/whatsnws