{"id":68513,"date":"2019-09-24T17:21:39","date_gmt":"2019-09-24T11:51:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/apnlive.com\/?p=68513"},"modified":"2020-11-03T11:03:31","modified_gmt":"2020-11-03T05:33:31","slug":"british-prime-minister-boris-johnsons-decision-suspend-parliament-illegal-britains-supreme-court","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/apnlive.com\/world-news\/british-prime-minister-boris-johnsons-decision-suspend-parliament-illegal-britains-supreme-court\/","title":{"rendered":"British PM Boris Johnson\u2019s decision to suspend Parliament illegal: Britain\u2019s Supreme Court"},"content":{"rendered":"
British Prime Minister Boris Johnson\u2019s decision to suspend Parliament for five weeks in the crucial countdown to the country\u2019s Brexit deadline was illegal, ruled Britain\u2019s Supreme Court today \u2013 Tuesday, Sep 24 \u2013 in a major blow that prompted demands for his resignation.<\/p>\n
The apex court\u2019s ruling declared the order to suspend Parliament \u201cvoid and of no effect\u201d. The 11 judges of the country\u2019s highest court were unanimous in their verdict, which they said meant parliament could now immediately reconvene, reported AFP.<\/p>\n
Supreme Court President Brenda Hale observed that the suspension was \u201cunlawful because it had the effect of frustrating or preventing the ability of Parliament to carry out its constitutional functions without reasonable justification.\u201d<\/p>\n
She said the suspension was as a result \u201cvoid and of no effect\u201d, adding: \u201cParliament has not been prorogued\u201d.<\/p>\n
The court rejected the government\u2019s assertions that the decision to suspend Parliament until Oct. 14 was routine and not related to Brexit, said media reports.<\/p>\n
The Speaker of the House of Commons, John Bercow, said MPs should reconvene immediately.<\/p>\n
The judges \u201chave vindicated the right and duty of parliament to meet at this crucial time to scrutinise the executive and hold ministers to account\u201d, Bercow said.<\/p>\n
This case represents a rare confrontation between the PM, the Parliament and courts over their rights and responsibilities. The larger meaning behind this case revolved around whether Johnson acted lawfully when he advised the Queen to suspend Parliament for five weeks during a crucial time frame before the Oct 31 Brexit deadline when Britain is scheduled to leave the European Union.<\/p>\n