Scottish judge rejects legal bid to force Boris Johnson to overturn Parliament suspension
3 min read
A Scottish judge has rejected a legal bid to force Boris Johnson to overturn the prorogation of Parliament.
At the Court of Session in Edinburgh, Lord Doherty ruled the Prime Minister's plan to suspend Parliament for five weeks ahead of the Brexit deadline had not contravened the law.
The case was brought by a cross-party group of 75 MPs, who claimed Mr Johnson had acted illegally by shutting down Parliament ahead of a Queen's Speech on 14 October.
They claimed he had done to prevent MPs blocking his attempts to take the UK out of the EU "do or die" on 31 October.
But in a judgement on Wednesday, the judge said the row was "political territory" and that it was "not for the courts to decide further restraints on prorogation which go beyond those which Parliament provides".
He added: "I am not persuaded that any of the matters relied upon by the petitioners or the Lord Advocate result in the claim be justiciable.
"In my view, the advice give in relation to the prorogation decision is a matter involving high policy and political judgement. This is political territory and decision making which cannot be measured against legal standards, but only by political judgements.
"Accountability for the advice is to Parliament and ultimately to the electorate, and not to the courts."
The cross-party group, which was led by SNP MP Joanna Cherry, have indicated they intend to appeal the ruling.
"Seems we have lost the Cherry case to stop prorogation at 1st instance," she tweeted.
"Judge rules court can't review exercise of perogative power to prorouge. We think he's erred in law on this point and others, and will seek to appeal immediately."
In a further blow for campaigners, Lord Doherty ordered the group to pay the Government's legal costs.
Fellow petitioner, Labour MP Ian Murray, said: "The fight against Boris Johnson’s assault on democracy and his plan to crash the UK out of the EU goes on.
“There will be an appeal on this ruling, and there is another court case taking place in England.
“But the main battle is currently in Parliament, where the Prime Minister has lost his majority and does not have the support of the House for his dangerous plan to impose a no-deal Brexit on the country.
“We have wrested control of parliamentary business and will attempt to pass a law that makes a no deal Brexit illegal. We will also fight to secure a final say for the people of the UK on Brexit and we must campaign to remain in the EU."
Meanwhile, documents produced during the case suggested Boris Johnson had signed off on the plan to suspend Parliament in mid-August - two weeks before it was announced.
According to the court document, Mr Johnson had written "yes" on the plans drawn up by Number 10 legal expert Nikki da Costa before writing to her the next day, saying: "Whole September session is a rigmarole introduced to show the public that MPs are earning their crust.
"I don't see anything shocking about this prorogation."
But the revelation prompted fury from opposition MPs, who accused the Prime Minister of treating democracy with "contempt".
PoliticsHome Newsletters
PoliticsHome provides the most comprehensive coverage of UK politics anywhere on the web, offering high quality original reporting and analysis: Subscribe
