Boris Johnson’s advice fires back

Submitted by  Sameh Hindawi at 25 September 2019 in  Politics and International Relations

The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom declares unlawful advice given by their Prime Minister Boris Johnson to the Queen regarding Parliament suspension. The decision made by the Supreme Court was built on the basis that Johnson’s advice aimed to frustrate and prevent the Parliament from carrying out its constitutional functions.

Britain’s highest Court declared unanimously that the acts of Prime Minister Johnson aimed towards a five-week prorogation in order to suppress the issue of Brexit. Knowing that during October the issue of Brexit will showcase the controversy within the United Kingdom’s government and political parties in order to vote which might cause a constitutional chaos on the 31st of October.

The President of the Supreme Court Brenda Hale clarified that “The effect upon the fundamentals of our democracy was extreme”. Which clearly illustrates that Prime Minister Johnson acted undemocratically by imposing his own thoughts towards the Queen without any governmental exposure on his advice.

All 11 Supreme Court judges were in favour with Brenda Hale’s decision, and her reasoning behind Johnson’s undemocratic act. Moreover, as the opportunity has risen to be criticized, the Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said Mr Johnson should “consider his position and become the shortest serving prime minister there has ever been”. Which means that Labour leader Corbyn is advising Prime Minister Johnson to re-evaluate if he is fit for such a position. And in Corbyn’s eyes, Prime Minster Johnson is not fit and should resign and become the shortest serving Prime Minster.

On the other hand, Johnson’s representatives confirmed that he will not resign, but his image has been damaged just before the UN General Assembly meeting which weakens his credibility towards a no-Brexit deal. Nonetheless, Johnson faced the music and came out to the public and said that he respects the judgement of the Supreme Court but still disagrees with their decision.

This incident clarifies that the role of the Supreme Court is vital when it comes to governmental decisions that are presented by Mr Johnson, which clearly shows his solo methodology of work ethic. Moreover, the campaigns against the Brexit deal are named victorious after this incident as a result of agreeing with the Supreme Court towards arguing that the prorogation is against the law and constitution.

Therefore, the decision of the Supreme Court against Prime Minster Johnson sounds reasonable for not following the proper methodology of addressing the government regarding a constitutional matter. And that the Supreme Court shall review the majority of Mr Johnson’s acts. And would consider Johnson’s acts as “Machiavellian”, as he tries to gain the full trust of the Queen in order to promote the Conservative Party to reconstruct the parliament with conservative representatives upon voting.

About The Author

Works at AAC

Studied at Kingston University London

Lives in United Kingdom

Knows English, Arabic, French

1K Total Stories Views
1519 views in this post