The Plastic Hippo

December 10, 2016

Throne of Games

Filed under: History,Law,Media,Politics,Rights — theplastichippo @ 11:55 pm
Tags: , , , , , ,

Supreme Court

Supreme Court

The sound quality was appalling, the camera angles limited and the best way to describe the vision mixing would be clumsy to say the very least but the Supreme Court`s live streaming of the government`s appeal against a High Court ruling regarding the use of the royal prerogative to trigger Article 50 and so leave the European Union made for compelling viewing.

Conducted with a consummate dignity and with a respectful politeness now completely eradicated from news, current affairs, documentary and reality television programming, all R (on the application of Miller and another)(Respondents) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union (Appellant) needs is a snappier title and it could well be up for multiple BAFTA nominations. Watching the finest legal minds in the United Kingdom offer arguments and counter-arguments might not be everyone`s idea of daytime television but it was infinitely more edifying that the freak shows that allow us to laugh at the poor and poorly educated. There was no need for bouncers at the Supreme Court.

The best drama award is in the bag as is best factual programme and the show might be in with a shout for best soap. With my Lady Hale and my Lord Sumption providing the glamour, Lord Neuberger, Lord Pannick QC and Mr James Eadie QC must be on the best newcomer shortlist. If only Lord Sumption had a first name beginning with A and if only Lord Neuberger was a bit younger than 68.

The issue before the noble Lords and Lady was a conflict between the royal prerogative and the European Communities Act 1972 and Article 50 of the European Union (Amendment) Act 2008 following the Lisbon Treaty. The legal arguments were intricate and, from time to time, rather arcane and it will be interesting to know if those who voted to leave Europe understood the proceedings. There are some on the leave side who bristle with anger when it is suggested that they were duped by misinformation prior to the referendum and insist that they voted in an informed way to take back control of UK borders, UK law and the sovereignty of the UK parliament. James Eadie QC, acting for the government, dismissed the concerns of the devolved authorities of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and suggested that European law was not applicable in the UK. Therefore, the decision to extract the UK from the EU is a decision for the executive to make under the royal prerogative without the need to trouble elected representatives in parliament.

There are eight words that encapsulate why the royal prerogative should be consigned to history in the wake of the English Civil War and those words are; Theresa May, Boris Johnson, David Davis and Liam Fox. These people are incompetent and although Mr Johnson is a descendent of the bastard offspring of a king, none of them are Royal. One is happy to spend £1,000 on a pair of leather trousers even as working families are dependent on food banks, another is an embarrassing buffoon, the third is an idiot and the fourth is a crook. The legal argument that these four numbskulls should decide the future of the UK takes us way beyond this post-truth era and off into the world of hallucinatory madness.

To be fair, Boris Johnson was misquoted and it is not government strategy to allow him enough rope in the hope of delaying the UKs departure from the single market by appointing yet another Foreign Secretary. He did not say “proxy wars”; what he actually said was “poxy whores”.

He was talking about Westminster.

Advertisements

1 Comment »

  1. I thought the proceedings rather touching and not dissimilar to watching someone who has been caught red-handed committing a serious and felonious act up before the Beak. Protesting that it was not them that done it, that the law does not apply to them the and that the law is an ass, at the same time they insist on their legal rights.

    Usually, Courts take a dim view of such tactics and of the lawyers that promote them so I look forward to increased punishment of the miscreants and a full Bar examination of the QC performance. Unless, of course, they have friends in high places who can put a word in

    Comment by The Realist — December 12, 2016 @ 11:06 am | Reply


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: