Major joins Gina’s fight against PM in the courts
SIR John Major last night took the unprecedented step of taking a fellow prime minister to court.
The former Tory PM announced that he was joining forces with antiBrexit campaigner Gina Miller to fight Boris Johnson’s decision to suspend Parliament.
Deputy Labour leader Tom Watson said he was joining the legal action against what he called ‘an unprecedented affront to democracy’. Liberal Democrat leader Jo Swinson also signed up.
Sir John’s intervention comes even though he prorogued Parliament in 1997 for almost three weeks to avoid scrutiny over the cash for questions scandal.
Yesterday, in a separate legal case, a Scottish judge refused to order a temporary halt to Mr Johnson’s plan to shut down Parliament.
Businesswoman Mrs Miller – who previously took the Government to court over the triggering of Article 50 – said her case would be heard on September 5.
Opponents claimed prorogation was aimed at stopping discussion of Brexit and hampering crossparty efforts to block the prospect of a No Deal withdrawal from the European Union – an allegation denied by Mr Johnson.
Sir John said his experience in No 10 could assist the High Court
‘Solid judgment has gone away’
in deciding whether Mr Johnson’s actions in proroguing Parliament are lawful. ‘In view of the imminence of the prorogation – and to avoid duplication of effort and taking up the court’s time through repetition – I intend to seek the court’s permission to intervene in the claim already initiated by Gina Miller, rather than to commence separate proceedings,’ he said.
‘If granted permission to intervene, I intend to seek to assist the court from the perspective of having served in government as a minister and prime minister, and also in Parliament for many years as a member of the House of Commons.’
Tory MP Peter Bone said Sir John should steer clear of the row – and accused him of descending into a ‘Brexit mist’. Mr Bone said. ‘If he sat down and thought about it, he would say this is how Parliament works. He knows that, Tom Watson knows that. But because they have got this Brexit mist where they absolutely want to keep us in the EU, all their other judgment, their normal solid judgment, has gone away.
‘It is sad and I just hope they reconsider their position.’ In 1997, Sir John prorogued Parliament for the longest period since 1918 before a general election. Critics accused him of doing it to prevent the publication of a critical report into a sleaze scandal.
Yesterday, 75 parliamentarians sought an interim interdict – similar to an injunction – at the Court of Session, Scotland’s highest civil court, ahead of a full hearing.
Lord Doherty said that he was not satisfied there was a ‘cogent need’ for an interdict. However, the full hearing will now be heard next Tuesday, rather than Friday, after the judge ruled it would be ‘in the interest of justice that it proceeds sooner rather than later’.
Mr Johnson could face crossexamination to explain his reasons for suspending Parliament.
Nick McKerrell, a lecturer in law at Glasgow Caledonian University, said: ‘An interesting development is the request that Boris Johnson issues a legally-binding statement to the court over his reasons to bring the suspension.
‘This could mean he potentially could face cross-examination. This is not automatically granted though and it would be yet another extremely unusual process if the court agreed to that.’
Responding to the ruling, a No 10 spokesman said: ‘As we have set out, the Government needs to bring forward a strong domestic legislative agenda and MPs are not prevented from scrutinising our withdrawal from the EU.
‘We are glad the court found against the interdict – there was no good reason to seek one, given the full hearing is due to take place next week, and the process of bringing the session to an end will not start until the week commencing September 9.’
A fresh Brexit row broke out yesterday after EU governments accused Britain of failing to table any workable solutions to the Irish border issue. Irish deputy prime minister Simon Coveney led the attack by insisting the UK has presented ‘nothing credible’ so far.
But No10 hit back, with Transport Secretary Grant Shapps branding the claims ‘just not true’.