Jo Maugham, a lawyer involved in the case, said an appeal to the Supreme Court, the highest judicial body in the uk, would start on Tuesday. The greatest civil court in Scotland on Wednesday announced parliament’s prorogation from the Boris Johnson government amidst Brexit rows as unlawful, ruling that the movement was prompted by the”improper purpose of stymying Parliament”, setting off another row in Westminster.
The contentious prorogation until October 14 took effect in the wee hours of Tuesday after criticism by House of Commons speaker John Bercow, amongst others. The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear another challenge to the prorogation following Tuesday.
Labour and other opposition parties which watched the prorogation as the Johnson government’s bid to prevent scrutiny of its strategy to Brexit, called the ruling’historical’ and demanded that parliament be remembered in light of the judgment, but Downing Street resisted it.
The UK Government should bring forward a solid domestic legislative agenda. Proroguing Parliament is the lawful and necessary method of delivering this.”
A panel of three judges in the Court of Session ruled in favour of a cross-party set of politicians that challenged the prime minister’s move, saying that the authorities information mentioned while seeking the prorogation order is unlawful.
However, the ruling won’t lead to the immediate reopening of parliament, despite demands from Labour, Scottish Nationalist Party and many others, since it didn’t order the cancellation of the prorogation.
Judge Carloway said:”We are of the opinion that the guidance given by the authorities to her majesty the Queen to prorogue parliament was criminal and the prorogation itself was criminal”.
Labour’s shadow Brexit secretary Keir Starmer said:”For the court to create a statement like that on an issue such as this is a massive thing for us. It vindicates what we did last week. I think that what I want to do, and what others will need to do, is to contact parliament and get Boris Johnson back into parliament so we can hold him properly into account”.
Scotland’s first minister Nicola Sturgeon said the judgment was of”enormous constitutional significance”, demanding that parliament be remembered immediately to make it perform the”real and substantive work of scrutiny”.
She added:”The prime minister’s behavior was reckless and outrageous, and has demonstrated a complete disregard for constitutional rules and standards.”