Brexit – The Poison Chalice Before The Supreme Court

December 6, 2016 OPINION/NEWS

PA photo



Hazel Speed

What a total waste of time and money!

Monday was the first day of the Hearing before all eleven Judges of the Supreme Court in London in respect of the requirement, or otherwise, of the Mother of all Parliaments to “sign off” on the issues associated with Brexit prior to Article 50 being triggered in the Spring.

Having seen via live TV broadcasting, the Court environment, Staff and voluminous hard copy/electronic filing systems, tabulations and references referred to, it is quite obvious the recommendations to consider prior Legislations and Executive – Royal Prerogative Powers that this is more a legal seminar rather than a peoples’ debate albeit such is the basis upon which this Hearing is predicated.

It is hoped those who voted to Remain in Europe are at last satisfied that their objection to the outcome of the UK Referendum is having yet another bite of the cherry as it were.

What is irksome, is that ordinary people who really need lawyers never can afford to see justice on this scale yet this Hearing Appeal is necessary to deter those who still seek a loophole in Parliamentary Systems as a further attempt to prove the people who voted to Leave Europe not only did not know what they were voting for but should have asked Parliament first as it is only polite, yet nobody asked to join The Common Market back in 1972 by anyone’s Leave (pun intended).

Therefore I would say where is Mr Cameron, the Speaker and the Judiciary who sat in Parliament and did not question the Parliamentary Rights or Legality prior to the Referendum this year?

It is hoped that Mr Cameron is watching this broadcast!

The Hearing is to continue for four days with the Judges’ Decision being made known in January.

Demonstrators are obviously in fine voice outside the Supreme Court.

It really beggars belief that despite major historic decisions and Executive Royal Prerogative Powers at the discretion of any and many Prime Minister of their day, suddenly now this current issue has to be the matter before the Supreme Court, especially as no such Hearing was required prior to ‘Joining’ the then Common Market in 1972 nor its morphed emergence as the European Union and/or someone’s ambition one day to initiate a European Army.

If this Appeal fails then is it only right to say we need another Supreme Court Hearing to decide the validity or otherwise of the UK joining what was the Common Market back in 1972 as if Parliament did not discuss and approve the same we are not really ‘in’ the now morphed Europe so technically will not be leaving what we have not joined.


EPA photo



What we do need is Oliver Cromwell!

A Referendum was taken prior to joining the Common Market but the losing side did not resort to the tactics currently being determined in this way.

Those therefore wishing this challenge against the right of Brexit being triggered without discussion in Parliament first, must also accept their own premise therein that if that were so (and Brexiteers think opposite of course) then membership of the Common Market/European Market is also invalid as the rights of Parliamentary Prerogative was not established then so how can it be challenged as necessary decades later. It is a counter-intuitive stance.

Sovereignty was the opening presentation and its dualism within and without the European Union, an obvious stance which negates the need for this whole Hearing within itself. That should really be sufficient to win the Appeal right there.

Then a dry list was given of legal references regarding Royal Prerogative Powers which were claimed to be ancient but still relevant and active domestically and within international treaties hence the dualism. Various world countries were referred to in respect of their Executive Powers, including America.

Fundamental and essential to UK effective Government are Royal Prerogative Powers.

Royal Prerogative powers are without Statutory authority and do not require Legislation otherwise they would be Statutory not Royal Prerogative Power.

Parliament is Sovereign and can control or remove altogether Royal Prerogative Power but would require Legislation to do so. This clarifies a dualism of intent.

There were a few questions by Judges of a technical nature regarding points of Law but inferred the deep legal issues involved in debate.

An abuse of power or otherwise by the Government but the principles relate to pursuing the Will of the people in the Referendum.

Dualism – domestic legal rights – international treaties, etc. Royal Prerogative Powers therein. Prerogative Powers are in order as long as they do not undermine Parliament itself, and as that is not pertinent to their remits they never will, nor can ergo a redundant stance of argument which therefore also becomes a moot point.

It made one wonder about Prerogative Powers during World War II, if Winston Churchill did not have Executive Royal Prerogative and powers. Indeed a reference was given this morning to World War I where a hotel was seconded to house the military but without compensation.

In other words, Executive Royal Prerogative Powers can be utilised as long as they do not at the same or any time undermine the powers or Raison D’etre of Parliament itself, which of course it never would without a State of Civil War and/or Revolution existing.

According to one TV commentator – Parliament itself could have had the power to trigger Article 50 but chose not to do so. This is the point I have raised earlier herein.

This is like a bad drama. The dead body being found on the floor in a room but the Police and everyone else in attendance to ascertain what has happened are admiring the curtains, talking about the soft furnishings, indeed anything except the dead body.

This is making very difficult viewing as to its ludicrousness in nature, X-Factor contestants as to most legally impressive.

The Highest Court in the Land! For most of us the highest voice in the Land is that of the people and they voted to Leave Europe ASAP!

I hope one day someone turns today’s Supreme Court Hearing into a musical … starring “The People” with top billing.









Hazel Speed

Photo (c) Hazel Speed – used by kind permision to Tuck Magazine

Hazel Speed is a Philosopher, Writer, and Artist with various creative projects at differing stages of development. Her flaship project is an animation which has produced a film short: She has also written an E-novel, ‘Just Suppose…!‘ which is available via the attached link.

Art sites:


No Comments Yet!

You can be first to comment this post!

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.