The Telegraph opted for a similar front page: “Judges vs the people”. A profile of each was provided on the Mail’s website: “One founded a EUROPEAN law group, another charged the taxpayer millions for advice and the third is an openly gay ex-Olympic fencer.” “ENEMIES OF THE PEOPLE” was emblazoned above photographs of the three judges involved. The front page of the Daily Mail the following day made a statement that echoed around the world. Ruling on judicial review proceedings brought by Gina Miller, the high court judges held that the process for giving notification to leave the EU under article 50 of the Lisbon treaty legally required an act of parliament, and that the notice to withdraw could not be given by the government using its prerogative powers.
Just over four months later three unelected judges apparently attempted to overturn the democratically expressed will of the British people. I t was back on 23 June 2016 that more than 17.4 million voters expressed their desire to leave the European Union in a referendum referred to by Prime Minister Theresa May in 2019 as “the biggest democratic exercise in our country’s history”. The course was set at the beginning of Johnson’s premiership when he unlawfully prorogued parliament and then sent out pliant ministers to spread misinformation about the judges who had dared point this out, from the business minister Kwasi Kwarteng telling the BBC that “many people … are saying that the judges are biased” to Johnson’s own response when asked about the supreme court decision, chuntering: “ There are a lot of people who want to frustrate Brexit.” Cue the anonymous and self-aggrandising media briefing that the PM’s chief adviser Dominic Cummings “wants to get the judges sorted”. The problem with our justice system, it has been decreed, is the judiciary. However, since entering Downing Street he has found himself moved, both by experience and by the counsel of that ubiquitous Unnamed Downing Street Source, to train his attentions more broadly.
0 kommentar(er)
