Boris Johnson Accused of Abusing Power Over Brexit 

(Bloomberg) -- Several Supreme Court justices turned on the lawyer for the government in the case over Boris Johnson’s decision to suspend Parliament, demanding a clearer explanation of what the prime minister would do if he lost the case.

Under pressure from judges, Richard Keen, a lawyer for the government, promised to file a written answer on how Johnson would abide by a decision against him. Justice Brian Kerr went further, pushing to discover if Johnson would recall lawmakers or attempt to suspend the legislature again.

“Can we take it that he wouldn’t prorogue Parliament again?” Kerr asked. Keen deferred to the prime minister, before agreeing to submit a written answer.

“I’m not in a position to comment on that,” Keen said. “That will have to be addressed by the decision maker.”

The questioning came soon after Keen took over the afternoon session of the most closely watched case in U.K. history. At the center of the appeal is whether the decision to suspend Parliament in the countdown to an Oct. 31 Brexit deadline is even a matter for the courts.

The three-day hearing is the final stage of a landmark case that not only threatens to undermine Johnson’s position as prime minister, but could also curtail the British executive’s longstanding power over when the legislature sits. Johnson could be forced to recall Parliament, giving opponents of a no-deal Brexit more room to try to thwart his “do or die” promise to leave the European Union with or without a divorce agreement on Oct. 31.

Difficult Questions

Supreme Court President Brenda Hale opened the proceedings by attempting to put some distance between the legal issues and the country’s deadlocked Parliament by reminding the room that the role of the judges is non-political and concerned solely with bringing sense to complex points of law.

“This is a serious and difficult question of law -- amply demonstrated by the fact that three senior judges in Scotland have reached a different conclusion to three senior judges in England,” she said. “The determination of this question will not determine when and how the United Kingdom will leave the European Union,” she continued.

Earlier Tuesday, David Pannick, a lawyer representing opponents of a so-called no-deal Brexit, argued that Johnson’s decision to suspend parliament was an abuse of power. He said lawmakers need to be recalled to keep a “close eye” on Johnson’s Brexit negotiations with the EU.

While it’s notoriously difficult to determine how a case will turn out from judges’ questions, Pannick had a much easier time during his 2 1/2 hours in front of the 11 members of the top court than Reed did in his first few minutes.

Pannick, however, did face queries about whether Parliament should have halted the possibility of prorogation by taking a no-confidence vote, which could have removed Johnson from office.

Easy Ride

“My impression was that they gave Pannick quite an easy ride this morning,” Robert Hazell, constitutional law professor at University College London, said. “Not many of their questions to him were challenging, some of them appeared to be supportive. They appeared to give Keen a harder time. If I were the government after the first day, I think I would be feeling a bit more worried.”

The Supreme Court has to resolve a dispute between judges in Scotland -- who said the suspension of Parliament was unlawful -- and those in London who backed Johnson.

The stakes are high, as the process that started with an in-out referendum in June 2016 comes closer to the Halloween deadline set by Johnson. The prime minister told his cabinet this morning that he’s “confident” about the government’s arguments in the case.

As of the lunch break, the court had recorded more than 4 million requests to access the live-stream of the proceedings, a likely record for a European court case. And that didn’t include those watching the live coverage from the BBC and other news channels.

--With assistance from Franz Wild.

To contact the reporters on this story: Jonathan Browning in London at jbrowning9@bloomberg.net;Jeremy Hodges in London at jhodges17@bloomberg.net

To contact the editors responsible for this story: Anthony Aarons at aaarons@bloomberg.net, Christopher Elser

©2019 Bloomberg L.P.