Tag: Royal Prerogative
-
Jeff King: Can Royal Assent to a Bill Be Withheld If So Advised by Ministers?
An article in the Sunday Times by Professor Richard Ekins and Sir Stephen Laws QC advised that the Monarch could withhold Royal Assent to a bill passed if advised to do so by ministers. Robert Craig has also argued for that position in a blog post, making clear why in his view that is the…
-
Robert Craig: Executive Versus Legislature in the UK – A Response to Mark Elliott and Tom Poole
For constitutional lawyers, the Brexit Santa Claus has shimmied down the chimney once again. This post is a response to Mark Elliott who recently commented on an article by John Finnis in the Telegraph. It also briefly addresses some of the points in a piece in the London Review of Books by Tom Poole published…
-
Stefan Theil: Unconstitutional Prorogation
Parliament voted on the evening of 1 April in a series of indicative votes to determine what, if any, alternative plan for withdrawal from the European Union could command the support of the House of Commons: all plans put forward again failed to command a majority. In a recent intervention, John Finnis has suggested that…
-
Robert Craig: Why Royal Consent Is Required for the Proposed Article 50 Extension Bill
I wrote recently on this blog about the issue of Royal Assent. This post concerns the wholly separate issue of Royal Consent which is a requirement for those rare Bills that would affect the royal prerogative. The possibility of a no deal exit has led Yvette Cooper MP to propose a Bill, the European Union…
-
David Howarth: How to Change the Government Without Causing a General Election
The Fixed Term Parliaments Act 2011 removed the ability of Prime Ministers to call early general elections and handed that power to Parliament. Parliament has two options: a motion supported by two thirds of MPs (434 votes) that an early election should take place; or a motion of no confidence in Her Majesty’s Government, in…
-
Francis Young: “Packing” the Lords: Some Legal Reflections
The recent string of Government defeats in the House of Lords over amendments to the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill has reignited the debate over the role of the Lords in a modern democracy. The Daily Mail published a characteristically trenchant headline suggesting that we should “pull the plug” on the “traitors in ermine”. The abolition of…
-
Robert Craig: Zombie Prerogatives Should Remain Decently Buried: Replacing the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 (Part 2)
Editors’ note: This is the second of a two-part contribution. The first part may be found here. Part 2: What should replace the FTPA? A previous post argued that a bare repeal of the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 (‘FTPA’) would not revive the dissolution prerogative. A new statute with clear words would be required in…
-
Alex Peplow: Withdrawal from the ECHR after Miller – A Matter of Prerogative?
Does the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of R (on the application of Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union [2017] UKSC 5 affect the way in which the UK could withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights? It is submitted that it clearly follows from the Miller…
-
Asanga Welikala: The Need for a ‘Cartesian Cleaning of the Augean Stables’? Miller and the Territorial Constitution
It is clear that the UKSC’s observations on the meaning and effect of ss. 1 and 2 of the Scotland Act 2016 in Miller have deep consequences for both the constitutional law and the constitutional politics of the UK’s territorial arrangements, and therefore for the Union itself. In relation to the law, some serious questions…
-
Philip Allott: The Short Title of the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill Is Incorrect
The Short Title of the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill is incorrect. The notification is not of withdrawal from the EU. As the Long Title and Clause 1(1) of the Bill correctly show, it is a European Union (Notification of Intention to Withdraw) Bill. Article 50(2) of the EU Treaty speaks only of notification…