View Single Post
Old 25th Sep 2019, 11:40
  #10597 (permalink)  
Fly Aiprt
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: French Alps
Posts: 326
Originally Posted by Aihkio View Post
Looking it from another direction:
Looks dangerous if PM can kick out the parliament at any time for as long as he wants and the Queen cannot interfere. That is the definition of a dictator, almost.

The "problem" here, is the that the ruling of the Supreme Court is not favourable to the PM, and so his partisans are objecting.
Had the judgment been otherwise, would those same people still object ? Not so sure.

And yet the Supreme Court is there to protect the Parliament decisions, not the PM's.
Wikipedia :
The United Kingdom has a doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty, so the Supreme Court is much more limited in its powers of judicial review than the constitutional or supreme courts of some other countries. It cannot overturn any primary legislation made by Parliament.
Many modern democratic countries have a Parliament, and some sort of Supreme or Constitutional Court, to which those cases can be submitted without being accused of "interference".
But as a begining, a written constitution could be the first step towards real democracy

Last edited by Fly Aiprt; 25th Sep 2019 at 11:40. Reason: Typo
Fly Aiprt is offline