Round and Round We Go

For discussion, news, comments, questions and information about Crete & Greece.
Cruc
Posts: 234
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2012 2:30 pm
Location: Cheltenham and Kokkino Chorio

Round and Round We Go

Postby Cruc » Thu Nov 03, 2016 3:56 pm

Regards
Cruc

YoMo2
Posts: 1148
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 11:07 am
Location: Milatos, Lasithi

Re: Round and Round We Go

Postby YoMo2 » Fri Nov 04, 2016 9:14 am

Well, if the referendum result is eventually ignored, it wouldn't be the first time in recent European history, would it?

Andrew

mouche
Posts: 690
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2011 5:43 pm

Re: Round and Round We Go

Postby mouche » Fri Nov 04, 2016 10:25 am

The court is only doing what a court is supposed to do and I actually fully share the view of the court! What a mess you have put yourself into.

Kilkis
Posts: 11023
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 3:58 pm
Location: Near Chania

Re: Round and Round We Go

Postby Kilkis » Fri Nov 04, 2016 10:30 am

But let's be clear, if the referendum result is not upheld it will not be the fault of the judges. Parliament writes the laws and judges ensure they are upheld. It is done that way for a purpose. When the government writes the laws and is responsible for upholding them you have a dictatorship. All the judges have done is rule that parliament is sovereign. Isn't that what leave voters have been campaigning for? The government can propose anything it likes but the law of the land is that parliament has the final say. If the result of the referendum is overruled by parliament then that will be the responsibility of the MPs who vote against it and they may pay the price at the next election, or not as the case may be.

Warwick

Mixos
Posts: 486
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 8:26 am
Location: North East Crete or S.W.England

Re: Round and Round We Go

Postby Mixos » Fri Nov 04, 2016 10:39 am

How extraordinary. Brexiteers are squealing like stuck pigs because the High Court has upheld the sovereignty of Parliament. Are these not the same people who were demanding that we "take back control" throughout the referendum campaign?

filippos
Posts: 5715
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 7:38 pm
Location: Kalyves
Contact:

Re: Round and Round We Go

Postby filippos » Fri Nov 04, 2016 2:52 pm

Government has been given leave to appeal and said they will do so. We'll have to wait for the decision of the Supreme Court before there's a conclusion either way.
Kilkis wrote:Parliament writes the laws and judges ensure they are upheld.

What judges actually do is interpret the law.

john4d
Posts: 483
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 5:13 pm
Location: Near Vamos

Re: Round and Round We Go

Postby john4d » Fri Nov 04, 2016 3:46 pm

What an interesting debate. Every country elects "local" members to parliament or a senate etc to make laws and govern the country for the people, it's a semi sensible way of doing things, even here in Greece. (See how I got that in to make it relevant for this forum, Caroline and Clio). Once in a blue moon an issue comes along which is so important and effects fundamentally the way the country is governed, that the government elects to let the people decide for themselves. They call this a referendum. You may recall that this happened in Greece not so long ago. They also call it single issue politics. Now three people have decided that 645 people are more representative of the UK than the 33,651,983 who voted in the referendum.

So the ethical question is, Dos a Referendum of all eligible voters on a single issue override the sovereignty of parliament? Clearly three senior judges thought it did. What do you think?
There's no such thing as a bad taste joke

Phild
Posts: 211
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2010 3:01 pm
Location: Way out West

Re: Round and Round We Go

Postby Phild » Fri Nov 04, 2016 4:12 pm

Of course, if the court appeal fails, and the vote does go to parliament - it's quite possible that the commons might vote *for* Brexit (after all, both major parties' leaderships appear to be *for* Brexit at the moment), but then the Lords (an unelected body, remember) might well put the brakes on.

Now, that will be an interesting time to watch the interaction of politics and the population.

:wink:
----
Phil
----

Kilkis
Posts: 11023
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 3:58 pm
Location: Near Chania

Re: Round and Round We Go

Postby Kilkis » Fri Nov 04, 2016 4:41 pm

john4d wrote:...So the ethical question is, Dos a Referendum of all eligible voters on a single issue override the sovereignty of parliament?...


It can but it doesn't necessarily do so. In most countries that make of use of referenda the constitution defines what the conditions are for the result of a referendum to be binding. Unfortunately the UK does not have a written constitution nor did the act of parliament that established the referendum make any such statement. Everything constitutional is decided on the basis of acts of parliament and court judgements. You can read the full judgement and a summary. I would recommend reading at least paragraphs 7 to 11 of the summary.

Only parliament can make and unmake laws. The purpose of article 50 is to allow existing UK laws to be unmade. Therefore article 50 must be approved by parliament. These checks and balances are there for a reason. You remove them at your peril.

Warwick

mouche
Posts: 690
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2011 5:43 pm

Re: Round and Round We Go

Postby mouche » Fri Nov 04, 2016 5:32 pm

In Norway we do have a constitution and twice we have had a referendum with respect to joining the EU, or not. Both times this was not considered in any way shape or form to be binding for the government!

Kilkis
Posts: 11023
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 3:58 pm
Location: Near Chania

Re: Round and Round We Go

Postby Kilkis » Fri Nov 04, 2016 5:46 pm

According to Wikipedia, while Norway has a constitution, that constitution does not mention referenda so they are not legally binding.

Warwick

john4d
Posts: 483
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 5:13 pm
Location: Near Vamos

Re: Round and Round We Go

Postby john4d » Fri Nov 04, 2016 5:58 pm

Warwick, you've supplied a legal answer which I'm sure knowing you is correct. However I tried to pose the question as one of ethics. One could of course take the view that the law must always be followed otherwise we have anarchy, but where would that have left the suffragettes or in more recent times the anti apartheid movement in South Africa?
There's no such thing as a bad taste joke

Kilkis
Posts: 11023
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 3:58 pm
Location: Near Chania

Re: Round and Round We Go

Postby Kilkis » Fri Nov 04, 2016 7:57 pm

I would see a difference between a situation where citizens are breaking the law to protest to government that the law is adversely affecting them, e.g. apartheid and suffragettes, and the situation where the government is breaking the law because the law doesn't suit it. In that case I would characterise the government as putting themselves above the law and that is never a good thing. Suffragettes and apartheid protesters both suffered the consequences of breaking the law. As individuals we are all entitled to break the law provided we accept the consequences.

Warwick

mouche
Posts: 690
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2011 5:43 pm

Re: Round and Round We Go

Postby mouche » Fri Nov 04, 2016 8:11 pm

Kilkis wrote:According to Wikipedia, while Norway has a constitution, that constitution does not mention referenda so they are not legally binding.

Warwick


DO you find many constitutions mentioning referenda?

nigeljackson5
Posts: 83
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2013 8:40 am
Location: Kalo Chorio

Re: Round and Round We Go

Postby nigeljackson5 » Fri Nov 04, 2016 8:33 pm

Just for information, to all those who wonder what role a Judge performs
Judges play many roles. They interpret the law, assess the evidence presented, and control how hearings and trials unfold in their courtrooms. Most important of all, judges are impartial decision-makers in the pursuit of justice.
Now turning to the original points about the recent court case
Parliamentary sovereignty is a principle of the unwritten UK constitution. It makes Parliament the supreme legal authority in the UK, which can create or end any law. Generally, the courts cannot overrule its legislation and no Parliament can pass laws that future Parliaments cannot change.
This is the basic tenet of English law dating back to 1688.
I welcome the Court decision that has upheld this principle.
The British people voted to leave the EU, and whilst not agreeing with the decision, their will must be obeyed, and we now have, in my opinion, no choice but to exit
However it is not a decision that should be taken by Government "Ultra Vires" (beyond their powers), alone, without consulting and obtaining Parliamentary approval, and the High court found this, in making their decision
To those Brexiteers out there who think this is a delaying tactic, it could not be further from the truth, it is all about the supremacy of parliament, and I would make these points:-
1. It would extremely foolish, and probably career ending, for any MP, who voted to block triggering of article 50, especially if his/her constituents had voted in favour of Brexit, and very unlikely, with the exception of Ken Clarke, to happen
2. The people who were in favour of regaining sovereignty, are now denying that right to the House of Commons. The Executive (government) have so far refused to give the House the final say on triggering Article 50
3. The "Wail" and other rags should be deplored for their biased and offensive comments, over a decision, based purely and simply,on their interpretation of the law....what has the fact there was, and I quote "an openly gay judge", on the panel anything to do with it ??!!
The decision yesterday, recognised that according to our unwritten constitution, Parliament is supreme, and has to be consulted, before any Constitutional changes are made.


Return to “General Discussion & News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests