The Public Law Project is intervening in today’s Supreme Court challenge to the Prime Minister’s advice to prorogue Parliament.

Permission to intervene was granted yesterday afternoon.

Our submissions argue that the advice of the Prime Minister was unlawful because he did not consider the impact on Parliament’s ability to scrutinise the secondary legislation required for an orderly Brexit.

Director of the Public Law Project, Jo Hickman said:

“The effect of prorogation is that statutory instruments affecting customs, financial services, food hygiene, banking regulations, animal health, air transport and product safety are being pushed through under an ‘urgent’ procedure.

“Under this procedure, these statutory instruments could become law before they are even debated, avoiding parliamentary oversight until after exit day.

“This urgency is of the Prime Minister’s own making. His actions pave the way for law-making by executive order, rather than by elected representatives.

“The EU Withdrawal Act mandates the Government to ensure that the statutory instruments needed for an orderly Brexit are properly scrutinised. The Prime Minister’s advice to prorogue Parliament is unlawful because it fails that mandate.”

Under the urgent case procedure, secondary legislation can come into force immediately, but that which requires debate will only remain in effect if approved by both Houses of Parliament after 28 days.

Documents relating to PLP’s intervention can be found at our resources section here.

For further information please contact Luke Robins-Grace, Public Law Project Communications Director: 0207036 4411 / 07808159200