it Was more of a question of principles than of content, and from that perspective, the Government was in the battle lost in advance. That’s despite the fact that the defense of its approach as would a character in homer as Cox, with a baritone voice and a legal knowledge at the height of the huge respect that we have to himself, as his fellow conservatives are in charge of reminding.
“it’s Not about discerning the legality of the actions of the Government,” thundered Cox. “it is rather a decision on the prudence and good political judgment used to access to an international agreement [such as the one reached with the EU] on the terms proposed”, defended the attorney-general, whose role in this whole issue is rather the attorney general of the State to which the Government resorts to asking for legal advice.
this is why Cox implored again and again to the deputies: “ask me anything you want, I will answer, I do not reserve anything, but I do not ask that I skip the constitutional principle of the privilege of confidentiality between client and lawyer,” he said. The paradox of this whole debate, to believe the word of Cox, is that there is no smoking gun or as saved under the sleeve. As he struggled to explain, during a long process of negotiation there are many reports in oral or written legal advice that the Government collectively, or ministers may apply to the attorney General of the State. But turn any of those documents, though not revealing anything new, it would be for Cox a dangerous precedent, “contrary to the public interest”.
in Front of this constitutional principle, the Camera block was defending others equally conclusive. For example, your hierarchy is sovereign over the Executive to impose an approved instruction in addition Tipobet to unanimously by the deputies. Or the required transparency and the information required before a decision is taken as extraordinary as the abandonment of the EU after decades of association.
MORE INFORMATION
The immigration of europeans to the United Kingdom records the lowest level in six years, The Bank of England warns that a Brexit without agreement would be worse than the 2008 financial crisis,
leaked Documents
“Our position is totally unacceptable,” protested the spokesman of Justice, labour, Nick Thomas-Symonds. “There are aspects that form part of the advice given by the attorney-general which have been conveniently leaked to the press during the weekend. This is not only a question of good political judgment,” he said.
The Labour Party, the nationalist scots in the SNP, the unionist northern irish in the DUP and the Liberal Democrats decided to finally present a joint letter to the speaker (speaker of the House of Commons, John Bercow, claiming the opening of a parliamentary procedure of contempt of court against the Government. Bercow has the last word, although it will be difficult to get in against the majority of the Parliament over which he presides, and in a case in which at stake is the principle of hierarchy sovereign in the separation of powers. Open up the procedure, it will not stop the debate over Brexit, which begins this Tuesday and will culminate with the vote on the agreement with the EU on the 11th of December.
