Read on Twitter
There’s some odd jubilation in some quarters about the Attorney General citing the Miller judgment in her statement attempting to justify breaching international law.
Unfortunately, like the statement itself, the reference to Miller is legally meaningless.
You’ve been fooled. https://twitter.com/barristersecret/status/1304084449047588865
Unfortunately, like the statement itself, the reference to Miller is legally meaningless.
You’ve been fooled. https://twitter.com/barristersecret/status/1304084449047588865
Miller confirms the long-established principle that Parliament is sovereign, but that is not in doubt. Nobody disputes that, as a matter of domestic law, Parliament has the power to legislate contrary to international law.
But we would still be in breach of international law.
But we would still be in breach of international law.
Miller is wholly irrelevant to that argument. It does not provide a defence nor a justification for breaching international law.
By citing it, the Attorney General is trying to distract and manipulate those who don’t understand the law.
And some of those people are letting her.
By citing it, the Attorney General is trying to distract and manipulate those who don’t understand the law.
And some of those people are letting her.
Remember the last episode of Friends where Phoebe causes widespread panic on a plane by shouting that there’s a problem with the “left phalange”?
That, in legal terms, is what the Attorney General is doing by citing Miller.
The crowing is embarrassing to watch.
That, in legal terms, is what the Attorney General is doing by citing Miller.
The crowing is embarrassing to watch.
