Thread: Attorney General responds to questions on Internal Market Bill and rule of law at Bar Council AGM. The responses appear to have been less than illuminating. https://twitter.com/alisonpadfield/status/1304733437748748288

Contrary to what AG says here, Court of Appeal made it perfectly clear in Gulf n case [2018] EWCA Civ 1855 that Ministerial Code continues to include duty to comply with international law. https://twitter.com/alisonpadfield/status/1304739362802937857

That the code ‘has no bearing on Parliament’s decision’ is perfectly obvious. But it self-evidently bears upon Ministers, including Law Officers in advising Government, and Ministers who may, in due course, use Bill to make regulations in breach of treaty obligations.

‘Relies on parliamentary sovereignty’—which is nothing to the point. Miller I (to which AG refers in legal position paper) affirms sovereignty but says: ‘treaties between sovereign states have effect in international law and are not governed by the domestic law of any state' https://twitter.com/alisonpadfield/status/1304740714035777536

In short, these responses, as reported, appear to add nothing to the incoherent legal position paper published a couple of days ago and suggest that the Government is quite prepared to dig in, notwithstanding profound rule-of-law concerns across the political spectrum. /ends