https://www.ft.com/content/351fe714-cc87-4b36-8562-fcd3533fff45Britain’s Conservatives have long prided themselves as being the party of law and order. Now, after an extraordinary admission in parliament, it seems they are the party of “specific and limited” law and order.
Regardless of the rights and wrongs of the Brexit argument, breaching an international treaty — one that Prime Minister Boris Johnson signed — is a dangerous moment for his party and the country. This instance may be limited and specific. The principle is not.
But Mr Johnson’s team is also driven by fury over the 2019 Supreme Court ruling declaring his suspension of parliament illegal.
In all the institutions this government wishes to reform — the courts, the independent civil service or the BBC — there are defects and deficiencies which any government is entitled to address.
But critics have long discerned a systematic attack on the vital checks and balances of the state, to remove impediments to its will.
The danger — one highlighted in the row over parliament’s suspension — is that Mr Johnson’s circle actually believes it is the government, rather than parliament, that is sovereign.
UK Conservatives are thus facing their Trump moment. This will not be the last time they face such a challenge from a government whose disdain for parliament and process is apparent.
If laws can be broken for reasons of inconvenience, which others might the government choose to disregard?
https://www.ft.com/content/351fe714-cc87-4b36-8562-fcd3533fff45 the only way to prevent this trend accelerating is to show that parliament truly is sovereign and that it stands for the rule of law.
Boris Johnson’s government has been presenting the UK as a champion of liberal democracy. Ministers talk about convening a new “club of democracies”, adding nations such as Japan and Australia to the existing G7 group. They have overlooked something. Raising the standard for democracy requires a commitment to the rule of law.
Officials in the legal service privately counter it was driven by the prime minister’s ideological objections to a residual EU role in British affairs post-Brexit.
The reputation of the British courts for unshakeable independence and incorruptibility have made London a global centre for litigation . Legal services have been a valuable export — both in financial and soft power terms.
. For the prime minister, what matters is getting his way. He showed this last year when he broke the law by proroguing parliament to defuse opposition to his Brexit strategy.
The potential complications for Northern Ireland of a failure to reach an overall trade deal were known before the withdrawal agreement was signed. Mr Johnson put his hands over his ears: it could be sorted out later.
Respect for the rule of law is the vital line of separation between democracy and authoritarianism.
