The Queen has been attacked by Republic, an organisation calling for the abolition of the monarchy in the UK and the election of a head of state, after the Supreme Court ruled Parliament was never suspended. Graham Smith, the CEO of the group, lashed out at the Queen, saying the Court’s decision “exposes the monarchy as a pointless and ineffective institution”.  

Mr Smith also said the Queen is unlikely to suffer the same consequences an elected head of state would be subjected to following a similar ruling – resignations.

He said: “If Parliament had been prorogued by an elected head of state, on the advice of the Prime Minister, that head of state would now have to resign.

“The Queen was given instruction to do an unlawful thing, and she did it.

“We’re always told she has the benefit of decades of experience and yet she couldn’t see what was obvious to everyone else, that the Prime Minister’s motives were not honest.  

“It cannot be the case that a head of state is constitutionally bound to do an unconstitutional thing.

“And ‘I was doing what I was told’ is no defence.”

Mr Smith also suggested the Queen would have risked the survival of the monarchy itself if she refused to prorogue Parliament.

However, he continued, “that’s the job”.

He said: “Of course, refusing prorogation would have been dangerous territory for the monarchy, but that’s the job.

“Truth is, this whole episode exposes the monarchy as a pointless and ineffective institution.

“An independent, elected head of state would have had the authority to make a judgement as to whether the prorogation request was lawful.

“If they got it wrong they would also be accountable for their actions.

“The Queen has abdicated all responsibility for her actions and that is not a sustainable position.

“We need a democratic alternative to the monarchy, a written constitution and an accountable and effective head of state.”

Prime Minister Boris Johnson received a damning response from the Supreme Court this morning, when the Supreme Court’s 11 judges unanimously told him his decision to advise the Queen to prorogue Parliament until October 14 was unlawful “because it had the effect of frustrating or preventing the ability of Parliament to carry out its constitutional functions without reasonable justification.”  

The Prime Minister said he “strongly disagrees” with the ruling but, he continued, he will “respect it”.

The ruling sparked happiness among Remain-backing leading figures, including the SNP’s spokeswoman on justice and home affairs Joanna Cherry, former Tory MP and now leader of the Independent Group for Change Anna Soubry and activist and business owner Gina Miller.

Speaker of the House John Bercow, who announced earlier this month he will resign on October 31, also “welcomed” the Court’s ruling, saying: “I welcome the Supreme Court’s judgement that the prorogation of Parliament was unlawful. 

“The judges have rejected the Government’s claim that closing down Parliament for five weeks was merely standard practice to allow for a new Queen’s Speech.

“In reaching their conclusion, they have vindicated the right and duty of Parliament to meet at this crucial time to scrutinise the executive and hold Ministers to account.

“As the embodiment of our Parliamentary democracy, the House of Commons must convene without delay. To this end, I will now consult the party leaders as a matter of urgency.”   

Source: Read Full Article