Top Supreme Court judge Lord Neuberger questions whether Parliament vote triggering Article 50 is needed after MPs back Brexit plan
THE SUPREME Court’s top judge yesterday openly questioned whether a second vote on triggering Article 50 is now needed – given last night’s show of hands in the Commons.
Speaking just hours before MPs backed a Brexit, Lord Neuberger said it would “seem a bit odd” to the man in the street if MPs were asked to go back and do it all again.
The comment came on the third day of the Supreme Court hearing into whether Theresa May must ask for Parliamentary backing before formally kick-starts EU divorce talks by invoking Article 50.
The Government is challenging last month’s High Court ruling that it has to.
During evidence, Lord Neuberger said: “To the man in the street it sounds a bit odd if one says to the Government you have to go back to Parliament to have an act of Parliament passed to show what Parliament’s will is when you have already been to Parliament and had a motion before both Houses which serves the notice.
“It does seem a bit odd doesn’t it?”
He was speaking as Lord Pannick QC, the lawyer for pro-EU campaigner Gina Miller, claimed the motion voted on by MPs tonight would not be good enough.
Lord Pannick said: “The law of the land is not altered by a motion in Parliament. This is a basic constitutional principle.”
But another of the Supreme Court’s 11 judges, Lord Carnwath said it was “a point that’s been troubling me”.