SNP MP Joanna Cherry says a Scottish court has left Boris Johnson with a "Sword of Damocles" hanging over his head should he break the law by failing to seek a Brexit extension if no deal is reached with the EU.
Campaigners including Cherry welcomed a decision by judges at the Court of Session in Edinburgh to monitor whether the Prime Minister abides by the Benn Act.
The court delayed ruling on a legal bid aimed at forcing Johnson to send a letter if no withdrawal deal is reached by October 19. It will continue the case on October 21.
The Benn Act, passed by MPs in a bid to prevent a no-deal departure, obliges the Prime Minister to ask for an extension to Article 50 rather than leave without a deal.
The campaigners asked the court to use the power of "nobile officium" to allow an official to send a letter on behalf of Johnson if he refuses to do it himself.
Three senior judges said the political debate must be played out before any decision is made, and delayed their ruling so campaigners do not have to start new proceedings if circumstances change.
READ MORE Court of Session delays ruling on Brexit extension letter
Cherry is leading the challenge along with fellow QC Jolyon Maugham and businessman Dale Vince.
She said: "This decision is a victory for the petitioners and everyone who wants the Tory Government to obey the law, and call for an extension, so we can avoid a devastating No-Deal Brexit.
"As a result of this vital court action, the Tory Government has been forced to concede the Prime Minister will comply with the law, and promise to send a letter requesting a Brexit extension. Crucially, he has also had to admit that he will not frustrate the purpose of the Benn Act.
"The court's decision is a clear signal it will keep a watch on Boris Johnson's actions - and is holding a sword of Damocles over him in case he breaks his promise.
"The Tory Prime Minister must obey the law and call for an extension, or face the consequences - including the ability for Scotland's supreme court to force a request for an extension."
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel