DSCN0256 There is something about the term ‘Supreme Court’ that affords it an image of absolutely scrupulous objectivity in all things. Like most British Justice these days, it is nothing of the kind. As this Slog investigation strongly suggests, the “Highest” Court in the Land is massively biased against Brexit, and enjoys a near-universal connection with ‘the European Project’. In the light of this research, there is the very strong smell of political intent masquerading as Constitutional diligence. It is time these facts were put before a much wider audience.

¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤

Attorney General Cox assured Team Johnson that proroguing Parliament was “entirely lawful”, and objections to it “are nothing more than political rhetoric”.

These are the eleven judges who unanimously overturned that judgement….

Lady Brenda Hale (Chair) is a lifetime academic and former Law Professor who went straight into being a Judge with no history in commercial law at all. She is a feminist, a great believer in diversity, and a lifelong liberal. I would be amazed if she voted any other way than Remain.

Lord Robert Reed (Deputy) is a Scot who also sits on the EU’s European Court of Human Rights. He was an expert advisor to the EU/Council of Europe Joint Initiative with Turkey. No prizes for guessing where Rabbie’s sympathies lie.

Lord Brian Kerr is the former Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland, and the first Catholic ever appointed to that post. In 2014, he had this to say in a lengthy interview:

“The Law has changed enormously since the enactment of the Human Rights Act. The central point about the Act is that it has given judges free access to the rich vein of jurisprudence that is provided by the Strasbourg Court…..we now have the ability to draw on jurisprudence from all over the Council of Europe on matters that critically affect the balance of power between the citizen and the state and I think that that can only be a good thing.”

Draw your own conclusions.

Lord Nicholas Wilson is left of centre and on the record as saying, ““In pursuit of its economic policy, the UK government has recently felt the need to dismantle much of our welfare state, namely social security and the National Health Service.” He is a passionate supporter of the ECHR in Strasbourg. The activist site Divorce & the City is currently preparing to impeach Lord Wilson for alleged corruption and ‘pro State’ bias. He is, reputedly, not a fan of Boris Johnson or Brexit.

Lord Robert Carnwath is an unknown quantity who appears never to have expressed an opinion about anything, except he sits on the advisory council of the English School in Poland.

Lord Patrick Hodge is another Scot. He was a civil servant in the 1970s, and then Counsel to the Department of Energy from 1989 to 1991, and to the Inland Revenue from 1991 to 1996. Ergo, chummy with the unelected State, 99.99% of whom are anti-Brexit. I’d imagine he’s also a wow at parties.

Lady Jill Black is unique in the Supreme Court in not having been to Oxbridge. You can see from this just how inclusive the Court is, and thus totally in touch with the average person.

Lord David Lloyd-Jones is another scholar who wound up a judge. He was a Fellow of Downing College, Cambridge from 1975 to 1991. From 1999 to 2005, he was a visiting professor at City University, London, and was then put onto The Bench. He has always specialised in international  and EU law. Only two months ago, in a Supreme Court hearing involving Kuoni Travel, Lloyd-Jones ruled that EU Law had primacy in the case. He gave the judgement in Welsh, which was a first. Highly unlikely to have voted to leave a Union in whose law he specialises, one could reasonably argue.

Lady Mary Arden became a member of the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague in 2011, and sits as a judge of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg blah blah yawn etc. In 2015 she published a book about the impact of the EU and the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg on the domestic law of the UK. In his preface to the book, the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales noted:

ArdenEUquote.PNG

Not a Leaver then, we suspect. This is all getting terribly predictable, isn’t it?

Lord David Kitchin coxed the team that won the 1975 Boat Race for Cambridge. More pertinently, he has for many years been a strong advocate of more harmonisation of the Law between EU jurisdictions. In May this year, he gave an interview offering the following opinion in relation to patent law, in which he is a specialist:

“The situation is improving and that is because there is now much more discussion and communication between judges in different countries. Judges now meet regularly to discuss these and other difficult issues. We consider each other’s judgments; all of us attach importance to the decisions of the Technical Boards of Appeal and the Enlarged Boards of Appeal at the European Patent Convention….there might not be jurisdiction to make references to the EU Court of Justice in these cases, or any cases after Brexit.”

And so this would be a bad thing, wouldn’t i? Get real: Lord Kitchin is a Good European who lectures about legal alignment in the EU.

Lord Philip Sales really is a case of leaving the best until last. Sales has had something of a meteoric rise: he is the youngest of the Supreme Court judges, and was a practising barrister at 11 King’s Bench Walk – according to The Guardian ‘a network of old boys and cronies’ that enabled him to be appointed First Counsel at the Treasury…a department of State with a long and grubby history of undying support for the EU. The recommendation that he be appointed came from Lord Irvine and Tony Blair’s old chambers.

Philip Sales is New Labour through and through. In 2016, he was a member of the Court of Appeal which ruled that 130,000 Labour members who joined the party after 12 January 2016 would not be able to vote in the leadership contest. This overruled the previous High Court decision to allow the 130,000 disenfranchised Labour Party members to vote in the 2016 Labour Party leadership election. In short, it was a bid by the Blairites to keep Corbyn out.

Finally, he was one of the three judges forming the High Court in proceedings concerning the use of the royal prerogative for the issue of notification in accordance with Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union, R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union. His role in this judgment meant that he appeared in an infamous front-cover of the Daily Mail  – Enemies of the People – as a solid-gold Remainer.

*** 

The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom reflects the liberal élite Establishment to the letter. It is 90.9% Oxbridge, its members are willing participants in European institutions the Government has always found questionable, and it does not reflect in any way at all a decision by the People in 2016 to leave the European Union. The last thing the Supreme Court does – whatever Lady Hale’s propensities might be – is reflect British diversity or democracy.

It has voted unanimously to overrule an Attorney General and the Queen’s Prime Minister. In doing so, it has failed to take cognisance of the blatant attempt by some 415 MPs, the UK media, Whitehall and Brussels itself to both interfere in and ultimately block a supreme decision-making role, awarded by a majority of MPs, for the British People to take a decision on Brexit.

The Prime Minister’s wish to prorogue Parliament (one of the longest-standing in history) was to in turn defend democracy by blocking the sabotage of 415 in favour of 17.4 million citizens. Neither I, you, nor any of these Supreme Court Judges can know what his motives beyond that might have been….let alone whether he misled the Queen or not.

Lady Hale’s scathing summation of the decision to prorogue was light on precedent Law, and seemed in denial about several other instances of it being used – most notably by John Major, the hypocrite now ludicrously demanding that Boris Johnson apologise to the Queen.

This is a terrible precedent, and one day these eleven people will live to regret very bitterly their decision to side with the unelected State, indulge in conjecture, present it as fact, and side with an undemocratic bloc.

They are on the wrong side of history here, and whatever one’s views about Johnson might be, it is for the time being the duty of every genuine liberal democrat – including Nigel Farage – to give the Prime Minister their support in this, a time of deplorable anarchy. It is nothing less than the preface to corporatocracy, and the Supreme Court has foolishly awarded entrance to those who support the right of might.