You say you’re being misrepresented, but in fact it is you who’s misrepresenting what I am saying. What I said was clear. Whatever the Court decides, EUNoWA was framed so as to sideline Parliament, to let it duck its responsibility. As you say yourself 1/5
I said you should be ashamed to be providing intellectual cover to the process. I think so still. As for your claim that you’ve already refuted the points being made, it seems to me you just ignore questions you don’t have answers to. Like this. 2/5
Twitter may not be the best forum for legal debate. But this is not a joke, this is not a game. This is not a minor academic curiosity or footling legal technicality. It’s the future of the country that we are arguing about, the authority of Parliament & the rule of law. 3/5
It is Parliament’s failure to assert itself that’s led to the nonsense currently being perpetrated in the name of the will of the people. Every day another convention is broken: Evidence withheld from Parliament, embargoed in locked rooms. 4/5
Every day another Minister blames civil servants or lies to Parliament through their back teeth.
A democracy that has ceased to follow its own rules is no longer a democracy. And you know it. I’m calling you out, Prof. It’s your choice. Whose side are you on? 5/5
A democracy that has ceased to follow its own rules is no longer a democracy. And you know it. I’m calling you out, Prof. It’s your choice. Whose side are you on? 5/5
