Johnson ‘in contempt of court’ after sending two letters to EU – which he promised Scottish court not to

Two letters sent, with legally-required one unsigned and sent by diplomat

Boris Johnson will face contempt of court proceedings next week after sending not one, but two letters to the European Union tonight following yet another parliamentary defeat over the ‘Letwin amendment’.

The Letwin motion required him to do so in order to allow all legislation relating to his deal to be passed before the deal is formalised.

Johnson sent an unsigned letter to the EU via a diplomat to ask for an extension – while sending a signed letter telling the EU that to grant one would be ‘deeply corrosive’:

But during the recent Scottish court case brought against the government, Johnson ‘promised the court in his own name’ that he would not try to ‘frustrate’ the legislation requiring him to send the extension request by, for example – sending two letters with one contradicting the other. Doing so would constitute ‘contempt of court’, as lawyer Jolyon Maugham told Sky News earlier this month:

Maugham confirmed on social media this evening that the parties involved will bring contempt proceedings against Johnson if he failed in his legal obligations:

Johnson’s tactics are reminiscent of a lazy pupil trying to pull a ruse to get out of detention or a homework deadline – but contempt of court is punishable in Scotland by imprisonment for up to two years.

The SKWAWKBOX needs your support. This blog is provided free of charge but depends on the generosity of its readers to be viable. If you can afford to, please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here for a monthly donation via GoCardless. Thanks for your solidarity so this blog can keep bringing you information the Establishment would prefer you not to know about.

If you wish to reblog this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.

42 responses to “Johnson ‘in contempt of court’ after sending two letters to EU – which he promised Scottish court not to

  1. All senior politician’s careers tend to end in failure but Boris’s time at the top has been spectacularly short.

    Is it any wonder that even his own siblings have tried to distance themselves from their brother prior to him bringing shame on the office of Prime Minister..

    • Don’t bank on it, Steve. Shame has never hindered him before in elbowing his snout into the trough.

  2. He needs sacking yesterday. I think a lengthy spell in the tower dungeons would do him the world of good. Just lock him up and throw away the keys.

  3. Pingback: Johnson ‘in contempt of court’ after sending two letters to EU – which he promised Scottish court not to | The SKWAWKBOX | Tory Britain!·

  4. If I can be arsed I’ll have a look – see if he’s still in the running for shortest PM ever.
    Wonder how he’ll get out of jail on this one?
    Maybe he’ll let Scotland secede from the union.
    Then the next-shortest-ever Tory PM Del Boy Francois can tell the Scots to go whistle for Doris’s extradition.

    • I’ll save you the trouble, I’ve just looked it up myself – George Canning, whose sole term lasted 119 days from 12 April 1827 until his death on 8 August 1827.

      At least George Canning had what most people would consider a reasonable excuse. What will be Boris’s excuse for getting thrown out of office for letting his hubris get the better of him.

      • 🙂 I looked Canning up when Doris first took office – even posted about it I think – got the memory of a floating goldfish these days though.
        Wasn’t Canning’s ‘reasonable excuse’ that he was at room temperature at the time?
        Doris’s will be that he was innocent – “Ah wiz frrramed, M’luddie”…
        … outwitted by Lister’s toaster, aka the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster.

  5. “punishable in Scotland by imprisonment for up to two years.”

    What a result if this is the result of Johson’s arrogance! Bring it on.

  6. UCL attack on Academic Freedom

    JVL Introduction

    A further example of the troubling use of references to the IHRA definition of antisemitism being used to curb free speech has emerged at University College London.

    This “definition” has clearly contributed to a climate of suspicion and hostility and a quite unacceptable presumption that discussion of Noam Chomsky’s ideas is likely to be antisemitic…

    https://www.jewishvoiceforlabour.org.uk/article/ucl-attack-on-academic-freedom/

    PS I expect one or two of the usual suspects/posters will use the article as an excuse to castigate Labour for adopting the definition, whilst conveniently ignoring the relentless pounding by the MSM and the Jewish newspapers et al at the time and over a period of weeks until they finally succumbed under the pressure!

    • That should have read….. castigate Labour AGAIN

      As I say – and as Jonathan Cook has said – the pressure and the criticism and (faux) outrage was just relentless, AND, as widely reported:

      A total of 68 Rabbis, from all religious denominations, signed an open letter imploring Labour’s National Executive Committee to adopt the full IHRA definition.

      https://www.thejc.com/comment/analysis/what-is-the-ihra-definition-of-antisemitism-and-why-has-labour-outraged-jews-by-rejecting-it-1.467511

      • I think you must have posted it before steve (and probably in response to a comment I posted), because when the page came up, the recording was at 17 mins 25 secs. Anyway, I listened to it for several of minutes as of from the bit you suggested, and although I’m not sure what your point was about that particular bit, even just in the bit I listened to, Hodge says on a couple of occasions that “of course people should be free to criticise the Israeli Government, and in fact, emphasising the fact, she says “*I* want to be critical of the Israeli Government” (at around 9 mins).

        The point is: Has she ever done so?! I doubt it somehow.

    • The JVL posting on this is worth a read :

      “https://www.jewishvoiceforlabour.org.uk/article/ucl-attack-on-academic-freedom/

      All the warnings about the IHRA ‘definition’ have come to pass, and its true puirpose could not be plainer.

      It is now the advocates of the IHRA that are guilty of treating Jews as an undifferentiated collective whilst trying to create an immunity from exposure of wrong-doing by pretending a general taken-for-granted innocence as opposed to the common slur of a collective guilt.. A sort of twisted negative of the normal anti-semitic trope.

    • Allan Howard, you cannot nullify the response to your ‘white flag’ policy by preempting it!

      Of course Labour were wrong to adopt the IHRA definition. It was a trap with the words ‘Beware This Is a Trap’ written all over it but we were stupid enough to ignore all the warnings. The problem is we are scared stiff of the JLM and are terrified to upset them. It’s how Hodge, Watson et al can get away with such outrageous behaviour.

      • Jack, you are so disingenuous and such a fraud it beggars belief. But then YOU and your other user-names are paid to combat the truth with your falsehoods. You play on peoples emotions and pretend that the massive great elephant in the room doesn’t exist.

        Just recently you did a 180, and suddenly Labour responds to accusations every day by the saboteurs, but when I asked you to give a few examples, needless to say you didn’t. And when, as I have on more than a few occasions now, I asked you how the saboteurs/corporate MSM responded when the LP condemned the Panorama program, or what happened to Ken Livingstone each and every time he tried to explain that what he said was an historical fact, you of course declined to answer, because to do so would expose yourself for the fraud that you are. And just so as to prove it, I’ll ask you AGAIN. So what happened in each case Jack?

  7. The Scottish judges, like the DUP, will soon realise that Boris Johnson’s word means nothing . The man cannot be trusted on anything.

    • Smartboy.you know that Johnson will probably get a slap on the wrist for contempt of court.The Big Benn Bill like the kyle bill was just grandstanding.No constitution and no real democracy will ensure an exit.Will we learn from this,and have we ever learnt from being charged with contempt..I was held for half a day in a holding cell at the high court in the strand…..The tea was good and the rest after braving the
      London underground much appreciated..The only horrifying art was the QC…Barristers…..Solicitors acounts to be paid immediately after having paid a large up front fee.The only winners in this farce are the judiciary and Johnson.

      • arghh what to do?? lay down at end of Heathrow airport? lay in a ditch?
        or go for “contempt of whatever?
        or just “implode”??

  8. Skwawkbox hasn’t published the relevant letters here. But you can read both of them at @MehreenKhn on twitter

  9. In the judgement re Chris Williamson’s case against the Labour Party, and referring to the ‘second suspension’ on September 3rd, it says:

    Sending an email to a member of the public who had complained to you about your criticisms of Margaret Hodge MP that referred her to a video on YouTube. The video described Ms Hodge as ‘cheapening and exploiting the memory of Jewish suffering’; ‘trivialising the memory of the Holocaust’; and requesting that she ‘get the hell out of the Labour Party’…

    As smartboy pointed out in a post at the time, whilst Hodge can call Jeremy a fucking anti-semite to his face without any come-back, Chris refers someone to a youtube video (by a well-known Jewish critic of the ‘anti-semitism’ smear campaign), and this is held against him. BUT, and THIS is my point, given that Chris referred the person in question to the video in an email, either the person in question then complained to the LP about it, OR, his email account has been hacked, which it no doubt is anyway. And if it was the former, I have little doubt that it was a set-up. I mean I have no idea when the person concerned contacted Chris (by email I assume) OR when Chris has been critical of Margaret Hodge OR how the person concerned got to hear about it OR whether Chris had received any other emails (or whatever) regarding his criticism of Hodge or whether it was just the one, but I have little doubt – if it WAS indeed the person that contacted him that reported him – that it was a fishing expedition.

    Anyway, ponder the following, from a bit further on in the judgement:

    The evidence before me is that some of the allegations set out in the letter of 3 September arose from complaints made to the Labour Party. In any event, the allegations are largely in respect of incidents alleged to have occurred after the date of the original disciplinary allegations. Some allegations predate the original case but were not brought to the Party’s attention until later.

    Hmm

    The 19 page judgement is at the end of the following EI article if you haven’t read it yet (you have to scroll through it):

    https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/asa-winstanley/court-overturns-labour-re-suspension-left-wing-mp

    • Afterthought: Despite what I said about there being no come-back on Hodge, it wasn’t quite that simple, and there was reams of criticism of the LP at the time for their intention to take disciplinary action against her. Check out the comments as well in the following article, which ALSO brings up the IHRA definition etc:

      https://jewishnews.timesofisrael.com/margaret-hodge-mp-to-face-disciplinary-action-for-calling-corbyn-an-anti-semite/

      • LP acceptance of the IHRA definition is as puzzling as it is confusing. A self inflicted wound that has become infected & cancerous & needs cauterising. Most allegations of AS against LP members are ‘true’ by IHRA definition – as any criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic. JC needs to get up off his knees & deal with the cancer & stop apologising……….the school bully is never stopped by appeasement as allegations of anti-Semitism is the stick that keeps beating JC & the gift that keeps giving MSM attacks on the LP.

      • Yeah, yeah, yeah, Steve, another Blairite pile of unowot trying to hoodwink and mislead people. Nothing to do with the power of the media then!

        You r-soles are as despicable as the fascist media!

      • Steve Richards, what you have to realise is that Allan Howard, otherwise known as White Flag Man is obsessed against anyone refuting the A/S allegations. He believes the best solution is to stand there and let the attackers chuck bricks at you.

        Attempts to fight back in his opinion are futile, therefore appeasement, capitulation and flying the white flag are his answers.

        Doesn’t appear to be working too well does it?

  10. The problem with the ‘orgasms’ that this website regularly has over Brexit court cases, the ‘rule of law’ and the contemporary prevalence of judicial power in politics, is that the exact same method would be used in the (increasingly-unlikely) scenario that a Corbyn-led Labour government comes into office. Don’t believe for one second that the Brexit phenomenon of the litigation-hungry well-to-do would vanish. That class would in all likelihood intensify its use of the courts to protect its wealth and class position until Labour drops all notions of social equality. The Left should aim to reduce the power of the judges – or get hoist by its own petard.

    • Well – there’s a novel idea! Although, I think a few dictators quite liked it.

      At least the Lexitories are honest about their concept of ‘democracy’ = populist majoritarianism at best (and while it suits) and f. the rest. Very much an emergent strand of the monarchical/aristocratic concept of governance.

  11. Given the seriousness of this particular case of contempt of court and my suspicion that Johnson is incapable of showing remorse, never mind experiencing it, no matter what the circumstances I would think that the two year jail sentence has to be considered both likely and thoroughly well deserved.

    • Thomas…do you really expect anything other than bluster from the establishment appointed anointed ?

  12. Ps Thomas….We could be in danger of another saint Boris even if he gets a reprimand.Everyone loves a martyr to the cause

  13. Only one thing de piffle could’ve done worse than sending an unsigned letter, and that’d have been sending one signed: ‘Boris Johnson *VC’. We know that like rees-smog, he’s fond of his latin.

    *VC = Vi Coactus. Having been coerced.

    I’ll bet the idea had crossed his mind, until someone told him that far from showing him to be acting like a VC recipient, it’d have shown him up to be the invertebrate imbecile with delusions of grandeur that he really is.

    • That said, he may still try as much when the court rules against him – again.

      He’s really not that clever, is de piffle. 🙄

  14. Pingback: Johnson ‘in contempt of court’ after sending two letters to EU – which he promised Scottish court not to | sdbast·

  15. Corbyn- ever the statesman. Cool, calm, rational. (Despite being) – Smeared by the overwhelming majority of the mainstream media and establishment. Daily. For 4 years. Has seen off…

    2 Tory PMs who mocked him incessantly, and who demonstrably damaged this country and its people- especially the less well-off.

    And Johnson. Known liar. Lies to queen. Illegally prorogues parliament. Racist. Garden bridge squandering- foreign relation damaging cheat. Supported by the Queen, the BBC and it’s chief cheerleader, Laura Kuenssberg.

    Want to know what’s wrong with our society, our ‘Broken Britain’ as dodgy dave used to sound-byte it? Well you don’t have to look far.

  16. Childish behaviour from an Etonion spoilt brat, trying to wriggle round the law.
    “Lock him up!”

  17. Oh dear what can the matter be?
    Boris Johnson’s locked in his strategy.

Leave a Reply