Boris Johnson finally steps down as UK PM after mass resignations

London, July 7: Boris Johnson resigned on Thursday as leader of Britain's Conservative party, paving the way for the selection of a new prime minister after dozens of ministers quit his scandal-hit government.

"It is clearly the will of the parliamentary Conservative party that there should be a new leader of that party, and therefore a new prime minister," Johnson said outside 10 Downing Street.

Johnson, 58, announced that he would step down after a slew of resignations from his top team in protest at his leadership but would stay on as prime minister until a replacement is found.

The timetable for a Tory leadership race will be announced next week, he said, after three tumultuous years in office defined by Brexit, the Covid pandemic and non-stop controversy over his reputation for mendacity.

The leadership election will take place over the summer and the victor will replace Johnson by the party's annual conference in early October, the BBC and others reported.

He said he was "sad... to be giving up the best job in the world" and justified fighting on in the final hours to deliver the mandate he won in a general election in December 2019.

In the frenzied hours building up to Johnson's announcement, opposition Labour leader Keir Starmer had welcomed his impending departure.

But Starmer said "a proper change of government" was needed and demanded a no-confidence vote in parliament, potentially triggering a general election, rather than Johnson "clinging on for months and months".

Even while eyeing the exit, Johnson on Thursday sought to steady the ship with several appointments to replace the departed cabinet members.

They included Greg Clark, an arch "remainer" opposed to Britain's divorce from the European Union, which Johnson had championed.

Johnson had been clinging on to power despite a wave of more than 50 government resignations, expressing defiance late Wednesday.

But Thursday's departure of education minister Michelle Donelan and a plea to quit from finance minister Nadhim Zahawi, only in their jobs for two days, appeared to tip the balance along with warnings of a new no-confidence vote by Tory MPs.

Defence minister Ben Wallace and Rishi Sunak, whose departure as finance minister on Tuesday sparked the exodus, were among the early frontrunners to succeed Johnson, according to a YouGov survey of Conservative party members.

Those members will decide the new leader once Tory MPs have whittled down the contenders to a final two.

Northern Ireland minister Brandon Lewis kicked off Thursday's frenzied events, becoming the fourth cabinet minister to resign and writing that Johnson was "past the point of no return".

Johnson late on Wednesday defiantly responded to calls from his loyalists and cabinet colleagues to step down by sacking minister Michael Gove, with a Downing Street source telling media that his former Brexit top ally was a "snake".

The Sun newspaper said Johnson had told colleagues they would have to "dip (their) hands in blood" to push him out of office, but Thursday's events forced his hand.

The shock resignations of Sunak and Health Secretary Sajid Javid late Tuesday set off a chain of others.

They quit after Johnson apologised for his February appointment of senior Conservative MP Chris Pincher as deputy chief whip.

Pincher was forced to step down following accusations he drunkenly groped two men.

Days of shifting explanations followed the resignation, before Downing Street finally conceded that Johnson had known about Pincher's behaviour as far back as 2019.

Tory critics said the Pincher affair had tipped many over the edge, angry at having to defend what they saw as more lies by Johnson over his appointment of what Starmer called a "sexual predator".

Johnson was confronted by members of his cabinet on Wednesday when he returned to Downing Street from a lengthy grilling by a parliamentary committee.

The delegation was said to include hardline interior minister Priti Patel.

Attorney General Suella Braverman told ITV that while she would not resign, "the balance has tipped now in favour of saying... it's time to go".

She became the first Tory to say she would stand in a leadership contest but is a rank outsider according to bookmakers.

A culture of scandal has dogged Johnson for months, including lockdown-breaking parties in Downing Street.

The prime minister, who received a police fine for the Covid lockdown-breaking "Partygate" affair, faces a parliamentary probe into whether he lied to MPs about the revelations.

He only narrowly survived a no-confidence vote among Conservative MPs a month ago, which ordinarily would mean he could not be challenged again for another year.

But the influential "1922 Committee" of non-ministerial Tory MPs is reportedly seeking to change the rules, with its executive committee planning to elect a fresh line-up of members next week.

In parliament on Wednesday, Johnson vowed to carry on, insisting the country needed "stable government".

But addressing MPs, Javid urged other ministers to resign.

"The problem starts at the top, and I believe that is not going to change," he told a hushed House of Commons.

Cries of "bye, Boris" echoed around the chamber at the end of his speech.

Comments

Add new comment

Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.

‘Officials to pay from salary’: Supreme Court issues guidelines on ‘bulldozer justice’

News Network

November 13,2024

New Delhi: The Supreme Court took a firm stance on ‘bulldozer justice’ today, affirming that the Executive cannot bypass the Judiciary and that the legal process must not prejudge the guilt of an accused. In a significant judgment, the bench led by Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan set new guidelines for demolition practices, responding to petitions challenging the controversial bulldozer actions taken against individuals accused of crimes.

The rise of this practice, termed 'bulldozer justice,' has seen authorities in various states demolish what they claim to be illegal structures belonging to accused individuals. However, multiple petitions questioned the legality and fairness of this approach, bringing the matter before the court.

Justice Gavai highlighted that owning a home is a cherished goal for many families, and an essential question was whether the Executive should have the authority to strip individuals of their shelter. “In a democracy, the rule of law protects citizens from arbitrary actions by the state. The criminal justice system must not assume guilt,” stated the bench, underscoring that due process is a fundamental right under the Constitution.

On the principle of separation of powers, the bench reinforced that the Judiciary alone holds adjudicatory powers and that the Executive cannot overstep these boundaries. Justice Gavai remarked, “When the state demolishes a home purely because its resident is accused of a crime, it violates the doctrine of separation of powers.”

The court issued a strong warning about accountability, stating that public officials who misuse their power or act arbitrarily must face consequences. Justice Gavai observed that selectively demolishing one property while ignoring similar cases suggests that the aim might be to penalize rather than enforce legality. “For most citizens, a house is the product of years of labor and dreams. Taking it away must be an action of last resort, thoroughly justified,” he said.

In its directives under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court established new demolition guidelines. These include:

Mandatory Show-Cause Notice: No demolition should occur without first issuing a show-cause notice. The person served has a minimum of 15 days or the duration stated in local laws to respond.

Transparency of Notice Content: The notice must include specifics about the alleged unauthorized construction, the nature of the violation, and the rationale for demolition.

Hearing and Final Order: Authorities are required to hear the response of the affected individual before issuing a final order. The homeowner will have 15 days to address the issue, with demolition proceeding only if no stay order is obtained from an appellate authority.

Contempt Proceedings: Any breach of these guidelines would lead to contempt proceedings. Officials who disregard these norms will be personally accountable for restitution, with costs deducted from their salaries.

Additionally, the court mandated that all municipal bodies establish digital portals within three months, displaying show-cause notices and final orders on unauthorized structures to ensure public transparency and accountability.

Comments