Spotlight: Historic Brexit case to be heard by Britain's supreme court

The most important case in a generation before the supreme court in Britain will begin in London Monday morning.

The decision by the supreme court will have a major implication for the British constitution over who wields power, parliament or the British government, currently led by Prime Minister Theresa May.

For the first time in its history, all 11 judges will hear the case which has aroused worldwide interest. The hearing is expected to last four days and the final decision will be made early January.

The supreme court is expected to rule whether parliament has the authority to trigger Britain's exit from the European Union (EU).

May continues to insist that under the centuries old principle of the Royal Prerogative her government has the power to start the process of leaving the EU following the June 23 referendum vote which backed Brexit.

She has vowed to start the process by the end of next March, starting a two-year period of talks with Brussels about Britain's future relationship with the EU.

Many of the politicians in both the House of Commons and the House of Lords have maintained that they, and not May's government, should be in the driving seat and be involved in the Brexit process.

At the heart of the wrangle is what kind of deal would be brokered between Westminster and Brussels. If Britain leaves with a so-called Hard Brexit, it would mean the door closing on access to the single market with its potential 400 million-plus customers, one of the world's biggest trading blocs. Brussels insists that allowing post-Brexit Britain to have access to the single market goes hand-in-hand with free movement of all EU citizens.

Growing immigration into Britain has been cited as a key reason for many people voting in June to quit the EU.

Just a few days ago the Office for National Statistics in London reported that net migration into Britain this year is at an all time high.

The figures revealed immigration into Britain in the year ending June 2016 was 650,000, its highest ever level. When the numbers leaving are taken into account it gave a net migration of 335,000 which included 189,000 EU citizens.

May has so far refused to show her hand, saying discussing a potential deal before formal talks start could risk Britain ending up with a poor deal.

The prime minister and her Brexit team of ministers also fear that if the exit process is handed to parliament there is a risk some politicians will attempt to block the will of the public who voted by a 52-48 margin to leave Europe.

The battleground, in the event, was not laid by politicians, but by a group of individuals who took the matter to the High Court in a legal bid to force May's government to seek parliamentary approval for the Brexit process.

In what came as a bombshell to the government, the three High Court judges agreed with the individuals who brought the case, led by wealthy British businesswoman Gina Miller.

Miller said after her court victory: "It was the right decision because we were dealing with the sovereignty of parliament."

Britain's International Trade Secretary Liam Fox, one of the so-called "Three Brexiteers", expressed disappointment at the result. He said: "The country voted to leave the EU in a referendum approved by an Act of Parliament. The government is determined to respect the result of the referendum."

Nigel Forage, former leader of UKIP, the political party set up 23 years ago to campaign for Britain's exit from the EU, has commented: "I worry that a betrayal may be at hand. I fear that every attempt will be made to block or delay the triggering of Article 50. If this is so they have no idea of the level of public anger they will provoke."

Intensive squabbles, mainly through the columns of newspapers and on broadcast media, have dominated the headlines over the weekend ahead of the historic court case.

But when the hearing starts Monday, in what is the only court in Britain to allow in the cameras, it will be a somber event, with days of detailed and intensive legal submissions by both sides.

Day One will be taken up entirely or mostly by a legal submission by the government's Attorney General Jeremy Wright. As well as being the government's top legal officer, 44-year-old Wright is a barrister and a Conservative member of parliament (MP) for Kenilworth and Southam in Warwickshire. As a leading barrister of law, Wright decided to fight the case himself. After Wright has finished his legal presentation, the judges will hear from the Advocate General for Scotland and the Attorney General for Northern Ireland.

It will be mid-afternoon Tuesday, or even Wednesday before Gina Miller's legal team put their case forward that the decision of the High Court should be confirmed. Her father was the attorney general of Guyana, a former British colony in South America.

After Miller's lawyers have finished, lawyers for the second lead person in the legal battle, hairdresser Deir Dos Santos, aged 37, will put forward their case, again calling for the earlier decision to be upheld. Dos Santos, who describes himself as "just an ordinary guy" was born in Brazil but is now a British citizen. His lawyers have said: "If his rights are going to be taken away, he wants it done in a proper and lawful manner."

On Wednesday and into Thursday when the case finished, other legal submissions will be made, including legal arguments put forward by the Scottish. Enditem