Boris Johnson’s resignation as British Prime Minister spawned constitutional misunderstanding in Britain about what you can and cannot do in your job while you wait to be replaced. On September 5, a new Conservative leader will take his place. But the workers’ party decided to launch this Wednesday a vote of confidence in the House of Commons, which can expel Boris of his office, “in the name of national interest”.

At the same time, the process of choosing the new leader of the Tories began. The question is whether the vote of confidence will provoke immediate general elections or a new conservative will come to Downing St in the meantime, because the Tory party still retains most of it in the House of Commons.

like Great Britain it has no written constitution but in the minutes, the interpretation of the role of the resigned prime minister is not easy. Queen Elizabeth has a duty to accept her resignation and ultimately dissolve Parliament. But the House of Windsor is desperate for the 90-year-old ruler there is no need to participate in the monumental political crisis that hit your country in the jubilee year. They want it to be based on Lascelle’s Principles.

The doctor Holger Hestermeyer He is co-director of the Center for International Governance and Dispute Resolution (CIGAD) and professor of international and European law at King’s College London, one of the most respected institutions in the country. He is one of the most consulted specialists in British and European constitutional law, is a consultant to the European Committee of the House of Lords and has been a “referendum” in the British Supreme Court of Justice.

With Clarione discussed Boris Johnson’s future as prime minister, which will succeed him if there is a vote of confidence, the role of the queen in this political crisis and the possibilities of Britain’s return to the European Union, in the face of the global crisis and the problems that led to Brexit. So was the dialogue.

– Do you think Britain is going through a constitutional crisis? And why?

-I believe, to begin with, that he is certainly going through a political crisis. There is a very controversial debate as to whether or not this is a constitutional crisis. There is a key point and it is that the Constitution of the United Kingdom is different from the Constitution of the vast majority of countries, Argentina, the United States, Germany. Because it is a Constitution that stands out in two respects: it is not written, but is based on the rules of history. And the second part, those rules are generally not justifiable. So it is very difficult to know if we are really already in a constitutional crisis.

-Boris Johnson wants to remain Prime Minister until the next election. Do you think you are achieving your goal?

Ultimately it is a political question. What is happening is that he has withdrawn from the leadership of the party and with that when they elect a new leader, he no longer has the right to be a leader. For that interval we are experiencing now, in theory it can remain. It depends on whether the ministers are appointed or not. If the ministers stay with him, he can stay for now until there is a new leader.

Is an interim minister constitutional?

-But is it constitutional, for example, for a prime minister to replace Boris Johnson until the next leader arrives?

-It is also constitutional. Boris Johnson may stay. But it is also possible that he will leave. At that time, at least this is the majority opinion, it would be Dominic Raab, the deputy prime minister, who will be the hereditary prime minister.

-If there is a Labor-sponsored vote of confidence tomorrow, conservatism loses, are immediate general elections called? Or how long do the elections take? And meanwhile Boris Johnson remains until the election of the new government or who takes over?

I think there is a key point there. It is not mandatory that there be general elections if there is a vote of confidence. The rules in this regard have changed. The rules were set by law, but that law no longer exists.

So we went back to the previous constitutional rules. And there The Crown can also deny the dissolution of Parliament, and it seems that this is likely. Yes, it is possible to form a government that has a majority and since conservatives theoretically have a large majority in Parliament, it is not excluded that there will be no general elections.

-A resigned prime minister like Boris Johnson, are his powers constitutionally limited? Can you, for example, change tax laws, lower taxes, generate subsidies without consulting Parliament? And what role do public officials play in this interregnum of lack of control?

-The first thing to change the laws is that Parliament is needed and everything must be consulted, any Prime Minister must do so. In theory, he is Prime Minister. But he has already said that he will not vote and will not implement new policies.

How it will be done in practice will be very difficult. But I agree that public service will play a key role in saying that we see this as a new policy. So we’ll tell you we can’t do that.

The role of Queen Elizabeth

-And another of Boris’ threats in those days was to ask if he wanted the dissolution of Parliament. And it is a request that you must ask Queen Elizabeth. Why didn’t Boris inform the queen about her resignation? Do you still have the possibility to ask for the dissolution of Parliament or not?

– Let us return to the subject of the flexible rules of the British Constitution. In theory it is the queen who has the power of dissolution and in theory it is the power of the queen. But generally the queen does not act in a political way. There are now new Princes of Lascelle, named after a Queen’s secretary who published a letter in 1930, explaining when the Queen will deny a dissolution. You there you said that you will deny a dissolution on three conditions. If the Parliament can do its job, if a dissolution is in danger for the national economy and if the Crown can find a Prime Minister, who can rule by majority. In these cases there will be no dissolution.

I believe that what Boris Johnson said actually had no interest in asking for dissolution because he now has or had a large majority. What he wanted to do was scare the young parliamentarians, who will lose their jobs and therefore impose their will. So, in theory, he could still ask for a dissolution. But first, I don’t think he will. And second, I don’t think The Crown will.

-Do you think the Queen doesn’t want to get involved?

He absolutely doesn’t want to get involved. There was a report in the Times that the civil service chief has already explained the rules and that The Crown was extremely happy that those rules had been explained by the civil service. So the Crown didn’t have to get involved and it was already pretty clear there wasn’t going to be a breakup.

Will Britain return to Europe?

-Lord Michael Helseltine said that “If Boris goes, Brexit goes”. Is there a chance for Britain to somehow return to the European Union? What do you think?

-Not in the next few years, not in the near future. The procedure is now the procedure of the treaty, Article 49, which applies to any European state wishing to join the European Union. So all the exceptions the UK had in the past, for example the non-use of the euro, worked again. And another thing is politics.

The first thing: in the UK there is no majority to re-enter. And if there is a majority in the 27 capitals of the European Union, there is no will to let the UK in, which does not want a large majority to return. Another decision, as the Brexit decision has been made, 52% -48%, there is no willingness to let the UK in on that basis. It should be a consensus of the population and I don’t see it in the near future.

-Do you think Britain can enter or enter the single European market and accept the free movement of people?

Economically it would be favorable to the UK. There are two economic aspects of how the European Union is formed in the economy. One is the customs union and the other is the single market.

The single market has four freedoms: the freedom to travel even for those who work, and the EFTA countries. Those countries are part of the single market and when Brexit happened there was a lot of discussion as to whether this would not have been an option for the UK. But that option implies that the UK would have to follow many EU rules, without actually being at the decision table, voting for those laws.

Norway said: “Well, we do it for the economy and we should actually implement the European rules, because we are a country that is not that big and we don’t have many important economic sectors but we have oil.” But for the UK, I don’t think that’s an option. I believe that the only option would really be to re-enter and that – as I have already said – I do not see it in the near future.

Paris, correspondent

ap