While constitutional conventions “are not enforced by the law courts”, this pretty much allows any unelected official to hold the role of Prime Minister.

We need to respect the law, including constitutional conventions.

  • AlolanVulpixOPM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    not saying it right or wrong, just that it’s happened before.

    Thanks for this piece of information. It’s still a dangerous precedent that is being set.

    • Bublboi
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      It happened before.

      It is actually quite common in the British Westminster tradition we follow.

      The earliest being William Pitt the Younger in 1783 who became prime minister at just 24 years old before securing a seat in Parliament. He won a by-election soon after assuming office.

      • AlolanVulpixOPM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Edit: the commenter changed their comment, so my response might not make sense

        I hope you aren’t suggesting we should infringe upon constitutional conventions, to limit any particular political party from coming into power…

        I don’t think that is healthy for the rule of law

        • Bublboi
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          14 hours ago

          I merely added an example that showed that convention exists longer than your original post implies.