Parliament is back in session in the United Kingdom. But the nation’s embattled prime minister seems as determined as ever to push through Brexit.

If you thought that the British prime minister might show some remorse, even apologise, for unlawfully advising Queen Elizabeth II to suspend Parliament for five weeks, you would be wrong.

With leaders of all opposition parties demanding the resignation of Boris Johnson and his principal advisers, 10 Downing Street orchestrated a determined push-back. They claimed that Johnson and his team were on the side of the people who want to see the result of the 2016 referendum delivered, and that Parliament is frustrating Brexit.

Boris Johnson casually brushed aside the unanimous ruling of 11 judges of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom that the prorogation of Parliament is null and void. He vowed to continue his quest to take Britain out of the European Union “do or die, without or without a deal, on October 31.”

The prime minister was forced to make an early return to London from the US where he had attended the United Nations General Assembly in New York and meetings with president Donald Trump. He faced tough questioning in the House of Commons, with many MPs doubting his claim that the prorogation was based on the need to prepare for a new Queens Speech rather than, as the Supreme Court found, to limit MPs’ ability to debate Brexit.

The Supreme Court’s decision, overturning a previous judgment by the English High Court, does far more than restore MPs so that they may hold government to account. It hands down the most important constitutional law decision in my lifetime, taking away power from the executive and restoring it to Parliament. The impact of what is in effect new law is that a government of any persuasion will only be able to suspend Parliament with the consent of MPs.

“The decision to advise Her Majesty to prorogue Parliament was unlawful because it had the effect of frustrating or preventing the ability of Parliament to carry out its constitutional functions without reasonable justification,” said the court’s president, Lady Hale, carefully reading a long judgement.

On Tuesday the House of Commons resumed under the control of Speaker John Berkow. The session started with the government’s top legal officer, attorney-general Geoffrey Cox, defending his advice that prorogation was legal, but refusing to provide any details, claiming “lawyer’s privilege.”

Then it turned ugly. As readers will recall, MPs have twice rejected Boris Johnson’s call for an early general election prior to his designated October 31 Brexit date, because they do not trust him not delay the election once Parliament is dissolved. If the election took place after 31 October, Britain would by default leave the EU without a deal, despite MPs’ overwhelming opposition.

Cox started by calmly insisting that the government would respect the Supreme Court’s decision, but suddenly turned up the decibels. In what many observers saw as confected anger, he declared Parliament “a disgrace.” To jeers and cheers from the competing tribes in the chamber, he told members there would be a third attempt to call an election. Like a cornered king brown, he attacked MPs with venom.

“They don’t like to hear it. They don’t like the truth. Twice they have been asked to let the electorate decide whether they should be allowed to sit in their seats. This Parliament is dead.” He accused MPs of being too cowardly to call a motion of no confidence and asserted that they have “no moral right to sit on these green benches.”

Johnson arrived in the House two hours later than scheduled, and pursued the same line of argument. He expressed his disagreement with the Supreme Court decision, saying he thought they should keep out of politics.

Johnson said that Labour was refusing to support his demands for a general election out of “sheer selfishness and political cowardice”, and asked: “Does he [Jeremy Corbyn] even want to be prime minister anymore?” Parliament, he said, was paralysed, as MPs “dithered, delayed and keep sabotaging our efforts to deliver Brexit”. And so it went on.

The tribalism in Britain continues. Meanwhile, Johnson is ensnared in yet another scandal. Both government public servants and the office of London’s mayor confirmed they are investigating revelations by The Sunday Times that Jennifer Arcuri, a former model, business woman and close friend of Johnson, received public funds of more than £126,000 for her company. She had joined Mr Johnson’s campaign to be re-elected mayor of London while she was at university in the capital.

Next week is the Conservatives’ party conference in Manchester but the Commons will also be sitting, making it difficult for Johnson and his loyalists to be in both places at the same time. The prime minister will also need to be in Brussels trying to conclude the elusive deal he still says he wants. Something will have to give.

Colin Chapman is a writer, broadcaster and public speaker, who specialises in geopolitics, international economics, and global media issues. He is a former president of AIIA NSW and was appointed a fellow of the AIIA in 2017.