More hope for the Remain Campaign

Other | Thursday 20th October 2016 | Phil

Gina Miller, a UK based investment manager and anti-Brexit campaigner, has made a legal challenge along with several other claimants including a hairdresser with both UK & EU citizenship and a group formed of UK ex-pats living across the EU. The main claim of the legal challenge holds that Article 50, the formal mechanism for leaving the European Union, cannot be activated without first receiving parliamentary approval. This fact is still yet to be determined by the courts.

The challenge itself arose as a reaction to the Government’s statement that it would not allow a parliamentary vote on actually triggering Article 50, bypassing parliament through use of the ancient royal prerogative of legal authority derived from the Crown. In essence, this would be ignoring the will of Parliament.

Although it is unlikely that there will be a second referendum on Brexit, one which would surely be a landslide victory for Remain in light of the economic chaos and commercial uncertainty that has arisen in the wake of the Leave vote, good news for Pro-EU MPs and Remain campaigners has emerged.

A leading QC stated to the High Court that it was without doubt that Parliament would have to ratify all the terms of any Brexit deal with Brussels. Following this statement, PM Theresa May’s spokesperson agreed that it was an “accurate reflection” of the Government’s interpretation of the meaning of the particular law. Following this news the value of the Pound rose, having lost almost 20% of its value since the EU Referendum.

The falling value of the Pound is something that is continuing to create immense commercial tension in the UK and having former Leave voters join the Remain campaign in vast numbers.

In the event of the UK actually leaving the European Union, Lord Kerr, the British diplomat who actually wrote Article 50, has stated that Theresa May should allow the British public to vote on the final terms of Brexit following the Conservative Party’s announcement that it was in full support of a ‘Hard Brexit’. Furthermore, with regards to the actual EU referendum, where both Brexit supporters and Remain campaigners were both hideously under-informed, it appears that back in October 2010 an inquiry by a House of Lords committee readily concluded that “because of the sovereignty of Parliament, referendums cannot be legally binding in the UK, and are therefore advisory”, a fact that was not readily bandied about in the build up to the referendum.

The Government has constantly asserted that it would be impossible to halt EU withdrawal after the Article 50 notice has been triggered early next year, but leading lawyers on EU law have argued there is nothing in Article 50 to prevent the UK withdrawing its declaration that it intends to leave the EU, if it chose to do so.

The High Court hearing continues and is likely to be taken to The Supreme Court due to the vast implications of the case.

Fingers crossed Remainers. Keep your eyes peeled.