In a major victory for Remain campaigners and those alarmed by the British government’s efforts to singlehandedly control the country’s exit from the European Union (EU), the High Court ruled that Brexit could not be triggered without a parliamentary vote.
The court rejected government arguments that clauses in a piece of legislation from 1972 gave it the power to act without parliamentary approval when it came to triggering Article 50, which gives EU member-states a two-year period to withdraw. The government’s argument was “contrary to the fundamental constitutional principles of the sovereignty of Parliament” and the government’s lack of entitlement to use its prerogative powers to change domestic law, the court said on Thursday.
The developments are the latest dramatic twist in the political drama that has enveloped the United Kingdom since the surprise vote in favour of leaving the EU in June.
ADVERTISEMENT
It is too early to tell the long implications of the ruling: the government has announced it will appeal the decision to the Supreme Court, with a hearing likely to take place in early December at the earliest.
Should the government be forced to seek parliamentary approval it is unlikely that MPs would vote against Article 50, despite comments from former UKIP leader Nigel Farage that “a betrayal may be near at hand.” The Conservatives are likely to rally around the Prime Minister. On the Labour side though there are many Labour MPs who campaigned against leaving, the clear Brexit vote in many of their constituencies leaves them unlikely to vote against what is seen as the clear will of the people. Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn said that the party respected “the decision of the British people to leave the European Union. This ruling underlines the need for the government to bring its negotiating terms to parliament.”
ADVERTISEMENT
May be challenging to PM
Where the ruling is likely to have a decisive impact is on the shape and scope of Brexit, making it far more likely that parliament will require the government to opt for a softer version, involving some form of free market access or customs union membership. This would prove a challenge to Prime Minister Theresa May as pushing for those positions would make it far harder, if not impossible, for her to further her tougher immigration agenda.
It is also likely to delay the government’s hope for a rapid Brexit. Even setting aside the Supreme Court hearing, any parliamentary acceptance of the need to trigger Article 50 is likely to be riddled with caveats and riders, shaping the direction of Brexit. There is much anger even with the Conservative party over the government’s approach to Brexit and even pro-leave MPs, such as Stephen Philips, have criticized its “undemocratic” approach.
Pro-Remains dominate House
While the House of Lords would be highly unlikely to trigger a constitutional crisis by voting against Article 50, the House is vehemently pro-Remain and is likely to support the need for strong conditions.