Britain’s future up in the air after Brexit ruling
Court decision calling for Parliament vote could force May to call an early election
May’s team have been all over the place when it comes to prioritising what is best for Britain, and it’s time they pull their socks up and start taking this seriously. Tim Farron
Britain’s plan for getting out of the European Union has been thrown into doubt after a senior court ruled that Prime Minister Theresa May will need to get Parliament’s approval before she acts.
The surprise decision introduced new uncertainty to a process already fraught with complication and threatened to derail May’s timetable of triggering Article 50, the neverbefore- used mechanism for exiting the EU, by the end of March.
It also boosted the odds that the Prime Minister, in office only since July, will have to call a fresh election next year to win the mandate she needs to launch EU divorce talks.
The decision drew immediate con- demnation from pro- Brexit politicians, who warned of an angry backlash from voters who favour leaving the 28- member bloc and had thought the matter was settled when they opted in a June referendum to get out.
Pro- EU leaders, meanwhile, showered the ruling with praise, and the pound jumped on hopes that Brexit might be postponed — or somehow avoided altogether.
A statement from May’s office at 10 Downing Street said it was “disappointed” by the ruling and would appeal to the Supreme Court. Justices are expected to take the case next month.
At the heart of the legal dispute is a clash between direct and representative democracy.
Although the British opted for Brexit by a margin of 52 per cent to 48 per cent, a large majority of MPs wanted Britain to stay in the EU. By giving Parliament a voice, the London- based High Court handed power back to a group that is sceptical or even hostile toward the very idea of Brexit.
Mujtaba Rahman, Europe director for the Eurasia Group political consultancy, said that lawmakers will be reluctant to incur voters’ wrath by going directly against their will and blocking exit plans.
Nonetheless, he described the court’s decision as “a severe setback for Theresa May’s Government”. If the Supreme Court upholds the judgment on appeal, Rahman wrote in an analysis yesterday, then pro- EU lawmakers could use the process to “seek to tie May’s negotiating hand”.
One option for May, in turn, could be to call a general election next year “to ask the public to endorse her negotiating goals — in effect, to use an election to override Parliament”, he added.
That would be a sharp break from the plan May has repeatedly outlined. She intends to trigger Brexit on her own, without Parliament’s input, and has ruled out an early election.
Yesterday’s decision instantly threw that plan into disarray. A threejudge panel representing England and Wales dismissed government lawyers’ arguments that May has the executive power necessary to launch Brexit talks on her own and sided with a group of plaintiffs who contended that Parliament must weigh in first.
“The most fundamental rule of the UK’s constitution is that Parliament is sovereign and can make and unmake any law it chooses,” the judges wrote.
“As an aspect of the sovereignty of Parliament it has been established for hundreds of years that the Crown — ie the Government of the day — cannot by exercise of prerogative powers override legislation enacted by Parliament.”
The court’s decision stunned British political and legal observers — just as the referendum outcome also defied predictions that voters would favour staying in the EU. Until yesterday, most analysts had predicted the court would side with the Government. The High Court in Northern Ireland had ruled as recently as last week that May’s Government could bypass Parliament.
“I now fear every attempt will be made to block or delay triggering Article 50,” tweeted Nigel Farage, the former UK Independence Party ( UKip) leader and a longtime Brexit champion. “They have no idea the level of public anger they will provoke.”
Pro- EU politicians, meanwhile, pressured May to share with Parliament her negotiating strategy — something she has steadfastly refused to do, insisting she will not give “a running commentary” on the talks.
“So far May’s team have been all over the place when it comes to prioritising what is best for Britain, and it’s time they pull their socks up and start taking this seriously,” Liberal Democrat leader Tim Farron said in a statement.
Pro- EU leaders also pointed to what they described as hypocrisy on the Brexit side. One prominent argument for getting out of the EU was to restore the sovereignty of Parliament. But in this case, anti- EU leaders want Parliament nowhere near a decision that carries huge ramifications for the country’s future.
The court ruling — assuming it is not overturned on appeal — sets up a crucial decision for the 650 representatives in Britain’s House of Commons. Members of the ruling Conservative Party were almost evenly split when the country voted on June 23 on whether Britain should stay in the EU or leave. But solid majorities of the other major parties in Parliament — including Labour, the Scottish National Party and the Liberal Democrats — all opposed an exit.
May, who took office in July following the resignation of David Cameron, has only a narrow majority in Parliament and could struggle to pass legislation authorising the start of Britain’s departure.