Anti-Brexit lawyer argues that the referendum vote was not enough to trigger Article 50, and only a Parliament vote can start negotiations
AN ANTI-BREXIT lawyer today said that the referendum vote to leave the EU was not enough to trigger Article 50, and the UK can only start proceedings by a vote in the House of Commons.
In a slap in the face to the 17 million Brits who voted Leave, officials said only an act of Parliament can take away the rights linked to the EU that were set down in our membership.
Lord Pannick, acting for the millionaire Gina Miller, said that it was legally "impossible" to give the people the decision to leave the EU, and the Government had to ratify it.
He said that MPs rejected the chance to make the referendum legally binding months ago, and that the European Communities Act said "it can only be repealed if Parliament makes it especially clear in the later repealing legislation".
The news comes as a poll for YouGov showed that a whopping 48% of people said the Government should start Brexit proceedings without a Parliament vote, compared to 33% who wanted one first.
But earlier in the day, the court heard that Scotland and Northern Ireland can't stop the Government from triggering Article 50 and kicking off Brexit talks.
Lord Keen QC, the Scottish advocate general, and John Larkin, the Attorney General for Northern Ireland, both backed the Government's position and said that Nicola Sturgeon doesn't have the power to veto Brexit.
Lord Keen said today that devolution settlements did not give Scotland and Northern Ireland a say, and the UK parliament was sovereign on foreign affairs like the EU.
RELATED STORIES
The court also heard that Theresa May will HAVE to put down a bill in Parliament on Article 50 if the Government loses the Brexit appeal.
Government lawyer James Eadie admitted today that it would require "parliamentary legislation" for MPs to declare their support of starting the process of leaving the EU.
"The reason it requires primary legislation is (because) you are being asked to declare ... the exercise of the prerogative power to give Article 50 notice as the first step in the process," he said as the court entered day two of the case.
Mrs May is fighting to overturn the High Court ruling that she fears could end up delaying Brexit for months.
The judges’ decision last month gave MPs the right to authorise ‘Article 50’ talks to leave the EU.
The 11 judges will make a decision in the new year.
And the Government have attempted to stave off a rebellion on their backbenches today by agreeing to publish a Brexit plan.
But a last minute amendment from the Prime Minister said she WOULD put out some plans, but challenged MPs to back triggering Article 50 too.
The Prime Minister had repeatedly said that she will not show the plans for leaving the EU as to not harm upcoming Brexit talks.
Supporters on both sides of the debate took to the streets yesterday to voice their opinions.
Outside the court Brexit-supporters came out to defend the rights of the millions who voted to Leave the EU.
But others came out in support of the judges, arguing they had the right to implement the law as they saw fit.
Senior Leave campaigners backed the government’s stand last night, and warned the judges to butt out of the Brexit process.
Former Tory leader Iain Duncan Smith said: “The territory is constitutionally very grave indeed. This is not their business”.
Ministers have already drawn up a very short bill to be introduced to Parliament immediately if the Supreme Court refuses the government’s appeal.
The verdict is not expected until the New Year.
What is going on in the Article 50 Supreme Court case?
What’s it about?
THE hearing is all about who decides when and how Britain leaves the EU, the Government, Parliament or the people. The public voted for Brexit in the referendum but High Court judges ruled that MPs and lords should get a vote before the PM can trigger Article 50, which begins our exit. The Government is challenging that ruling.
Who’s involved?
THE original case was brought by an 11-strong group of Remainers led by financier Gina Miller. Her supporters raised £170,000 online to launch the hearing in October. Today’s appeal is a fight between lawyers for the Government, led by Attorney General Jeremy Wright, above, and the 11, who are represented by Dominic Chambers, QC.
What’s next?
THE judges are expected to deliver their decision in the New Year. If the appeal is allowed, the PM can start the Brexit process before the end of March as planned. But if not, it will throw her timetable into chaos. If MPs and peers start deliberately stalling the process, she may have no option but to call a snap General Election.
READ MORE:
- What is the Article 50 Appeal?
- Theresa May will still trigger Article 50 by end of March 2017 despite High Court defeat, says No10
- Brexit ‘could be delayed for FOUR YEARS by Remainers, warns QC
- Theresa May’s plan for leaving the EU in tatters after judges rule Parliament needs approval on Article 50 in Brexit legal challenge
- What is Article 50, why is it key to EU Brexit and will Parliament get to vote on it?
- Theresa May uses first Tory conference speech as PM to vow Britain will quit the EU by April 2019
- Conservatives could QUADRUPLE their majority in the Commons if Theresa May called a snap election