Thank you for a very lucid and pithy summary of the legal standing concerning the power negotiation to invoke Art 50. Some questions arise. What happened to the democratic right of the people’s referendum for Brexit and who wield the ultimate power behind the Parliament authority? The case of invoking Art 50 throws much light on the apparent ambiguity in the British constitution.
Editors’ note: In this blog post the distinguished New Zealand jurist, Professor Philip Joseph, reflects upon the fall-out from the referendum vote on 23 June. The post is a precis of a longer paper which can be read here.
An uneasy truth: Brexit was borne out of sheer political miscalculation and an unshakable belief that the Remain vote would prevail. David Cameron gambled and lost. He will be remembered as the Prime Minister who took Britain out of Europe. Then, the reality dawned: there was no contingency plan should the unthinkable happen. It was the Cameron Government’s considered view not to instruct its key ministries to plan for the possibility of a Leave victory. This was astonishing politics. The House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee termed the lack of forward planning “gross negligence”. The fallout precipitated an immediate leadership vacuum: Cameron resigned as Prime Minister, Boris Johnson quit the…
View original post 333 more words
eanpengmas292 