I make no apology for lifting Jon Danzig's Facebook post in its entirety below. It sets out the legal hurdles that the government is facing, quite apart from the withdrawal negotiations and the withdrawal bill's passage through parliament. Davis has already described Brexit as the most complex task any government has undertaken since the Second World War and even likened it to the moon landings. This doesn't do it justice. Brexit is like doing both at the same time as playing three dimensional chess while the nation is split down the middle on the objective you are trying to reach.
This is Jon Danzig's post:
It's just over 6 months since Theresa May sent her "Brexit means Brexit" letter to President Donald Tusk, purporting to give notice of the UK's intention to exit the European Union, and already there are six legal challenges in the pipeline, writes our Guest Writer for Today, Richard Bird.
That's an average of one legal challenge per month.
The results of legal actions may not perhaps be the ultimate cause of a reversal of Brexit; that will be political.
But our democratic system is based upon the rule of law, and if the rule of law is abused, our democracy is devalued and threatened.
By the same token, if the law is not enforced, it has no power.
The Gina Miller et al case ensured that the government follow the rule of law. But since then, the government has continued to flagrantly disregard the law and the proper role of Parliament.
As a result these latest legal challenges have been launched:
► 1. ACTION FOR EXPAT VOTERS
Challenging the validity of the referendum in EU courts, due to the lack of votes given to millions of UK residents abroad, and hence the validity of the entire Brexit process. Led by Action for Europe, this case may go to the Court of Justice of the EU.
Links: gofundme.com/action-for-expat-votes
actionforeurope.org.uk
► 2. DUP ALLEGED BRIBE
A legal action by Northern Ireland Green Party politician Ceiran McClean alleging that the £1billion promised to the DUP by Theresa May to buy votes is illegal.
Link: crowdjustice.com/case/challenge-dup-deal/
► 3. DUP ALLEGED BRIBE
An action is planned which alleges criminal misconduct by Prime Minister, Theresa May, regarding the 'deal' she made with the DUP.
Link: DUPbribe.org.uk
► 4. ALLEGED CRIMINAL MISCONDUCT IN PUBLIC OFFICE
Allegations of criminal conduct by Theresa May and her ministers have been laid and a 4200 signature letter sent to the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, led by the Wolchover Action Group. A case file had been opened in the Met.
Link: stopbrexitmisconduct.org.uk
► 5. FIFTY SECRET STUDIES
Good Law Project led by Jolyon Maugham demanding disclosure of the 50 secret Brexit Impact studies, which the government has refused to make public.
Link: crowdjustice.com/case/secretbrexitstudies/
► 6. ARTICLE 50 NON-VALIDITY
A legal challenge launched in the name of Liz Webster and supported by A C Grayling claims that the Article 50 Notice is invalid and therefore there is no clock ticking towards 29 March 2019, and the current negotiations have no legal basis.
If this is upheld, Theresa May would have to go to Parliament for an Act to confirm a decision in order to ratify the Article 50 Notice – and perhaps even retrospectively ratify it. Whether she should be able to get such a Bill passed is very uncertain.
The threat of a ruling in 3 or 4 months time will be a constant worry for the government to consider – and lose sleep over.
Link: crowdjustice.com/case/a50-chall-her-e50/
► WHAT NEXT?
It will take some time for these actions to proceed through the courts and for the results to have an impact. Meanwhile, political and practical events continue to develop.
Negotiations with the EU are proceeding slowly if at all. The UK still appears to be unsure what it actually wants, 18 months after the referendum.
Labour and sensible Tories both now seem to favour a Soft Brexit with close access to the single market and free tariffs. The soft deal offered by the EU would be close to a Norwegian or Swiss model.
Unfortunately for the Brexiters, that will most likely entail acceptance of Free Movement of People and possibly even of Schengen, ECJ jurisdiction, and certainly the loss of the rebate secured by Margaret Thatcher.
In which case the question which will be raised is : what is the point of it?
If Soft Brexit is pointless, the only other option is No Brexit.
Legal and political opinion is that a cancellation of the Article 50 Notice would be accepted by the 27. To do so in good time before March 2019 would allow the UK to preserve the special advantages it has at present.
Not to do so would put those special deals at risk. What is "in good time"? I think the crunch time will come before Spring 2018.
Ministers talk of a 'transitional period' to ease the pain. A fantasy Agreement of a transitional arrangement would take time - there isn't enough time – which they don’t have. Also, the main stumbling block is there is no legal precedent for it.
The devil is always in the details. 'Abide by the provisions' is not enough. There isn't enough time to agree a new transitional arrangement, even if such a thing were legally feasible.
The crunch comes early next year, literally a few months away.
The easy option, which could be agreed in a week, is Art 50. 3 TFEU, which states:
"The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2 , unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period."
That means simple extension of the period, in which the member state remains a full member. A period of 1-2 years would take us up to the next general election.
Then all is up in the air again. And again, it will all seem so pointless.
Well before Spring 2018 the events and legal challenges will build up to a crisis and a hard decision will have to be made: Carry on with the comedy, or stop it now.
Richard Bird is a semi-retired architect based in London and France. He believes that strict upholding of the rule of law - even on so-claimed 'technical illegalities' - is vital to protect our democracy from step-by-step erosion by those with hidden agendas. His catchphrase is: ‘Illegal means illegal’. (Much clearer than Mrs May’s ‘Brexit means Brexit’).
That's an average of one legal challenge per month.
The results of legal actions may not perhaps be the ultimate cause of a reversal of Brexit; that will be political.
But our democratic system is based upon the rule of law, and if the rule of law is abused, our democracy is devalued and threatened.
By the same token, if the law is not enforced, it has no power.
The Gina Miller et al case ensured that the government follow the rule of law. But since then, the government has continued to flagrantly disregard the law and the proper role of Parliament.
As a result these latest legal challenges have been launched:
► 1. ACTION FOR EXPAT VOTERS
Challenging the validity of the referendum in EU courts, due to the lack of votes given to millions of UK residents abroad, and hence the validity of the entire Brexit process. Led by Action for Europe, this case may go to the Court of Justice of the EU.
Links: gofundme.com/action-for-expat-votes
actionforeurope.org.uk
► 2. DUP ALLEGED BRIBE
A legal action by Northern Ireland Green Party politician Ceiran McClean alleging that the £1billion promised to the DUP by Theresa May to buy votes is illegal.
Link: crowdjustice.com/case/challenge-dup-deal/
► 3. DUP ALLEGED BRIBE
An action is planned which alleges criminal misconduct by Prime Minister, Theresa May, regarding the 'deal' she made with the DUP.
Link: DUPbribe.org.uk
► 4. ALLEGED CRIMINAL MISCONDUCT IN PUBLIC OFFICE
Allegations of criminal conduct by Theresa May and her ministers have been laid and a 4200 signature letter sent to the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, led by the Wolchover Action Group. A case file had been opened in the Met.
Link: stopbrexitmisconduct.org.uk
► 5. FIFTY SECRET STUDIES
Good Law Project led by Jolyon Maugham demanding disclosure of the 50 secret Brexit Impact studies, which the government has refused to make public.
Link: crowdjustice.com/case/secretbrexitstudies/
► 6. ARTICLE 50 NON-VALIDITY
A legal challenge launched in the name of Liz Webster and supported by A C Grayling claims that the Article 50 Notice is invalid and therefore there is no clock ticking towards 29 March 2019, and the current negotiations have no legal basis.
If this is upheld, Theresa May would have to go to Parliament for an Act to confirm a decision in order to ratify the Article 50 Notice – and perhaps even retrospectively ratify it. Whether she should be able to get such a Bill passed is very uncertain.
The threat of a ruling in 3 or 4 months time will be a constant worry for the government to consider – and lose sleep over.
Link: crowdjustice.com/case/a50-chall-her-e50/
► WHAT NEXT?
It will take some time for these actions to proceed through the courts and for the results to have an impact. Meanwhile, political and practical events continue to develop.
Negotiations with the EU are proceeding slowly if at all. The UK still appears to be unsure what it actually wants, 18 months after the referendum.
Labour and sensible Tories both now seem to favour a Soft Brexit with close access to the single market and free tariffs. The soft deal offered by the EU would be close to a Norwegian or Swiss model.
Unfortunately for the Brexiters, that will most likely entail acceptance of Free Movement of People and possibly even of Schengen, ECJ jurisdiction, and certainly the loss of the rebate secured by Margaret Thatcher.
In which case the question which will be raised is : what is the point of it?
If Soft Brexit is pointless, the only other option is No Brexit.
Legal and political opinion is that a cancellation of the Article 50 Notice would be accepted by the 27. To do so in good time before March 2019 would allow the UK to preserve the special advantages it has at present.
Not to do so would put those special deals at risk. What is "in good time"? I think the crunch time will come before Spring 2018.
Ministers talk of a 'transitional period' to ease the pain. A fantasy Agreement of a transitional arrangement would take time - there isn't enough time – which they don’t have. Also, the main stumbling block is there is no legal precedent for it.
The devil is always in the details. 'Abide by the provisions' is not enough. There isn't enough time to agree a new transitional arrangement, even if such a thing were legally feasible.
The crunch comes early next year, literally a few months away.
The easy option, which could be agreed in a week, is Art 50. 3 TFEU, which states:
"The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2 , unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period."
That means simple extension of the period, in which the member state remains a full member. A period of 1-2 years would take us up to the next general election.
Then all is up in the air again. And again, it will all seem so pointless.
Well before Spring 2018 the events and legal challenges will build up to a crisis and a hard decision will have to be made: Carry on with the comedy, or stop it now.
Richard Bird is a semi-retired architect based in London and France. He believes that strict upholding of the rule of law - even on so-claimed 'technical illegalities' - is vital to protect our democracy from step-by-step erosion by those with hidden agendas. His catchphrase is: ‘Illegal means illegal’. (Much clearer than Mrs May’s ‘Brexit means Brexit’).
