Friday 28 February 2020

Mayhem Brexit - International Law requires the European Union unconditionally to readmit the United Kingdom to EU Membership

International Law requires the European Union unconditionally to readmit the United Kingdom to EU membership.

I don't mean that the United Kingdom has to go through the process described in Article 49 of the Treaty on European Union.

The European Union has an obligation in International Law unconditionally to readmit the United Kingdom to membership of the European Union.

Taken together with the effect of International Law that requires the United Kingdom to rejoin the European Union, if the UK and the EU fulfil their respective obligations in International Law the UK will be restored to its rightful membership of the European Union.

That, perhaps later in 2020, is how Mayhem Brexit can lawfully be brought to an end.

Mayhem Brexit - International Law requires the United Kingdom to rejoin the European Union

International Law requires the United Kingdom to rejoin the European Union.

Boris Johnson's promise to "Get Brexit Done" is a daring fraud.

To understand why I assert that (perhaps startling) proposition it is necessary to approach UKExit ("Brexit") from the perspective of International Law.

As mentioned in my most recent post on this blog, David Cameron, Theresa May and Boris Johnson have failed to give International Law the consideration which its importance regarding UKExit merits.

In my next few posts I hope to set out for the general, intelligent reader some fundamentals of International Law that lead me to the conclusion that the United Kingdom is obliged to rejoin the European Union.




Mayhem Brexit - The silence about International Law

UKExit ("Brexit") requires an unprecedented, fundamental and radical set of changes in the United Kingdom's international relationships.

International relationships, at least the parts that are legally effective, are created in International Law.

One of the startling failures of the whole UKExit ("Brexit") process is the failure properly to consider the effect of International Law on the process of UKExit.

If you revisit David Cameron's Bloomberg speech of January 2013 you will search in vain for a mention of the constraints imposed by International Law.

If you review Theresa May's various set-piece speeches on UKExit, they are similarly silent on the limitations imposed by International Law on the United Kingdom's supposed freedom of manoeuvre.

Likewise Boris Johnson's incessant infantile incompetence on UKExit is also a zone free from serious consideration of the constraints of International Law.

The fundamental failures of approach of three successive Conservative UK Prime Ministers are at the root of Mayhem Brexit.

Friday 31 January 2020

Mayhem Brexit - 19 hours until Mayhem Brexit

As I write this there are only some 19 hours until the United Kingdom and the European Union enter the era of Mayhem Brexit.

Mayhem Brexit is the term I use to refer to the situation of legal uncertainty and chaos created jointly by the United Kingdom and the European Union as a result of a succession of bad choices.

The result is that there is enormous legal uncertainty with effect from 23.00 GMT on 31st January 2020 as to the true situation in Public International Law and European Union Law with respect to the legal relationship between the UK and the EU.

In order for the UK and the EU to negotiate a credible agreement during 2020 the legal starting point must be known.

Mayhem Brexit will shortly start.

In Mayhem Brexit there are arguably at least four interpretations of the legal relationship between the UK and the EU as from 23.00 GMT on 31st January 2020:

  • The official suggestion is that the UK has lawfully left the EU and that a lawful Withdrawal Agreement is in place including a Transition Period that supposedly creates legal stability until 23.00 GMT on 31st December 2020.
  • A second interpretation is that the UK has lawfully left the EU but that the supposed Withdrawal Agreement is unlawful and/or void.
  • A third interpretation is that the UK remains a Member State of the European Union. In other words the supposed Article 50 TEU process was void ab initio.
  • A fourth interpretation is that the United Kingdom's supposed departure from the European Union constitutes an Internationally Wrongful Act (on the part of both the United Kingdom and the European Union). In that case both the UK and the EU have an obligation in Public International Law to restore the legal situation that existed before the Internationally Wrongful Act.
Boris Johnson has claimed that Brexit on 31st January would end uncertainty.

The opposite is true.

Uncertainty is entering a new progressive, pervasive and dangerous phase.

You ain't seen nothing yet.

I expect there to be a constitutional crisis in the UK whose proportions dwarf anything in living memory.

In addition, I expect there to be political crises in the UK and in the EU of  awesome seriousness.