EDINBURGH (Reuters) – The British government believes the query of whether or not it alone can cease Brexit is irrelevant, because it doesn’t intend to alter its thoughts about leaving the European Union, in line with its response to a authorized problem by Scottish lawmakers against Brexit.
In a court docket doc seen by Reuters, Theresa May’s government submitted its authorized response to the problem filed by a bunch of anti-Brexit Scottish lawmakers at Scotland’s Court of Session, its supreme civil court docket. Now the court docket should resolve inside a two-week interval whether or not a full listening to must be known as.
The petitioners search to indicate that Britain can, if the case arises, change its thoughts about leaving the world’s greatest buying and selling bloc and achieve this alone. They say if that have been the case, Britain’s bargaining place could be strengthened as a result of it could not have to kowtow to the calls for of the opposite 27 EU members to rejoin.
May formally notified the EU of Britain’s intention to go away by triggering Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty on March 29 final yr, beginning a two-year exit course of.
She has stated she won’t tolerate any try in parliament to dam it. But British lawmakers defied the government in December by voting towards May’s needs and securing parliament a way more substantial say on whether or not to simply accept the ultimate Brexit deal.
The 21-page court docket doc, despatched as a response from Britain’s Brexit Minister David Davis, argued that the petitioners had failed to supply correct grounds. “There not being a genuine dispute as to the proper construction of Article 50(2) TEU, the orders sought should be refused.”
A spokeswoman for the UK government had no quick remark.
Britons voted 51.9 % to go away the EU in June 2016, and May is at the moment drawing up a plan for Britain’s potential commerce take care of the EU after Brexit occurs.
“What would be terrible would be for parliament to decide it doesn’t like the (Brexit) deal the government has managed to do and it fell a long way short of what the people were promised in the referendum campaign and for no one to know what that meant,” Jo Maugham QC, who has crowd-funded the petition, advised Reuters.
“It would be enormously disruptive to the political and economic life of the whole of the European Union,” he stated.
“What we can’t know is when the question (of revoking) will arise or whether the question will arise. What we can know is that we will bloody well wish (the question) was answered before it had arisen” he stated.
Separately, a authorized supply advised Reuters Labour lawmaker was getting ready a letter of help from different lawmakers for the Scottish Brexit litigation.
Scotland’s supreme civil judicial physique will now resolve whether or not the case goes to listening to and, finally, to the European Court of Justice to make a closing choice. It could have a bearing on whether or not or not Brexit occurs and the way it occurs, if public opinion ought to change.
“The government want us to believe that you either accept the deal on offer or you crash out on March 29 2019 with no deal” stated Joanna Cherry QC, one of many petitioners and lawmaker for the Scottish National Party.
“Both (European Council President) Donald Tusk and (French President Emmanuel) Macron have in the past week mentioned the possibility that the UK could still change its mind about leaving, the implication being that such a change of mind would be acceptable to (other EU members).”
Since the referendum, opponents of Brexit at home and overseas have stated Britain may change its thoughts legally and keep away from what they are saying will likely be disastrous penalties for the economic system.
Reporting by Elisabeth O’Leary, Editing by William Maclean