Following a legal challenge to Brexit which was brought to the high court by Gina Miller (among others), there has now been a ruling that Theresa May cannot go ahead with Brexit without the approval of parliament.
Wait, what?
We’ve heard from the Prime Minister that ‘Brexit means Brexit’ and it’s going to be ‘hard’, does this mean it might not happen at all?
The truth of the matter is that the referendum was not legally binding. It was, in effect, a giant opinion poll. It was not an election and it was not a parliamentary process. It resulted in an unelected Prime Minister carrying out the wishes of those 52% of people who voted to leave the European Union and, in constitutional terms, this is one giant grey area.
The challenge brought by Miller and her associates to the high court was a legal one. It goes back to the 1689 Bill of Rights which asserts Parliament’s sovereignty over any one individual. This means that Parliament has the ultimate power, not our queen and not our prime minister. Nothing can be done without Parliament’s consent. Britain is a democracy which representatives, elected by voters make collective decisions in parliament by voting on issues in full view of the public.
In its judgement the High Court said:
‘The Court does not accept the argument put forward by the Government. There is nothing in the text of the 1972 Act to support it. In the judgement of the Court the argument is contrary both to the language used by Parliament in the 1972 Act and to the fundamental constitutional principles of the sovereignty of Parliament and the absence on the Crown to change domestic law by exercise of its prerogative powers.’
Roughly translated that legal jargon means this: the parliamentary processes which we have in this country underpin our transparent and accountable democracy, that’s why they are protected and legally binding. The referendum which lead to Brexit was not.
Speaking outside of the court today Miller said ‘you can’t have a government casually throwing away people’s rights – that’s why we turned to the courts.’
Miller has also spoken about how she has received racist abuse since bringing the legal challenge to court. Indeed, a quick search of her name on Twitter reveals that, unfortunately, such abuse is being directed at her:
Theresa May has previously said that she intends to trigger Article 50 and formally begin Brexit in 2017 without consulting Parliament. Her reasoning was that the referendum gave her government a mandate to do this and no further vote on the matter was required. Today’s ruling means that our parliamentary laws suggest otherwise.
A Government spokesperson has said that they intend to appeal the high court’s decision.
Whatever happens now it’s unlikely that this will really change anything in the short term. It’s possible that, at some point, there may have to be a general election. If this decision isn’t overturned by a Government appeal, then there will also be a vote in Parliament.
What’s certain, however, is that legal discussion about how Brexit is supposed to happen are going to go on and on and on.
You might also be interested in:
The Legacy Of Brexit Has Made People Of Colour Feel Unwelcome In Their Own Country
Follow Vicky on Twitter @Victoria_Spratt
This article originally appeared on The Debrief.