Brexist The UK
Brexit in the UK
The fraught relationship between the Britain and European date back in 1951at the start of the Coal and State Community. Its relationship with the European Union (EU) has not been consistent, especially due to issues touching on its sovereignty. Consequently, the UK voted to tear itself from the EU through a referendum that was supported by about 51.9% of votes (Brinded 2). The British campaign to leave EU was nicknamed Brexit, which fully stands for “British exit”. However, there is still a dispute on how the country is planning to withdraw from the EU due to lack of clarity in the Article 50 of Lisbon Treaty that permits denunciation. The article, therefore, focuses on the issues surrounding the Brexit, especially legal requirements.
There are a number of issues that triggered the UK to leave the EU. Mass immigration is one of the issues because the country can do very little to stop the influx, as the EU rules advocate for free borders among its member states (Harvey and Carmen 7). The exit is also fueled by economic factors like poor balance of payment, as the country imports more than it exports to other EU member states (Springford and Tilford 2). Consequently, the country needs the freedom to trade with the rest with the world without interference by the EU treaties and regulations.
Therefore, based on the result of the British referendum, the EU should start thinking of ways of ironing out the issues that are affecting its member states. It should start evaluating the social, political, and economic issues that can negatively affect its stability (Lawyers for Britain 5). In addition, it should be sensitive to the interests of all its member states to enhance their unity. Consequently, EU will prevent other withdrawal cases that may come in the future.
However, even after British voted to leave the EU, it is still required to abide by Article 50 of Lisbon Treaty, which is the main dispute in its withdrawal plan. It is the article 50 that spells out how an EU member sate can withdraw from the union. Unfortunately, the article was vaguely written because it only gives the procedure for withdraw without substantive conditions (Arnull et al. 139). Despite the fact that article 50 allows withdrawal, it gives no party the right to invoke the article, which creates a controversy on the timeframe that is required to start and finish the withdrawal process. Article 50 only gives the withdrawing member state two years to finish the new arrangements from the date of notification (Ranking and Borger 2). Consequently, article 50 creates a conflict between the UK and the remaining EU member states.
Nevertheless, in case the UK is reluctant to initiate the withdrawal process, the EU can use Article 7 of EU Treaty to suspend British from the union. Article 7allows the EU to suspend its any of its members that violates the basic principles such as equality, democracy, and the rules of the law (Ranking and Borger 2). However, in case of British, it must follow the withdrawal procedures that are laid by article 50 because the alternatives legal avenues like the Vienna Convention and repealing of the 1972 Act are no viable, especially after the enactment of Lisbon Treaty in 2009.
As a result, the protagonist in the conflict is the British while the antagonists are remaining EU member states. The British, especially the UKIP leaders led by Nigel Farage wants withdrawal process to be as quick as possible. On the other hand, the remaining EU member states would like the matter to be resolved smartly in order to minimize the uncertainties that may trigger more withdrawal. As a result, there are different views between EU and British on how the withdrawal process should be carried out.
Even though there is a conflict on the process of withdrawal, it is now certain that the British will leave EU and there is a need to come up with structured negotiation. Apart from containing the agreement that is spelled out in Article 50, the negotiation should also include new trading relationship between the British and the remaining EU member states (“Lawyers for Britain” 4). The negotiation should be aimed at tightening the institutional, regulatory, and financial challenges that can be associated with the exit of Britain. Therefore, the negotiation should take care of the interests of EU and UK.
The British referendum result showed that Scotland largely voted against the Brexit with 62% voting to remain in the EU. Consequently, the result shows that Scotland is not ready to leave EU and it may not be comfortable working with party and the prime minister it voted against (Ormston 7). Therefore, may be forced to come up with another referendum that allows it to separate from British in order to join the EU. As a result, the interest of Scotland can only be accommodated if it is allowed to separate from UK and join EU.
Therefore, in conclusion, the British decision to withdraw from EU has a number of legal, political, economical, and other uncertainties that can affect both EU and UK. As a member of magi circle law firm in London, I would start ironing out the legal controversies that are likely to emerge out of the withdrawal and find their possible solutions. In addition, I would start identifying the possible conflict between the EU regulations and that of the UK to ensure smooth transition. However, there is still much to be done, especially in terms of legal requirements during the transition.
Arnull, Anthony, et al. European Union Law. London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2000.
Brinded, Lianna. “Britain is broken beyond repair: and the worst is yet to come.” (2016). Retrieved from http://uk.businessinsider.com/brexit-eu-referendum-result-political- economic-and-social-analysis-and-whats-next-2016-6
Harvey, David, and Carmen Hubbard. «Why Brexit?.» (2016).
Lawyers for Britain. “News and Articles: Detailed Analysis of Brexit Process.” (2016).
Lawyers for Britain. Brexit: “Doing a Deal with the EU”. (2016)
Ormston, Rachel. «Disunited Kingdom? Attitudes to the EU across the UK.» (2015).
Ranking, Jennifer and Borger Julian. “What is article 50 and why is it so central to the Brexit debate?” (2016). Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/25/article-50-brexit-debate-britain-eu
Springford, John, and Simon Tilford. «The Great British trade-off.» Financial Times (2013).