Brexit continuously shows us international laws are not as stable as we thought

WATERLOO, ONT.—As the world watches Brexit unfold from afar, they must shudder in recognition of potential issues closer to home. Brexit shows us that the web of international treaties that binds nations together is more complex and less stable than we might ever have imagined. North Americans need only recall the uncertainty generated by candidate Donald Trump’s threat to rip up the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and the excruciating threats, animosity, and brinksmanship that surrounded the renegotiations which finally led to the renamed but not yet in force North American trade deal. Withdrawing from the EU requires revoking U.K. legislation that affects almost all aspects of daily life and replacing it all with new U.K. laws and administration. The Irish backstop in the negotiated U.K. EU withdrawal agreement prevents the U.K. from concluding new trade deals with Canada and the rest of the world because to avoid a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, Northern Ireland effectively remains in the EU customs union. It is also a negotiation with multiple parties such that even if the U.K. Parliament and Theresa May can agree to request an extension of the article 50 notice all the EU countries will need to consent to it. Brexit provides a case study on how a referendum can go awry. There were false claims made and a lack of truthful analysis during the campaign. Criminal investigations are ongoing into illegal contributions and illicit manipulation of voters using social media. The referendum results intensified existing political divisions, with a majority in Scotland, Northern Ireland and Central London voting to remain in the EU but being outvoted nationally by Leave supporters. Instead of accommodating the interests and perspectives of key minorities as the Supreme Court of Canada would have advised, May has charged ahead in a quest to get majority support for her withdrawal deal. Brexit has revealed new issues about the respective roles of Parliament and the executive in international law making and unmaking. The initial position of the May government was to exercise the executive right and give Article 50 notice of its intention to withdraw from the EU without seeking the authorization of parliament. The decision of the United Kingdom Supreme Court in R. v. Miller disagreed with this position, clarifying that parliament needed to be involved because of the significant impact withdrawal would have on the laws of the U.K. This led to a more substantial role for parliament in giving effect to the referendum vote. While MPs voted to authorize the government to give the article 50 notification, passed legislation to prepare to implement Brexit and twice voted down May’s deal, they have been unable to commandeer the Brexit negotiations or the legislative agenda. It is still May and her government that negotiate, and despite her many defeats she is still at the helm. After the crushing parliamentary defeat of the U.K. EU withdrawal agreement on Jan. 16 and subsequent debates, Prime Minister May tried to gain concessions from the EU on the Irish backstop in the hopes she could then secure parliamentary approval for a revised Brexit deal. Last Tuesday, parliamentarians soundly rejected her plan once more. The following day a majority of parliamentarians voted decisively against a no-deal Brexit. A spokesman for Donald Tusk, the president of the European council, meanwhile signalled that a reasoned request from the U.K. for an article 50 extension would be considered, but EU countries would have to approve it unanimously. True to her plan, the government brought forward a motion last Thursday stating that they would seek an article 50 extension until June 30 if by March 20 Parliament has approved the withdrawal agreement and noting that otherwise the EU would require a justification for the extension. After an exhausting round of parliamentary activity, May will now ask the EU for an extension until June 30, 2019. The unruly parliamentary factions continuously shape shift such that it is possible for some configuration of discontents to defeat May’s deal twice and counting and declare that a no-deal Brexit should be off the table, while still voting their confidence in her and offering no viable alternative leadership, policies or vision. Even after landslide defeats May remains committed to the U.K. EU withdrawal agreement and has found a way to bring it back for a third vote. The EU leadership has also taken to warning May and the parliamentarians that there is no way to avoid a hard Brexit except by agreeing to a deal. They might also like to remind them there is one unilateral option still to consider, and that is to revoke the article 50 notice given two years ago, before the nation’s full realization of the complexity of Brexit. With the rapidly declining democratic legitimacy of the process, this may be the most sensible option. Those of us watching from outside should learn lessons about the fragility of the international legal order, the trickiness of managing referenda, and parliamentary democracy’s failings when pushed to its limits. Oonagh Fitzgerald is the director of international law research at the Centre for International Governance Innovation. The Hill Times

Brexit continuously shows us international laws are not as stable as we thought

Those of us watching from outside should learn lessons about the fragility of the international legal order, the trickiness of managing referenda, and parliamentary democracy’s failings when pushed to its limits.

Boris Johnson’s conjurer’s act finally hits the big time

Boris Johnson’s cunning plan

Boris Johnson’s reaction to Brexit vote ‘draconian,’ says Senator

Boris Johnson’s conjurer’s act finally hits the big time

Canada needs a modern, national health data architecture

To address online harms, Canada must commit to digital media literacy

A cure for multiple sclerosis could be just around the corner

Renewable energy is the way to go, says letter writer

Supporting local broadcasters is critical for our democracy

Brexit: Johnson makes his move

Waiting until a hard Brexit comes with risk for Canadian trade, say observers

He supercharged his career with anti-EU lies, now BoJo has ridden Brexit into 10 Downing St.

The last prime minister of the United Kingdom

Canada should expect ‘chaos,’ ‘uncertainty’ in long term after Boris Johnson’s leadership victory, say experts

News

Get free news updates

Opinion

Submit a guest opinion article

resources

Advertise

subscribe

get help

Brexit continuously shows us international laws are not as stable as we thought

Those of us watching from outside should learn lessons about the fragility of the international legal order, the trickiness of managing referenda, and parliamentary democracy’s failings when pushed to its limits.

Get The Foreign Policy and Diplomacy Newsletter