Last Tuesday, something rare took place in Westminster. The UK Government officially announced its intention to breach the Withdrawal Agreement that it had signed and ratified a few months ago. Brandon Lewis, the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, admitted that the Internal Market Bill which the Government was to reveal the following day ‘does break international law in a very specific and limited way.’
On Wednesday, true to its word, Boris Johnson’s administration presented a bill that has already been described as an ‘eye-watering’ attempt to override the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland. Clause 42 of the Bill allows the UK Government to disapply through secondary legislation export declarations and other exit procedures that the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland requires for goods that will be moving from Northern Ireland to Great Britain after the end of the transition period. Clause 43 gives the power to UK Ministers to disapply or modify the effect of Article 10 of the Protocol. The aim of the latter is to ‘ensure that a level playing field is retained by precluding a more generous UK state aid regime from advantaging UK firms relative to EU competitors. ’Finally, clause 45 provides that the regulations made under the aforementioned provisions ‘have effect notwithstanding any relevant international or domestic law with which they may be incompatible or inconsistent’.
The Prime Minister valiantly defended the draft by declaring that such breach is necessary in order ‘to uphold the integrity of the UK, but also to protect the Northern Irish peace process and the Good Friday agreement.’ Is that really so? In this post, I question the stated intentions of the UK Government. This draft piece of legislation not only does not defend the ‘integrity’ of the UK, but also creates frictions within the fragile political equilibrium of Northern Ireland.
The Protocol
In order to keep the Irish territorial border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland frictionless, the relevant Protocol attached to the UK’s Withdrawal Agreement provides for a rather ingenious solution. The Protocol recognises that de jure Northern Ireland remains within the UK customs union, but EU customs legislation will still apply to the region even after the end of the transition period on 31 January 2020. Similarly, a significant part of the EU acquis on the free movement of goods will also apply extraterritorially with regard to Northern Ireland, and so will the EU law provisions concerning VAT and excise. This means that Northern Ireland will have a much closer relationship with the EU than the rest of the UK, adding an extra dimension to the special status of this devolved entity within the UK constitutional order.
A Threat to Peace and UK’s integrity?
I have argued in a series of posts and academic papers that such a differentiated arrangement for Northern Ireland should not be considered as a challenge to UK’s constitutional integrity. Neither should the regulatory and customs checks that will be taking place in the Irish Sea. Within the EU legal order there are a number of cases where different parts of a member state might have different relationships with the EU. The sovereignty of a (Member) State over these areas has never been challenged just because EU law is applied differently there.
However, the Prime Minister seems to suggest that the Northern Ireland arrangement poses a threat to the ‘integrity of the UK internal market’. It is true that after the end of the transition period, trade between the two sides of the Irish Sea will not be frictionless any more. The extent of the friction in the intra-UK trade will depend on the future UK–EU relationship. The more distant it is, the less frictionless the trade will be between Northern Ireland and Great Britain.
The proposed legislation, however, does not effectively deal with the perceived threat. Neither the amendment on state aid nor on export declarations effectively bridge the economic and trade divide between the two shores of the Irish Sea that will occur on 1 January 2021. Goods coming from Great Britain to Northern Ireland will still have to comply with the relevant EU legislation and undergo the required customs and regulatory checks creating significant friction to the UK internal market especially in the case of no trade deal.
Rather than protecting the UK internal market, the main aim of those two amendments seems to relate to internal political strategies. During the election campaign, Boris Johnson told ‘Northern Ireland businesses they can put customs declarations “in the bin”.’ At the same time, a looser state aid regime is at the very centre of the political vision of the current government.
Two Real Threats to Peace and Constitutional Integrity
If there is a threat to the fragile peace process and the constitutional integrity of the UK, however, it might come from the proposed legislation itself and the political developments that might follow as the EU Commission has already noted. Starting with the peace process, the biggest unionist party in Northern Ireland DUP has cautiously welcomed the Bill ‘as a step forward for Northern Ireland’. They also ‘stressed the need for more measures that would ensure closer regulatory alignment between post-Brexit Northern Ireland’ and its metropolitan State. If this is to happen, not only will the painstakingly achieved compromise of the Withdrawal Agreement be wrecked, but the entire fragile political system of Northern Irelandwill be knocked off-balance. It is worth remembering that the executive of Northern Ireland was only re-established in January 2020, after three years of gridlock. DUP’s support to the breach of the Withdrawal Agreement might be considered as a sufficient reason for the other parties that participate in the government to withdraw their support and thus for the executive to collapse again.
Moreover, from a constitutional integrity point of view, it is interesting to point out that clause 45 aims at creating a new type of secondary legislation that is immune to judicial review. Traditionally, immunity from judicial review is only afforded to Acts of the Westminster Parliament. Secondary legislation and acts passed by the devolved institutions can be judicially reviewed. In this case, the Government makes clear that it is prepared to give power to its own Ministers to pass regulations even if they are incompatible with ‘any relevant international or domestic law’. It will be interesting to see whether the UK judiciary will be prepared to uphold the view put forward by the Government according to which clause 45 abolishes judicial review with regard to those regulations.
Similar to the episode of the prorogation of the Parliament, the current debacle is a clear sign of the priorities of the current UK Government. The ‘intoxicating cry of “taking back control”’ leads them to ignore the real concerns that relate not only with the peace process in Northern Ireland but also with the application of the rule of law in the whole UK.
The post was first published on Verfassungblog on 10 September 2020.
Archive
-
October 2024
- Oct 4, 2024 New Publication: Mind the Gap Between Federalism and Secession Oct 4, 2024
-
March 2024
- Mar 6, 2024 Secession in the EU multi-level constitutional order Mar 6, 2024
-
June 2023
- Jun 30, 2023 Alexis Tsipras, Nanni Moretti and the future of the Greek Left Jun 30, 2023
-
June 2022
- Jun 30, 2022 Scottish Indyref 2: Towards Another Constitutional Crisis Jun 30, 2022
- Jun 15, 2022 The Northern Ireland Protocol Bill: How did we end up here? Jun 15, 2022
-
May 2022
- May 19, 2022 The Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland: The Current Stalemate May 19, 2022
-
April 2021
- Apr 28, 2021 2 Articles on the Cyprus issue negotiations. Apr 28, 2021
-
February 2021
- Feb 5, 2021 The Right of Self-Determination in the EU constitutional order. Feb 5, 2021
-
September 2020
- Sep 18, 2020 Competing claims and narratives in Eastern Mediterranean Sep 18, 2020
- Sep 10, 2020 In the name of peace and integrity? UK Government's breach of the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland Sep 10, 2020
-
October 2019
- Oct 22, 2019 A ‘Cracking Deal’ for the Union? Oct 22, 2019
- Oct 18, 2019 Whatever Happened to the Backstop Oct 18, 2019
- Oct 17, 2019 What To Expect (From the EU Council) When You Are Expecting A Brexit Deal Oct 17, 2019
- Oct 3, 2019 Boris Johnson’s Alternative to the Backstop Oct 3, 2019
-
August 2019
- Aug 23, 2019 Interview with DW Aug 23, 2019
-
April 2019
- Apr 12, 2019 Extending Brexit: Reaching the Larry David Moment of the Saga Apr 12, 2019
- Apr 3, 2019 Brexit as a secession Apr 3, 2019
- Apr 1, 2019 Holding European Parliament Elections in Northern Ireland after Brexit Apr 1, 2019
-
March 2019
- Mar 29, 2019 ‘Our Precious Union’: The Backstop and the Constitutional Integrity of the UK Mar 29, 2019
- Mar 18, 2019 The UK Sovereign Base Areas in Cyprus: The other Brexit land boundary Mar 18, 2019
-
February 2019
- Feb 7, 2019 Why a frontstop cannot replace the backstop. A Modest Reply to Professor JHH Weiler. Feb 7, 2019
-
January 2019
- Jan 22, 2019 Macedonia name issue: Agreement and disagreement Jan 22, 2019
-
December 2018
- Dec 12, 2018 Breaking Up is Hard to Do Dec 12, 2018
-
November 2018
- Nov 28, 2018 "Everything must change so that everything can stay the same.": The Effect of Brexit on the Union Nov 28, 2018
-
October 2018
- Oct 17, 2018 Backstop, Backstop, Backstop... Oct 17, 2018
-
July 2018
- Jul 9, 2018 The 'Chequers' Agreement That Wasn't Jul 9, 2018
-
June 2018
- Jun 14, 2018 What’s in a name? Jun 14, 2018
- Jun 8, 2018 A Tale of two 'Backstop' Options Jun 8, 2018
-
May 2018
- May 15, 2018 A Special Arrangement for Northern Ireland? May 15, 2018
-
April 2018
- Apr 12, 2018 A Bull in a China Shop: Brexit as a Challenge to the Good Friday Agreement Apr 12, 2018
- March 2018
-
December 2017
- Dec 13, 2017 The case for a differentiated Brexit Dec 13, 2017
- Dec 11, 2017 What’s in an Irish Border? Dec 11, 2017
-
November 2017
- Nov 17, 2017 How can Scotland and Northern Ireland remain in the EU without seceding from the UK? Nov 17, 2017
-
October 2017
- Oct 6, 2017 Homage to Catalonia Oct 6, 2017
-
August 2017
- Aug 18, 2017 Footnotes in Ireland Aug 18, 2017
-
July 2017
- Jul 13, 2017 No Country for Reluctant Peacemakers Jul 13, 2017
-
June 2017
- Jun 28, 2017 Conference on Cyprus: Foot-dragging Towards a Dead-End Jun 28, 2017
- Jun 20, 2017 May is the cruelest month Jun 20, 2017
-
April 2017
- Apr 4, 2017 Brexit has Opened a Can of (Constitutional) Worms Apr 4, 2017
-
March 2017
- Mar 31, 2017 Short guide to the EU Guidelines for the Brexit Negotiations Mar 31, 2017
- Mar 29, 2017 Brexit o’ clock: The State of the Union Mar 29, 2017
- Mar 28, 2017 Reunifying Ireland: An EU law perspective Mar 28, 2017
-
February 2017
- Feb 28, 2017 Limiting the constitutional space of Scotland and Northern Ireland Feb 28, 2017
-
January 2017
- Jan 26, 2017 The future of the UK: A legal perspective Jan 26, 2017
- Jan 24, 2017 A short comment on Miller Jan 24, 2017
-
December 2016
- Dec 22, 2016 From Greenland to Svalbard: Scotland’s quest for a differentiated Brexit Dec 22, 2016
- Dec 8, 2016 The Colour of Brexit Dec 8, 2016
-
November 2016
- Nov 28, 2016 The Cyprus Conundrum Nov 28, 2016
- Nov 23, 2016 Sturgeon, Puigdemont and the Constitutional Taboo of Secession Nov 23, 2016
- Nov 16, 2016 Guest Post: Cyprus is Waiting for a New Reunification Plan. Again... Nov 16, 2016
- Nov 14, 2016 The Birth of a Republic but not of a Nation: Understanding the inherent paradox of post-conflict constitution-making Nov 14, 2016
- October 2016
-
August 2016
- Aug 2, 2016 Can Scotland and Northern Ireland Remain in the EU? Aug 2, 2016
- Aug 2, 2016 Scotland's and Northern Ireland's Choice: How could they remain in the EU? Aug 2, 2016
- Aug 2, 2016 Brexit - secession and the UK’s ongoing position with the EU Aug 2, 2016
- Aug 2, 2016 On Article 50 TEU Aug 2, 2016
- Aug 2, 2016 The unbearable toxicity of referendum campaigns Aug 2, 2016
- Aug 2, 2016 The Day after the Referendum Before: Possible Alternatives to EU Membership Aug 2, 2016
- Aug 2, 2016 Football and Nationalism Aug 2, 2016
- Aug 2, 2016 A view from the fence Aug 2, 2016
- Aug 2, 2016 4+1 Comments on the Greek referendum Aug 2, 2016
- Aug 2, 2016 Media Coverage of the Greek Referendum Aug 2, 2016
- Aug 2, 2016 In Greek: Πώς είναι ένας αριστερός Πρωθυπουργός; Aug 2, 2016
- Aug 2, 2016 In Greek: "Το "ερυθρόλευκο ποτάμι" Aug 2, 2016
- Aug 2, 2016 Cyprus's Groundhog Day Aug 2, 2016
- Aug 2, 2016 In Greek: Το δίκιο (του άλλου) είναι ζόρικο πολύ Aug 2, 2016
- Aug 2, 2016 In Greek: Το Συνταγματικό Τόξο και η ΕΡΤ Aug 2, 2016
- Aug 2, 2016 In Greek: 5+1 σύντομες σκέψεις για την κρίση στην Κύπρο Aug 2, 2016