A thousand lawyers send letter to Cameron over EU Referendum

[BrexitThunderbolt]

It starts:
TO THE PRIME MINISTER AND ALL MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT

9 July 2016

Dear Prime Minister and Members of Parliament

Re: Brexit

We are all individual members of the Bars of England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. We are writing to propose a way forward which reconciles the legal, constitutional and political issues which arise following the Brexit referendum.

The result of the referendum must be acknowledged. Our legal opinion is that the referendum is advisory.

The European Referendum Act does not make it legally binding. We believe that in order to trigger Article 50, there must first be primary legislation. It is of the utmost importance that the legislative process is informed by an objective understanding as to the benefits, costs and risks of triggering Article 50.

link to the whole letter here

I am particularly pleased to see this included in their reasons for writing as they do:
There is evidence that the referendum result was influenced by misrepresentations of fact and promises that could not be delivered.

Since the result was only narrowly in favour of Brexit, it cannot be discounted that the misrepresentations and promises were a decisive or contributory factor in the result.

It's late, and I've been out - but I think that this letter was written before Leadsom dropped out?

Leadsom was talking about a triggering article 50 quickly - not a good idea. It is up to Parliament to ensure that the law is correctly followed - and I would think that a parliamentary vote is required for this.

It is a massive constitutional change - let's make sure that in another decade's time we're not reading a "Chilcot" report about how badly Brexit was handled.

I think (hope) that now Theresa May is in charge, she will handle this methodically, correctly and, above all, legally.

It is a massive constitutional change - let's make sure that in another decade's time we're not reading a "Chilcot" report about how badly Brexit was handled

We will be whatever.

I'm still praying it doesn't happen at all, Gloria.

But that seems to getting to be getting to be a bit of a stretch now.

But that seems to getting to be getting to be a bit of a stretch now.

Yes, sadly .

Not in my name is what I say.

When they say we are all "leavers" now, I think are we fuck . 37% of the electorate are.

i'm more optimistic it won't happen. But saying it will happen is the best way to make it not happen now....

But the letter is just background noise. A sort of last hurrah of the "don't you know who I am"/"trust me I'm a doctor" type of strategy that failed so spectacularly.

'Don't you know who I am' - yes, exactly.

I'm trying to find the list because I'm interested to see whether any of my colleagues or counsel were foolish enough to be involved. Using the law in a blatant attempt to further their own politics is risky.

Oh,. So are you a lawyer too?'
the letter does describe itself as" advice" ....

Yes, lawyer here.

Very keen to know who these people are. There are lots of constitutional quirks in the British legal system. Generally trying to exploit them is not good for democracy. Eg technically the Queen doesn't have to give Royal Assent to parliaments acts - but she if she didn't there would be a problem.

These lawyers have been rash - and pompous - to do this.

Where is the list?!

I'm sure you could get it via a FOI request, AddTo, if you're that interested.

I take your point
I don't feel the same, I think we all did silly things in the aftermath. Having said that....
Just write to the barrister who started it, he will send you a copy. some good might come of a complaint

Yes I would quite like to see these condescending 'get back in your box plebs' named and hopefully shamed. If they are happy that attempting to use legal loopholes to override a democratically accepted vote is not just acceptable behaviour but one to be proud of then their names should be public.

Yes I would quite like to see these condescending 'get back in your box plebs' named and hopefully shamed. If they are happy that attempting to use legal loopholes to override a democratically accepted vote is not just acceptable behaviour but one to be proud of then their names should be public.
Yes, it's absolutely outrageous that an advisory referendum should be subject to the type of scrutiny these lawyers recommend ("...It is of the utmost importance that the legislative process is informed by an objective understanding as to the benefits, costs and risks of triggering Article 50.")
And how dare they suggest "...there is evidence that the referendum result was influenced by misrepresentations of fact and promises that could not be delivered."
Bloody cheek. The people have spoken etc.

Twofingers

The issue is that they are offering "advice". To do that you must be confident you have expertise.

It's as if my heart doctor told me my child didn't have autism despite a diagnosis of autism. It would be wrong to give an opinion merely because autism came up in his medical degree way back when.

I think they blurred boundaries because of their emotions.

I did too in various ways but not in a professional capacity

I think that the whole idea that the referendum is not legally binding and is only advisory has got way out of hand.
It is politically binding and that is the point. No government who stated thy would have a referendum on a matter then go against the will of the majority of the people who voted would stay in power. In fact there could well have a revolution.
You may as well suggest that the Queen has every right not to ratify a law that parliament has agreed to - not going to happen.

I don't see how it's any more binding than a manifesto promise, on the basis of which people vote in a government, and which are regularly not kept.

First line of Wikipedia: "Referendums are not legally binding..."

We absolutely need this to be put to parliamentary vote - it will most likely go through - but it needs to be done.

This whole thing is a political and economical fiasco so far - and is only likely to get worse. Are even the most ardent leave voters saying they would still go ahead and leave if it proves disastrous for the UK?

We absolutely need this to be put to parliamentary vote

No, we don't. In fact, the government could have triggered Article50 without a referendum - it is already in law and a government prerogative. (Not that any government would do). That's another reason why I want to see the list - the letter is bullshit law.

I voted remain, but unfortunately I am certain the government will trigger Article 50. I don't think there is anything anyone can do or say to stop it now.

The reason I'm sure about this is that as a country we've been in a huge and increasing financial mess for a long time. Most people keep pretending it's all fine but eventually we have to accept the inevitable crash. Triggering Article 50 and leaving the EU gives the government a convenient scapegoat for what's about to happen.

Then they can then blame whichever demographic they chose to blame. It looks like they are already pointing their finger at the poor. A mix of people voted remain, a mix voted leave, it's another lie that the majority of leave voters are poor. The writing is on the wall already.

There is a huge contingent - of lawyers and MPs - that agrees that a parliamentary vote is required to repeal the ECA - so yes - to ensure this is constitutionally safe - we absolutely should have a vote on it. Why would we not ensure this is legally sound - in view of what the Chilcot Inquiry has just reported? This will have farer reaching consequences on the country and the economy than the Iraq war.

Well said Addtobasket. We don't need to put it to Parliament, we don't need some Royal commission or anything else. They can just look at the best ways of going ahead and get on with it. End of.
The idea that loads of leave voters voted in mistaken beliefs may be true but so did remain voters. More than one told me - better the devil you know!
Several said they were scared that Scotland would vote again on independence if we voted out - I'm in Scotland. And others thought that their EU spouses/friends etc. would be asked to leave the UK.
I'm sure there are loads more that were scared by the likes of George Osbourne et al as well.

But yes, namechanger - stand by for every in the next 2 or 3 generations to be blamed on brexit, and on the 'country' for voting for it. It was 'our choice' based on lies after all.

*everything

But it is legally sound. That's the point.

Well a lot of lawyers and MPs don't agree.... so - let's make sure it is -at the very least- legally sound eh?

Lawyers disagree on this. I don't think we need a Parliamentary vote (and nor do we legally have to do anything with the referendum result other than put it in the bin). However politically and morally May, I and many other lawyers know it would be sensible to go ahead with Brexit and also to have Parliamentary backing once the negotiated deal is a bit clearer. There is a second legal issue - whether Scotland's Parliament should also approve it too and again that would be politically sensible as well.

It is very likely whatever route May chooses one or other side will apply for judicial review and a decision probably being fast tracked to the Supreme Court on the legal route once May's plans are further advanced. I would hope such a court decision will also clarify the position on Scotland and whether its parliament needs to approve at the same time.