EU commissioners are expected to take new legal action against the United Kingdom later this week, following Monday’s announcement of a bill that would unilaterally revise the Northern Ireland Protocol agreed by Mr Johnson with Brussels in 2019. A former head of the government’s legal service said the ministers’ attempt to justify the move was “desperate”, while another legal expert said the UK would face an “awkward fight” to convince any court that it did not amount to a breach. INTERNATIONAL LAW. Foreign Secretary Liz Trouse said the UK was forced to take unilateral action because negotiations with Brussels to ease trade disruptions in Northern Ireland after Brexit had reached a “dead end”. However, European capitals have backed Brussels’ approach, with Germany saying Britain’s action was “unacceptable” and warning that “peace and prosperity on the island of Ireland is not a pawn”. And Irish Foreign Minister Simon Coveney said London seemed to be “for any political reason” trying to “break up the protocol, which is international law, which has been carefully drafted for years through painstaking negotiations with the British Prime Minister.” to resolve how best to manage the Brexit disruption on the island of Ireland. “ Irish Prime Minister Michael Martin said Mr Johnson’s proposals were not “well thought out or well thought out” and that the provisions of the bill would prove “against business and industry”. In a stern joint statement, a group of senior members of Congress called on the United Kingdom and the European Union to “continue negotiations in good faith to find lasting solutions to the post-Brexit trade challenges”. The statement, signed by House Speaker Richard Neal, European Commission Chairman Bill Keating and Republican Brian Fitzpatrick, and Congressional Speaker Brendan Boyle, was signed by the House of Representatives. Westminster. “The introduction of legislation in the United Kingdom undermines the Northern Ireland Protocol, threatens international law and, most worryingly, could jeopardize the nearly 25 years of peace established by the Good Friday Agreement,” they warned. Mr Boyle said the legislation “clearly violates international law”, noting that about 60 per cent of the members elected to the Northern Ireland Assembly last month support the protocol in its current form. In a separate statement, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Bob Menendez, said he was “deeply disappointed” by the UK decision “to try to unilaterally overturn the Northern Ireland Protocol”. “The proposal is an irresponsible move that threatens the 24 years of peace since the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland signed the Good Friday Agreement in 1998 as well as the financial well-being of all those living on the island,” he warned. “It was an ‘unnecessary distraction’ from the international community on Ukraine.” Washington has issued an assurance that UK action would not prevent a possible future trade deal, but progress on that front has been negligible since the inauguration of President Joe Biden. A White House spokesman also called on both sides to “return to talks to resolve their differences.” The UK ministers said their attempt to circumvent the Protocol on Trade through the Irish Sea, the involvement of the European Court of Justice in dispute resolution and Wesminster control over tax rates in Northern Ireland was justified in the its current form is unacceptable to the trade union community. However, DUP leader Sir Jeffrey Donaldson has denied the government’s hopes that the bill will spur a return to power-sharing institutions from the larger union party, which has prevented the formation of an assembly and executive branch since last election. month. “There is a long way to go with this legislation. “It will take months for the Commons and the Lords to pass, unless the government decides to escalate the timetable for the bill, and we have not heard that,” he said. “Therefore, we will look at what will happen in the legislative process, but at this stage we have not reached a point of view on when the institutions can be restored.” Legal experts soon argued that the government was dependent on a concept known as the “doctrine of necessity” to support its claim that the bill would not violate international law. The Committee on International Law states that the doctrine can be invoked only in circumstances of “serious and imminent danger” and in cases where the developing State has not contributed to the situation by its own actions. A legal position signed by Attorney General Suella Braverman argues that this requirement is being met because of “trade diversion and the serious social and economic difficulties caused by the Protocol” and “the pressure of protocol-based arrangements on institutions in Northern Ireland”. “. But Sir Jonathan Jones – who resigned as Treasury attorney after admitting that legislation in 2020 would violate international law – described the position as “certainly desperate, without providing any evidence of how this high test is being met”. ». “The EU will certainly see it as a clear violation of the Exit Agreement,” he said. “Legal proceedings seem inevitable.” And Cambridge University law professor Mark Elliott said the government’s argument was “ridiculous” and “very doubtful” that any court would accept it. “It would be derogatory to say that the government would face a difficult struggle seeking to satisfy a court that the bill could be justified by reference to necessity,” said Professor Eliot. “Announcing its intention to enact this legislation and accompanying it with a ridiculous ‘legal justification’, the government has once again signaled its willingness to play fast and relaxed with the rule of law and its commitment to a rules of international order. In doing so, it relinquishes moral authority, questions its credibility as a partner in the Treaty — including any future trade negotiations — and calls on other states to invoke political convenience disguised as a “necessity” in order to justify the breach of the Treaty. ».
