« The War on Weed Is Winding Down – But Will Monsanto Be the Winner?Us v. Them »

Brexit Referendum Is Non-Binding

June 24th, 2016

Stephen Lendman

All the fuss and bother about Brexit largely ignores its non-binding status - parliament, not voters deciding if Britain stays or leaves the EU, the latter extremely unlikely.

Writing in the Financial Times, British lawyer David Allen Green explained Brexit voting is “advisory,” not “mandatory.” Parliament has final say.

MPs can legally disregard the public’s will either way, they alone empowered to decide the path Britain chooses.

What happens ahead is “a matter of politics not law. It will come down to what is politically expedient and practicable,” said Green.

Various options exist, including supporting Thursday’s outcome, ignoring it, or “re-negotiating another deal and put(ting) that to another referendum” - repeating the process “until voters eventually vote the ‘right’ way,” what’s best for monied interests, not them.

Invoking Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty is another matter entirely, legally binding, unlike Thursday’s vote. It states as follows:

“1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.

2. A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union.

That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.

3. The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.

4. For the purposes of paragraphs 2 and 3, the member of the European Council or of the Council representing the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in the discussions of the European Council or Council or in decisions concerning it.

A qualified majority shall be defined in accordance with Article 238(3)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

5. If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to rejoin, its request shall be subject to the procedure referred to in Article 49.”

Green highlighted key points. Member states can choose how to vote on withdrawal - by referendum, parliament or other means.

The withdrawal process begins with formal notification. Once “given, the member state and the EU are stuck with it.”

Member states wishing to withdraw have up to two years maximum to complete the process “unless this period is extended by unanimous agreement.”

Once withdrawal intentions are announced and initiated, there’s no going back. At the same time, what’s “created by international agreement can be undone” the same way.

Brussels could “come up with some muddling fudge which holds off the two year deadline,” or a new treaty amendment could be adopted.

Politics alone will drive what happens ahead, not the will of the people. Britain is no more democratic than America - nor are any other EU countries.

Special interests decide things. Whatever they want they get. However voting turns out, government policy “is to remain in the EU,” said Green.

Leaving would require Prime Minister David Cameron invoking Article 50, unlikely given his vocal opposition to Brexit.

-###-

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

His new book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks World War III".

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Networkns with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.

No feedback yet

Voices

Voices

  • Fred Gransville I. A Pill Nation: The New Face of an Old Experiment Imagine a mother at the pharmacy counter with prescription in hand, wavering under the pharmacist's gaze. Her seven-year-old has been diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity…
  • By David Swanson, World BEYOND War photo: wrp.org.uk Have you read “The Case for Military Intervention to Stop the Gaza Genocide“? I don’t mind promoting it to you, since I agree with most of it (and also consider most of it to do absolutely nothing to…
  • By Sally Dugman ...give up conforming to “group-think”... From my angle, a not entirely true assessment exists and here is excerpted from it, from Martin Armstrong’s article: The Domestic Civil Disturbance Quick Reaction Force The people have lost all…
  • © 2025 Tracy Turner From Reagan’s smile to Trump’s pill of control, America’s descent into the hybrid dystopia is no longer fiction—it is the spectacle we live, the sedation we swallow, the surveillance we obey. America in 2025 is Orwellian, Huxleyean,…
  • By Gabriel Aguirre, World BEYOND War The presence of more than 877 military bases around the world, with at least 76 of them in Latin America, together with the presence of the Fourth Fleet, constitute a real threat to peace and stability in the world…
  • By Mark Aurelius Three momentous words: cataclysm, catastrophe and apocalypse all in one title? How to deflate all this hyperbole (if it can be done)? Well, at least this is not blatant statement about a nuclear war? Although there could be that as well…
  • © 2025 Ted Wrong A raw confession of faith from the margins—where loyalty to Christ defies politics, church labels, and “types” of Christians. From the depths of the political and spiritual wilderness, I make a…
  • Katherine Smith PhD How land reform, privatizations of strategic minerals, and Israel's balancing act reveal the economics driving the war in Ukraine The Western media have oversimplified the war in Ukraine into morality drama theater: democracy vs.…
  • By David Swanson, World BEYOND War "Lord of the Flies is a story made up by a disturbed Nazi..." Did you know that the murders and rapes and free-for-all violent chaos in New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina didn’t actually happen, and that the…
  • By Sally Dugman It, I suppose, is really easy to denigrate and castigate Jews as a whole after watching them laughingly slaughter Palestinian civilians of all ages about which I wrote here: Red Light—Green Light And Other Games Played by Children And…
Censorship is not safety. It is authoritarianism in disguise. Bing is not just a search engine—it is an information gatekeeper. Click the red button to email MSN and Bing.com executives. This message challenges their censorship of ThePeoplesVoice.org and demands transparency, algorithmic fairness, and an end to suppression of free expression.
August 2025
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
 << <   > >>
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31            

  XML Feeds

b2
FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted articles and information about environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. This news and information is displayed without profit for educational purposes, in accordance with, Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 of the US Copyright Law. Thepeoplesvoice.org is a non-advocacy internet web site, edited by non-affiliated U.S. citizens. editor
ozlu Sozler GereksizGercek Hava Durumu Firma Rehberi Hava Durumu Firma Rehberi E-okul Veli Firma Rehberi