FU (Fed Up) wrote:
This is vital as the EU is exposed as of now to someone calling them out, under their own rules, as they state that it must be unanimous, or the treaty fails. So surely they are open to challenge, via the Courts, as is our present shower of a government, for when the Lisbon Lie was put before Parliament, it was on the understanding that unananimity was required. Therefore the Treaty is now no longer the same legal entity, that Parliament voted on.
Also the case can be argued that we cannot and do not live under a system, that is allowed to change the rules/laws, as it sees fit, without going through the correct motions, or else all common and contract law becomes null and void.
I agree with all of that. It is clearly what needs to be done. It would be the right way to proceed in any properly accountable system.
However, the mere threat of such proceedings should have kept any potential rogue operators in check but recent events clearly demonstrate it hasn't. A line has been crossed. [Is it that white one in the road over there? Ed.
I'd say this is proof that we were in new territory, as of course we have been for some time. I don't think we can rely any longer on the courts. I get the strong impression that their deliberations are now based on operating principles derived more from some kind of mediaeval sophistry, perverse literalism or just outright casuistry and big windbag bollox for the sole purpose of serving the political agenda rather than anything suitable for a disinterested pursuit of justice.
This is Alice in Nightmare Wonderland. It's like being in one of those old horror films where all that appears natural and wholesome is gradually revealed—to a naive and innocent victim who, naturally, dismisses all the clues—to have been eaten away from the inside by a deeply malevolent presence, until finally events build to a crescendo and he is confronted with the full-brown horror of his situation.
Cue the 7th Cavalry.
Failing that, a brooned-off, bloodthirsty, British mob. (Actually that would be my first choice now.)
"The court is very surprised that the government apparently proposes to ratify while the claimant's challenge to the decision not to hold a referendum on ratification is before the court."
Oh I'm sure they'll get over it and resume business as usual shortly.