The infringement procedure initiated on Thursday by the European Commission, if the United Kingdom does not back down, should reach the Court of Justice of the European Union (EU), which could impose large fines on London.
It is a scenario that many consider distant, but also in 2015 few would believe that the United Kingdom would leave the European Union. Some people put water on the boil and say that this step is merely “a necessary administrative measure”, as commented by Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte. Which is still a fact: many Member States face dozens of lawsuits for contravening EU laws. According to AFP, this is the 94th action against the United Kingdom.
On the other hand, Johnson’s controversial Internal Market Act, criticized by all previous British heads of government, was passed by the House of Commons after several amendments in the specialty, but has yet to pass through the House of Lords, where conservatives are not in the majority.
Baroness Helena Kennedy, a laborer, accused the British government of “tearing up” the law after the passage of the Internal Market Law and envisaged a rare measure, the rejection of the legislation. For Kennedy, the Lords will be facing a “flagrant violation of international law”. In statements to the Scottish BBC, Helena Kennedy accused the Boris Johnson government of “Trumpism” and of being composed of “teenagers who don’t like the law and are prepared to subvert it in their own interest”.
The bill passed with 340 votes in favor and 256 against allows the United Kingdom to “not apply” agreed rules on which goods should be subject to customs controls, and on the other hand to establish its own rules for state aid to Ireland of the North, possibly undermining the EU’s demand for a level playing field between trading partners.
A spokesman at 10 Downing Street described the bill as necessary to ensure smooth trade in the UK. “We have clearly outlined our reasons for introducing measures related to the Northern Ireland protocol,” said the spokesman. “We need to create a legal safety net to protect the integrity of the UK’s internal market, ensure that ministers can always fulfill their obligations to Northern Ireland and protect the gains from the peace process.”
This infringement process, unlike dozens of others, has a gravity that makes it unique: the United Kingdom is about to violate the withdrawal agreement signed a year ago with the EU and which is in force, and endangering the peace agreement in Ireland.
In Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said the legislation passed in the House of Commons is “in complete contradiction” with Britain’s previous guarantee to avoid a land border on the island of Ireland.
Von der Leyen said the European Commission decided to start legal proceedings after the British government ignored an EU request to abandon the bill by the end of September.
“There could be no other answer,” declared MEP Pedro Silva Pereira, who was appointed Parliament’s rapporteur for the Withdrawal Agreement on Thursday. “It is a gross violation of the principle of good faith and international law,” said socialist parliamentarian.
Article 5 of the Withdrawal Agreement provides for both parties to take all measures to ensure the fulfillment of the obligations arising from the document and to refrain from taking any action that may affect the achievement of these objectives. Both are bound by the obligation to cooperate in good faith in the fulfillment of the agreement.
The EU has sent a “formal notification letter”, which could lead to a lengthy legal confrontation at the Court of Justice of the European Union – and given that some ministers of the Boris Johnson government have admitted the illegality, the United Kingdom risks heavy fines.
The UK has a month to justify itself. “We will respond to the letter in due course,” said a British government spokesman.
Negotiations in the last round
In the meantime, the two sides will continue to try to make a divorce settlement over trade, travel and future relationships.
EU and UK negotiators Michel Barnier and David Frost are meeting in Brussels this week for their final round of talks on a post-Brexit trade deal. Diplomats say these talks will not be disturbed by legal action, but London’s position cast further doubt on the negotiations ahead of a planned EU summit on 15 October.
If no agreement is reached by the end of October, European officials warn that it is difficult to see how it could be ratified by the end of the year, which means that the UK would leave the single market without a trade agreement.
This would accentuate what is already expected to be the Brexit economic shock, moreover with the consequences of the pandemic: tariffs applied under the rules of the World Trade Organization and the prospect of a dispute over fishing rights.
Johnson has promised that the UK will leave the EU with or without an agreement when a transition period expires at the end of the year.
In Brussels there is speculation about whether the British government really wants an agreement. Some European diplomats also say that breaking a deal is not a way of laying the groundwork for a second deal.
When Johnson signed the Northern Ireland protocol a year ago, he hailed it as an advance, only to say later that it was a hasty document that needed a substantial amendment.
The challenge has been how to maintain an invisible border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland in the south. The elimination of the border was a key part of the 1998 Good Friday Agreement, which was instrumental in ending three decades of sectarian violence between pro-British Protestants and pro-Irish Catholics.
The post-Brexit solution, under the protocol, was that Northern Ireland would continue to apply European rules on customs duties and health and product standards, making a border between the north and south of the island unnecessary.
– .
