[ad_1]
The infringement procedure initiated this 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 bring water to a boil and say that this step is simply “a necessary administrative measure”, as Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte commented. What remains a fact: many Member States face dozens of lawsuits for violating EU laws. According to AFP, this is action number 94 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 field, but has yet to go through the House of Lords. , where conservatives are not in the majority.
Baroness Helena Kennedy, a worker, accused the British government of “breaking” the law after the passage of the Internal Market Act and envisioned an unusual measure, the rejection of the legislation. For Kennedy, the Lords will face a “flagrant violation of international law.” Speaking to BBC Scotland, Helena Kennedy accused the government of Boris Johnson of “Trumpism” and of being composed of “teenagers who do not like the law and are willing to subvert it in their own interest.”
The bill passed with 340 votes in favor and 256 against allows the UK to “not apply” the 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 . North, possibly undermining the EU’s demand for a level playing field among trading partners.
A spokesman for 10 Downing Street described the bill as necessary to ensure smooth trade in the UK. “We have clearly delineated our reasons for introducing measures related to the Northern Ireland protocol,” the spokesman said. “We need to create a legal safety net to protect the integrity of the UK’s domestic market, to ensure that ministers can always fulfill their obligations to Northern Ireland and to protect the achievements of the peace process.”
This infringement process, unlike many others, has a severity that makes it unique: The United Kingdom is on the verge of violating the withdrawal agreement signed a year ago with the EU and which is in force, and which endangers the peace agreement in Ireland.
In Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said that legislation passed in the House of Commons is “in total contradiction” with Britain’s earlier guarantee to avoid a land border on the island of Ireland.
Von der Leyen said the European Commission decided to initiate legal proceedings after the British government ignored an EU request to abandon the bill in late September.
“There could be no other answer,” said Pedro Silva Pereira MEP on Thursday, who was appointed Parliament’s rapporteur for the Withdrawal Agreement. “It is a flagrant violation of the principle of good faith and international law,” he said. socialist parliamentarian.
Article 5 of the Withdrawal Agreement establishes that both parties will take all measures to ensure compliance with the obligations derived from the document and will refrain from taking any action that may affect the achievement of these objectives. Both are subject to the obligation to cooperate in good faith in the performance of the contract.
The EU has sent a “formal notification letter”, which could lead to a lengthy legal confrontation in the Court of Justice of the European Union, and as some ministers in Boris Johnson’s government have admitted the illegality, the UK runs the risk of 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 parties will continue to try to reach a divorce settlement over trade, travel and future relationships.
EU and UK negotiators Michel Barnier and David Frost will meet in Brussels this week for their final round of talks on a post-Brexit trade deal. Diplomats say these talks will not be disrupted by legal action, but London’s position casts further doubt on the negotiations ahead of the EU summit scheduled for October 15.
If no deal is reached by the end of October, European officials caution that it is difficult to see how it could be ratified by the end of the year, meaning the UK would exit the single market without a trade deal.
This would accentuate what is already expected to be the economic shock of Brexit, in addition to 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 a deal when a transition period expires at the end of the year.
There is speculation in Brussels about whether the British government really wants a deal. Some European diplomats also say that breaking an agreement is not a way to lay the groundwork for a second agreement.
When Johnson signed the Northern Ireland protocol a year ago, he praised it as a breakthrough, only to later say it was a rushed document in need of substantial amendment.
The challenge has been how to maintain an invisible border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland in the south. The removal 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, according to the protocol, was that Northern Ireland would continue to apply European rules on customs duties and product and health standards, making the border between the north and south of the island unnecessary.
