My Opinion on Brexit Remain/Leave - By Peace Igoni Pedro - NewzEmpire


Latest Gist, News on Entertainment, Celebs Gossip, Sports and Mp3 Downloads


Friday, November 16, 2018

My Opinion on Brexit Remain/Leave - By Peace Igoni Pedro

Peace Igoni Pedro
Peace Igoni Pedro.
The often rocky relationship between Britain and the European Union can be dated back to approximately half a century ago. Nevertheless, David Cameroon became the first prime minster to veto an EU treaty in 2011. He did this in order to protect Britain financial interest. Nevertheless, the real beginning of brexit can be dated back to 2013 in a speech by David Cameroon where he promised  to renegotiate the membership with the European union if the conservative party won the next general election. After he won the election he began to make arrangement with the European Union. In 2016 he announced the result of the negotiation. Consequently, June 23 was the day promised for referendum which was followed after the election in which England and Wales voted in favor for a brexit. After the resignation of David Cameroon, the new Prime Minster Theresa May declared her intention to strike article 50; as of the last election conducted the United Kingdom voted to leave with a figure of approximately 53.4% to leave, and 46.6% to stay While, the remaining outcome of Scotland saw a remain majority.
As Most of you already know there has been a deep political crisis in the United Kingdom cabinet. Following this crisis, some ministers, including Chief brexit negotiator have quit leaving the Prime Minster in a deep political emergency. Shortly after this turmoil the Minister of pension and works secretary resigned as of 15th November, 2018.
This piece of art aims to discuss the origin of the European Union, place forward argument on reasons to remain within the union, and reasons to leave with the support of statues and case law, give my opinion, and a conclusion would be reached.

From a historical point of view, European unity can be traced back to the seventeenth century. It was first propounded by a British Quaker named Williams Penn who suggested for the creation for a European parliament. [1] However, the more immediate push for European integration was formally enacted into law by the Maastricht treaty in Nov 1, 1993.This enactment was directed towards the unification of the European states. It was propelled by the fact that those who reside within a certain geographical area, and who speak similar language should co-exist amongst each other. It also enhanced the use of a single currency which is the euro. The euro is currently used in 19 member states within the European Union except the United Kingdom.
As of today the European Union is an international organization. It is especially a political, and economic entity. In terms of economic entity, the European Union has developed an internal structure of a single market, whose policies are strictly abided by each member state. The European Union is located in the European part of the world which consists of 28 member states respectively, and holds a population of approximately 513 million people. The EU member state includes, turkey, Italy, France, Germany, especially the United Kingdom which is the main point of discussion, and more sovereign state to mention.

The remain campaign
Free movement of worker within the European Union is one important reason the United Kingdom is advised to remain within the European Union. This is in accordance to section 45 TFEU, which states that there shall be free movement of workers within the European Union, and the freedom shall therefore abolish any form or kind of discrimination between each member state with regards to employment, payment of salaries, and other conditions of work. Over the past couple of years, the court has continually emphasized the importance of the non-discrimination on the basis of nationality. From the statement above, it is made obvious that the European Union affords the United Kingdom a position where they can freely work with/in other member state without discrimination. This is made clear in the European court of justice ruling in walrave and Koch[2]. Where the court held that article 45TFUE would apply even when the court work was done outside the European Union as long as employment was entered into within the European Union. Also, in the boukhalfa case [3] the employment of an EU national was entered into, and was performed in a non-member country where the EU national resided. When the court was involved, article 45 TFEU was applied and enforced. Furthermore, in the Peterson case, the court ruled that European Union law would be applicable with respect to any professional  activity carried out in the outside the territory  so long as the employment  retains a sufficiently close link with the European union.[4] From the analysis of these cases, it is clear that rules which directly or indirectly discriminate on the grounds of nationality will be caught by article 45TFEU. The European Union affords the United Kingdom opportunity not only to work freely within the European Union, but to work in other member state without discrimination, and protection of the European Union. For this reason, the United Kingdom is advised to remain within the European Union.
It is imperative to understand that free movement of goods is a reason why Britain should remain a member of the European Union. The free movement of goods is caught by article 34-37 of the TFEU. Article 34 catches quantitative restriction, and all measures that have similar results. This could also mean laws adopted by member states, and even European Union measures. The major aim of article 34 is that it forbids actions by a state that favors domestic goods to the detriment of other competiting products.   This article catches national law which prevents import from one member-state to another. This could also involve direct or indirect discrimination between domestic or imported goods. The European court of justice also stops measures that render it more difficult for importers to break into the single market. Consequently, this amounts to an import licenses which will be caught by article 34.[5]  The rule which article 34 manifest can be made clear in a case commission V United Kingdom.  The European commission argued that there was breach of article 30 where the United Kingdom legislation required that certain goods should not be sold in retail markets unless they were marked with their country of origin. For this reason Britain is urged to remain within the European Union, because article 30-34 catches restrictions or custom duties which do not allow for free movement of goods. If the United Kingdom decides to leave the European Union they would face a lot of difficulties why trading with the other member state in the form of tariffs, custom duties and equivalent measures to custom duties.
The issue of equal treatment and non-discrimination is one very important reason the United Kingdom cannot afford to leave the European Union. This anti-discrimination law was originally propounded in respect of equal remuneration between male and female workers. For decades, European Union action against discrimination was limited to discrimination in work place specifically between male and female.  However, article 19 of the Amsterdam treaty which came into force in 1999 ensured that the European Union must take measures to fight against discrimination based upon sex, racial or ethnic group, disability, sexual orientation and sex.  Article 19 is accordingly divided into two part which is directive 2000/43, known as the race directive, This legislation prohibits discrimination on the grounds of racial, and ethnic origin in a range of contexts. While, Directive 2000/78, known as the framework employment directive, prohibits discrimination in the field of employment on the ground which include religion, disability, age and sexual orientation. The case deutsche Telekom V Schroder demonstrated the court decision on the rights not to be discriminated against on the basis of gender which is inherent in the fundamental human rights.  [6]

The next issue which would be considered on the grounds of the United Kingdom staying in the European Union is citizenship of the European Union. In it early days, the idea of European unity was greeted by such academic skepticism. Many critics focused on the idea of reciprocal duties. Nevertheless, European citizenship unity came into force. Consequently, the legal concept of citizenship of EU law was first introduced by the treaty of European Union. Notwithstanding the fact that the idea of European citizenship had been in circulation for a long time; According to the Grzelczyk case, “union citizenship is destined to be the fundamental status of nationals of the member state”.[7] The treaty provision on citizenship is clearly stated in article 20 and 21 of the TFEU. This treaty is assumed to create independent and directly effective rights to move and reside in a member state, irrespective of whether the person concerned falls in the category of any existing EU law. This article has further strengthened in various ways the right of EU nationals to challenge national restrictions on movement, residence, entry and enjoyment of other benefit within the EU.  Article 21 of the TFEU was demonstrated in theRunevic case. In this case, it was held that when a citizen of the union moves to another member state and marries the national of that state. This cannot constitute treatment that is less favorable than that which she enjoyed before she availed herself of the opportunity offered by the treaty in relation to free movement of person. Consequently, the absence of such a right is not liable to deter a citizen of the union from exercising the right of movement recognized in Article 21 of the TFEU and , to an extent , does not constitute a restriction. [8]  In relation to this case law it would be advised that the United Kingdom should not leave the European Union as they are afforded the right to free movement with the European states and they enjoy residence within the European Union.

The single market is the next which would be discussed. This is a central, and a very essential part of the European Union .The European Union is a single market which tariffs are not imposed. Over the years, The United Kingdom alongside, the 27 member states have operated a single market, and have benefitted from trade deals between the other member states. The techniques which has been used to achieve a single market is that EU laws prohibits national rules which hinder cross-boarders trade within member states, because they discriminate against goods or services from other member state, and render it difficult to for each member state to access each other’s products. The next technique is that the single market requires is known as positive integration. This is where barriers like health, safety, technical specification, and the likes are harmonized through EU directives. Positive integration is found in articles 114 and 115 TFEU and other specific treaty articles.[9]

Security is one sub- topic which would be discussed. According to Michael Fallon the defence secretary the United Kingdom benefited from the European Union, because it is through the European Union that there is exchange of passenger and criminal records and this helps work together on counter terrorism, he also said the United Kingdom needed an organization like the European Union when dealing with Russian aggression or terrorism. “In may 2018  Andrew parker said who is the head of M15 said “in today’s world we  need that shared strength with the European union more than ever .He went on to further elaborate that “he hopes for a comprehensive and enduring agreement that tackles obstacles and allows for professionals to get on with the job together”. This is one argument which the united kingdom should consider in order to stay within the European union.

Leave campaign
A lead Brexiter Boris Johnson suggested that the United Kingdom could adopt the Canadian style arrangement. The Canadian style entails that the United Kingdom would have access to the market. This means that the United Kingdom is able to freely trade with other member state without tariffs, and custom duties. Although, they would not be a member of the European Union. This argument however, rejected by David Cameroon, and later rejected by Boris Johnson.  This argument is very imperative, and this is one reason for the leave campaign group. However later suggestions state that European Union will want to make life really difficult for the United Kingdom to discourage breakaway. Thus, Britain would have to compromise agreeing to regulatory equivalence.
The next argument which was put forward for the leave campaign was stated by former work and pension’s secretary in respect to security. According to Iain Duncan smith, former work and pensions secretary who advocated for the leave campaign, said that Britain was leaving the ``door open`` to terrorist attacks by remaining member of the European Union. In this statement he elaborated that. "This open border does not allow us to check and control people"

Also, Kemp a former head of international terrorism team at the cabinet stated that by leaving the European Union the United Kingdom would be able to identify and determine who does and who doesn’t have access to the United Kingdom. He further stated that failure to do so would endanger the people to terrorism and betray the country. This is one argument which people have made to leave the European Union.
According to a member of parliament David Davis “this is a moment of truth. This is the fork in the road. Do we pursue a future as an independent nation or accept EU domination, imprisonment in the customs union and 2nd class status. Cabinet and all conservative Mps should stand up, be counted and say no to this capitulation” from the statement he has delivered, it is clearly seen that the campaign group does not want to stay because of they believe that being part of the European union limits their parliamentary sovereignty as well as the fact that they would be treated like second class citizens. This is a reason why the United Kingdom is advised to leave the European Union.

My view from a layman point.
The United Kingdom is a huge contributor to the European Union. It is one of three major countries that contribute to the European Union. In 2017 alone the UK made a contribution of approximately £13.0 billion. From my perspective I presumed that the government could negotiate brexit especially for the single market in the Canadian style proposed by Boris Johnson.

The law.
However, the impact on national law is that the European Union measure renders inapplicable any conflicting provision of national law prevents the adoption of the new and prevents the adoption of the new national law that would conflict with European Union law. In the Simmental principal does not require that national court to invalidate or annual the provision of national law that conflict with E.U law, but rather to refuse to apply it.[10] This is what the law states and this is what should be applied.

Conclusively, I would advice that the United Kingdom remain members of the European Union because they benefit from the union also, the United Kingdom has a lot to gain in terms of NHS, security, immigration, especially the single market. Although, I haven’t stated this in the discussion above.

This work has been sourced from different sites and textbooks.

In the name of love cities shall blossom.

[1] D Urwin, The community of Europe: A History of European integration, 2nd edn, 1995}
[2] Case 36/37walrave and Koch v Association union cyclist international[1974] ECR 1405
[3]  Case C -214/95 Boukhalfa v BRD[1996]
[4] Case C-544/11peterson {1941]
[5]  Case 51-54/71 international fruit company V produktschap voor Groenten en fruit [1971]ECR1107
[6]  Case C-50/96Telekom V Schroder[2000]ECR 1-743
[7] Case C-184/99 Grezelczyk v centre public diade sociale d’aide sociale[2001]ECR1-6193,[31]
[8]  Case c-391/09 Runevic-vardyn EU:C:2011:291

[10] Case C-1981 01 CIF

No comments:

Post a Comment

Please Drop your Comments!