Report comment

To Stuart Hathaway, 16:39: but are you satisfied that consent was express and sufficiently clear to justify a fairly major constitutional change concerning what is municipal law and what is governed by international treaty? As I understand it, the UK government, which is elected, negotiated the following clause in protocol 30 of the CFR:

'(1) The Charter does not extend the ability of the Court of Justice of the European Union, or any court or tribunal of Poland or the United Kingdom, to find that the laws, regulations or administrative provisions, practices or action of Poland or the United Kingdom are inconsistent with the fundamental rights, freedoms and principles that it reaffirms.'

The Luxembourg court subsequently said that this was not an opt-out at all. It is certainly true that the UK has consented to the CJEU's power to have final say over the meaning of the EU treaties. You say, the UK government has therefore *implicitly* assented to powers of judicial review by a foreign court, from which previously it *explicitly* withheld assent. Are you really happy that this is a sound, legitimate basis for a massive extension of the scope of a foreign court's power?

By your argument, that must mean the UK government has consented to anything the CJEU decides, and to open-ended frustration of its will. When the CJEU has such flexible scope to extend its own powers, consent to it is necessarily uninformed and meaninglessness – there can be no saying to what power we have given our consent because we don't know how far it will expand. It is like nailing jelly to the wall.

Which brings me back to the political question, which you avoided. You cannot honestly, rationally believe that this is a solid political basis for the court's jurisdiction. In fact, I'd suggest the reason the jurisdiction of the CJEU has been expressly *rejected* by the UK, in a direct vote, is precisely because the court presumed for so long to expand its powers with complete indifference to the consent of those within its jurisdiction. Because, that is, of bad faith.

We consent to be governed by law. Supporters of the laws created by the European treaties have for years been killing their own babies by pretending that acceptance and consent are negligible. It is self-defeating foolishness.