When mischief in Mrs May’s misnamed Withdrawal Agreement with the European Union is mentioned in the media, we usually only hear about the so-called Backstop. This vexatious Backstop is called the Protocol on Northern Ireland in the Agreement. But if Mrs May’s misnamed Withdrawal Agreement gets through Parliament in time, then the transition period will start on 29th March 2019. And from then on Britain will be in peril on a sea of troubles far worse than any Backstop.
Article 131 in the Agreement allows all EU councils and other bodies, including the EU Court of Justice, to retain their present powers over Britain in the transition period. But Article 7 in the Agreement says that Britain will have no representation on any EU bodies during the transition period. So, the British government will have no vote or veto in the transition period against EU decisions that damage the United Kingdom.
We rarely, if ever, hear in the media, printed or electronic, about the Joint Committee set up to carry out the Agreement in the transition period. It is a joint EU & UK committee, but the Court of Justice of the EU will have the final word in resolving disputes on it. This is because the Agreement is a legal document and its implementation a legal matter, and the CJEU is the supreme interpreter of EU law in any disputes between the EU and UK sides of the Joint Committee.
The Arbitration Panel set up in Article 168 to resolve disputes on the Joint Committee is just a fig leaf for the Court of Justice of the European Union, which intervenes in Article 174. So, the United Kingdom is there on the Joint Committee only for the sake of appearances, as the Court of Justice will always rule in favour of the European Union side.
Articles 164 to 169 in the Agreement give the Joint Committee enormous power over the Agreement’s implementation in the transition period, which will include most things that matter. Clause 2 of Article 166 says that the decisions of the Joint Committee “will be binding” on the EU & UK. In other words, the EU Court of Justice, through the EU side of the Joint Committee, will overrule the British government throughout the transition period.
So, Britain in the transition period (towards its total subjection) will be ruled by the EU as a colony which the EU can loot at its leisure. Britain will be subject to taxation without representation. The Joint Committee may double the £39 billion currently suggested as the annual penalty on British taxpayers for their rebellion on the 23rd June 2016.
The Joint Committee could place Britain under martial law, one of the policy options that Whitehall mandarins have been considering recently if there are riots in British cities. And the European Gendarmerie Force could be requested to enter Britain to suppress any resistance to the rule of the Joint Committee. In Parliament, while Mrs May was Home Secretary, a deputy Home Office minister said that it was willing to invite the EGF onto British soil. That must have been Mrs May’s policy.
Government ministers of an EU member country can ask for the assistance of the European Gendarmerie Force, but the EGF remains under the central command of the EU after it enters the territory of any member state. It is unlikely that a member state would invite the EGF onto its territory unless it was a whole-hearted supporter of the EU central government in Brussels. Mrs May evidently has no fears about inviting the EGF onto British soil, which indicates that she is a whole-hearted supporter of the EU central government in Brussels.
We should remember the Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Communities in the Brussels Merger Treaty of 1965, now in the Lisbon Treaty. By that Protocol, the bureaucrats of the EU Commission granted themselves a lifelong legal immunity for any acts they committed during their EU duties. That immunity has spread through later EU legislation to all officials and other servants of the EU (including Europol). The proliferation of that legal immunity gives a free hand to EGF personnel to commit murder and any other crimes in the course of their EU duties on British soil.
Article 132 in the Agreement says that the Joint Committee can, before 1st July 2020, extend the transition period “until 31st December 20XX”. At first, the transition period will only be until the end of 2020, as Article 126 says. But the EU members of this Joint Committee can recommend before July 2020 that Britain’s transition period should be extended until 31st December 2099.
If the UK side of the Joint Committee disputes that, then the dispute can only be referred to the joint Arbitration Panel. Article 168 says that only the Panel can arbitrate disputes on the Joint Committee. The Panel is unlikely to agree on a decision, as like the JC, the numbers on its EU & UK sides are equal. The Panel’s only purpose seems to be to funnel JC disputes to the Court of Justice of the EU.
Therefore, the dispute will be referred to the Court of Justice, which has a constitutional duty to work “towards the ever-closer union of the peoples of Europe”. Which transition period for Britain will work towards the ever-closer union of the people of Europe? One ending on the 31st December 2020, or one ending on the 31st December 2099? The Court of Justice will rule in favour of the one ending on 31st December 2099, to keep Britain closer to the European Union.
So, from the start of the transition period, Mrs May’s misnamed Withdrawal Agreement sets up an EU dictatorship over Britain until the end of 2099, known as the Joint Committee. The 23rd June 2016 saw a massive vote against EU rule, and Mrs May’s misnamed Withdrawal Agreement intends to crush British resistance to EU rule, if necessary, by force. Oh, and by the way, clause 10 of Annex VIII in the Agreement says that the proceedings of this Joint Committee will be “confidential”, in other words, secret.
When the “31st December 20XX” becomes the 31st December 2099 the BBC, also known as the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation, will not be allowed to tell us about it. Although the BBC never broadcasts any news anyway that Brussels doesn’t want us to know anyway. Like those eight decades under the Direct Rule of the European Union through its Joint Committee. Those eight decades under the jackboot of the EU are waiting for Britain now, in Article 132 of Mrs May’s (No) Withdrawal Agreement.
from PMB Yes thanks for reminding us just how bad May’s deal is. Could Ralph Prothero’s article please be ‘sent to’ ‘put before Ms May. MAKE HER SEE JUST WHAT SHE IS DOING. We know she is at heart a Remainer. And we know she would prefer to have all Tories on her side. (Even she must realise by now that is impossible.) She does not want to lose her job – apparently hopes to influence choice of next leader. BUT SURELY even she is not so down right EVIL as to knowingly put Britain under the jackboots of the E.U. Brown Shirts.
I’ve mixed metaphors or something, gendarmes are French aren’t they? But it really does look like the E.U. ARE intending to move in the same way Hitler did, first with his brown shirts, then the rest. I find it hard to believe even our Civil Servants, Main Stream Media and all the rest of the Remain Stubborn Mules are knowingly evil. BUT THEN NOR WERE THE GERMAN PEOPLE.
Chilling. Add in the Defence give-away and this WA is nothing but vassalage.
Talking of puzzling things happening in cyberspace, for a while whenever I tried to open & read an article in Independence Daily on a computer in my local public library there was a warning like this: “Your connection is not private. Attackers may steal your information from Independence Daily, e.g. passwords, details of credit cards & bank accounts, etc.” Then there was a blue Back To Safety button, to tap to flee the danger of Independence Daily. There was no alternative to that blue Back To Safety button.
The council computer would not allow you to go farther into Independence Daily than beyond Independence Daily’s first page showing the day’s contents. This had been going on since the name changed to Independence Daily about the middle of December last. But they’ve stopped doing it now.
On the EGF – or the principle of Corpus Juris that Mrs May was fairly placid about in 2012, to say the least – EU law would have extended to the UK and made anyone not following its diktat – at any level – guilty until proved innocent and open to arrest by the EuroGendarmerie (they who seem happy to shoot at anyone in a yellow vest disobedient enough to question the New Order)
Under the WA the Uk would have no legal protection, the only “guarantee” of good intentions is what Mrs May has smiling assumed is the “only deal” and dismissed questions about. It is worth remembering what happened when she was Home Secretary and cutting our own Police numbers. Mrs May said in 2012, of the EuroGendFor, “Of course we will call upon them, if we see the need” – hmmm And we will be paying 39bn for this?
These proposals were in actual fact first examined in 1998 and a committee led by QC and MP Humfrey Mullins, who was so horrified by its implications that the plan was hurriedly hushed up by the Westminster establishment and quickly went off the BBC and mainstream media radar. This body of law is totally at odds with Habeas Corpus, (and starts with the precedent of Justinian 1 in the C6th, a body of Imperial enactments no less, he who introduced the genocide in Europe of all and any questioning the Holy Roman Empire) this European Civil Code is arguably merely a means to control the people and all their freedoms and actions – its role to enforce the EU prosecutor’s decisions if local enforcement agencies are “recalcitrant”, and – to quote the learned QC – “it will look like, feel like and be like.. a military invasion by an armed, hostile foreign force… who will owe allegiance only to Brussels”
So this is what Mrs May wants.
It looks more and more as if Leavers are the equivalent of “La Résistance” during the War, resisting the fascist takeover; freedom-fighters trying now from the inside to restore sovereign values of self-determination and liberty from oppression, all that the WA is resolutely opposed to and which the Mrs Mays, and others who seem to be in cahoots with the technocratic imperialists, have decided is “progressive” and “the only way”. It is the 3rd-Way.
Not relevant to article but please please please circulate and get as many signatures as possible to this petition for legal advice to be published re Brexit
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/234014
After months – One thousand, four hundred and eleven votes to six o’clock this evening.
Nearly as many as people wanting UKIP ”out of you-rope bags” (free but only available in South West Englandshire)
I suppose you would prefer to have this forgotten about rather than publicised. I did ask you whether you could think of a better way of publicising this, but no answer
It is rare nowadays to find anyone who has read Gibbons ” Decline and fall of the Roman Empire “. The much vaunthe Roman ” Peace” kept peace in Rome itself for more than 500 years.. In order to maintain that ” peace ” Roman armies roamed, looted, enslaved, and slaughtered the known world in a search for wealth and prestige and slaves to send back to Rome.. Rome drenched the world in blood, not just for the duration of Rome for some 7 to 900 years but for hundreds of centuries after. Ambitious proto emporers from everywhere wanted to emulate or plunder this wealth and power.
They had a slogan; ” Pax Romana.” ( The roman peace )
The only benefit to the world was that they culled the species. Already long overdue again. It’ll probably be more efficient and effective this time.
History is neither good nor bad. Just Remorseless.
“The only benefit to the world was that they culled the species. Already long overdue again. It’ll probably be more efficient and effective this time.”
Well if anyone’s gotta go, sooner you than me TG!
Due to anno domini, sorry , The chances are, I’m first.
So true, we see it everywhere in the UK.
Thank you for the reminder Ralph. I believe a list of the (40 or so?) unacceptable items in addition to the backstop was published but I cannot recall where just now. We should anticipate the use of EGF to suppress us and prepare to defend ourselves just as our forefathers readied themselves to deal with the the Nazis.
In the Spectator I am sure!