‘Appalling’: Fury over European Court of Justice concessions after Brexit
ALLOWING the European Court of Justice (ECJ) to intefere in the UK's affairs after Brexit would be “appalling”, Tory MP Nadine Dorries has declared.
The Government is expected to allow the court to have a permanent role in protecting the rights of EU migrants even after Britain leaves the bloc.
Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt confirmed the Government policy on ITV’s Peston on Sunday show, insisting it was a “technical point” and European law would no longer hold sway over British law.
But it has caused outrage from leading Eurosceptics, including Iain Duncan-Smith and former Court of Appeal judge Sir Richard Aitkens.
Related articles
Asked about it on ITV's Peston, Ms Dorries said: “I think I would probably find that appalling too.”
She went on: “I think when the negotiations take place the position will be clarified.
“But if we leave with no deal which is everyday becoming a step closer well then that situation will change also.”
Sir Richard has warned such a Brexit agreement allowing continued ECJ jurisdiction would be "tantamount to reversing the result of the 2016 referendum".
GETTY/ITV
He was backed by the Conservative former Cabinet minister Mr Duncan Smith who suggested it could result in European judges ruling on future trade disputes between Britain and the EU.
Sir Richard, the president of the Lawyers for Britain group, which campaigned for Leave in the referendum, warned her not to compromise on the issue of the jurisdiction of the ECJ in order to secure an agreement on citizens' rights.
In a letter to Mrs May, seen by The Sunday Telegraph, he expressed concern that she was heading for an arrangement in which British judges would be able to refer specific cases relating to EU citizens to the ECJ for a "binding interpretation".
He said: "After the UK leaves the European Union, the rights of EU citizens in the UK will be governed by a bilateral treaty between the UK and the EU.
GETTY
"I know of no instance in current international relations where a sovereign state that has entered into a treaty with another sovereign entity such as the EU has accepted as binding the rulings of the court of the other party.
"If the ECJ were given the exclusive right to interpret the proposed UK/EU treaty in relation to EU citizens' rights to enter and stay in the UK, the right of the UK to 'control' UK borders and the rights of all citizens who lived in the UK would be lost forever.
"That would be tantamount to reversing the result of the 2016 referendum."
In a separate article in the Telegraph, Mr Duncan Smith warns the plan would be "quite unacceptable" as it would put the UK in the position of "ceding power to a foreign court".
GETTY
He warned: "Any oversight in relation to EU citizens could also lead to a mission creep in which the EU demands similar arrangements for legal disputes on trade and other areas."
The interventions come at the start of a crucial week for Theresa May which could determine whether EU leaders give the go-ahead for trade talks to begin.
She travels to Brussels tomorrow to meet European Commissioner Jean-Claude Juncker with the EU side insisting she must improve her offer on the terms of Britain's withdrawal if there is to be progress at the EU's December summit.
These include settling Britain's divorce bill, the resolving the status of Northern Ireland's border with the Republic and the future rights of EU nationals living in the UK and British nationals in the EU.
