Amid all the chaos of Brexit, it is hard at times to make sense of the choices and the options that face the UK.
The 2016 referendum was a non-binding vote won, we now know, by unlawful campaigning.
It invited no views on our future relationship with the EU and no preparation or planning was undertaken in anticipation of a vote to leave.
Read more: Exports to EU support 40,000 jobs in and around Glasgow, as no-deal cliff-edge fears mount
The UK Government’s handling of the referendum’s aftermath and the negotiations with the EU have been inept, misguided and incoherent.
The UK Parliament has a critical role to play in how this whole process ends and what shape the future takes.
Events move fast and what seemed settled last week can be up in the air the next.
It was with a view to bringing greater clarity and certainty to the process that my colleagues and I embarked on a legal case to answer a very straightforward question.
If, for whatever reason, the UK Parliament was to wish to instruct the UK Government to revoke the Article 50 letter sent to the EU in March 2017, could it do so knowing for certain what legal effect that would have?
Read more: Scots battle to win MPs' right to halt Brexit 'likely to succeed'
In particular, if the UK chose to remain in the EU, could it do so by withdrawing the Prime Minister’s letter?
Only the Court of Justice of the EU can answer that question following a referral by a UK court.
It has been a pleasure to work with politicians from across the political spectrum and from three legislatures to seek and ultimately be successful in having that referral made.
The answer could have profound implications for the future of all of us and will provide a degree of clarity that may assist Parliament in its deliberations.
- Andy Wightman is the Scottish Green Party MSP for Lothian
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel