John Finnis QC and John Larkin QC

Introducing the Internal Market bill isn’t unconstitutional

Getty images

In the row about the Internal Market bill, some important constitutional propositions are in danger of being misunderstood. The introduction of the bill, which would empower ministers to disapply provisions of the Ireland/Northern Ireland Protocol to the Withdrawal Agreement, has been widely reported as Government law-breaking. The Attorney General and Lord Chancellor have been criticised for failing to resign and for breaching their oaths to respect the rule of law. But do ministers break any rule of our law if they introduce a bill that conflicts with a treaty? Does introducing such a bill defy the constitutional principle of the rule of law? We think not.

Clauses 42 and 43 of the United Kingdom Internal Market bill, if enacted, will empower ministers to make regulations in relation to exit declarations governing goods moving from Northern Ireland to Great Britain and about the interpretation and application of the state aid provisions of the Protocol.

Comments

Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months

Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.

Already a subscriber? Log in