Brexit: Campaigners seek judicial review of 2016 vote

Brexit: Campaigners seek judicial review of 2016 vote

Dec 9, 2018 | Articles, Campaigns & Events, News

The UK in EU Challenge group says the result should be quashed because of “misconduct” by pro-Leave campaigners.

Mr Justice Ouseley’s decision is expected on either Monday or Tuesday.

An earlier attempt to challenge the result was rejected on the grounds that it had not been proven that any wrongdoing affected the vote’s outcome.

The case is being brought against the government by four British citizens living on the European continent, Susan Wilson, Elinore Gayson, Carole-Anne Richards and John Shaw.

They say the Article 50 process, by which the UK is leaving the EU, should be halted due to breaches of spending limits and other irregularities by leave-supporting groups during the referendum.

Lawyers for the group say the infractions, which resulted in Vote Leave and Leave.EU being fined £61,000 and £70,000 respectively by the Electoral Commission earlier this year, cast doubt on the legitimacy of the result under the terms of the 1983 Representation of The People Act.

‘Proven illegalities’

Speaking after the hearing, Susan Wilson said she was hopeful of success.

“We also maintain our firm belief that the referendum result cannot be considered the ‘will of the people’,” she said.

“The Leave campaign’s fraudulent behaviour has been proven by the Electoral Commission and we are continually frustrated that the government fails to acknowledge the impact of this illegality and continues to defend its position.”

Read full story on the BBC website

Jon Danzig’s World – EU referendum broke code of good practice

Jon Danzig’s World – EU referendum broke code of good practice

Nov 26, 2018 | Articles

In all democracies, it’s essential that elections – including referendums – are run fairly, and that the regulatory authority has the power to annul an election or referendum if serious irregularities may have affected the result.

That’s not just my opinion. Such a requirement forms part of the Venice Commission’s ‘Code of Good Practice on Referendums’.  Although the code is voluntary and not legally binding, the UK is one of the 61 member states of the Commission and helped to form the Code, which was adopted in 2006. The Commission advised me:
 
 
“The Code was and is strongly supported by the Committee of Ministers recommending to the member States to respect its provisions.”
The UK’s Foreign Secretary, Jeremy Hunt, currently sits on the Commission’s Committee of Ministers.
Clause II 3. 3 e) of the Venice Code states:
‘The appeal body must have authority to annul the referendum where irregularities may have affected the outcome. It must be possible to annul the entire referendum or merely the results for one polling station or constituency. In the event of annulment of the global result, a new referendum must be called.’
In the UK, our Electoral Commission is the independent regulatory body for elections and referendums, set up by Parliament to “regulate political finance in the UK” and to “promote public confidence in the democratic process and ensure its integrity.” 
 
I asked the Commission if they have the power to annul a referendum, in accordance with the recommendations of the Venice Code.
 
They replied:
“In short, no we do not have the power to annul an election or referendum.”
If the Electoral Commission had the power to annul a referendum in accordance with the Venice Code, then it’s unlikely that members of the public would now be calling on the High Court to declare the EU referendum “void” as a result of serious irregularities. 
 
The case of Susan Wilson & Others versus The Prime Minister, is scheduled to move to a full hearing on 7 December.
The case will argue that Brexit must be declared void and the notification of Article 50 quashed because, “various criminal offences may have been committed”. 
 
Read the full Jon Danzig’s article in his blog…
Brexit: High Court to rule if referendum vote ‘void’ as early as Christmas after Arron Banks investigation

Brexit: High Court to rule if referendum vote ‘void’ as early as Christmas after Arron Banks investigation

Nov 25, 2018 | Articles, News

The High Court will rule as early as Christmas whether Brexit should be declared “void”, in a legal case given a turbo-boost by the criminal investigation into Leave funder Arron Banks.

Judges are poised to fast track the potentially explosive challenge, after Theresa May’s refusal to act on the growing evidence of illegality in the 2016 referendum campaign, The Independent can reveal.

 

Lawyers describe that failure as “absolutely extraordinary” – given the National Crime Agency’s (NCA) probe into suspicions of “multiple” criminal offences committed by Mr Banks and the Leave.EU campaign.

Now The Independent understands the case is likely to move to a full hearing and a ruling within weeks of opening on 7 December, with the clock ticking on the UK’s departure from the EU next March.

Both its lawyers and a leading academic believe its chances of success have been given a big boost by the unfolding scandal and the government’s refusal to recognise the gravity of what is being exposed.

The government is expected to deploy Sir James Eadie QC – the star barrister who led the unsuccessful battle for the government to trigger Article 50 without parliament’s consent – in a sign of the case’s importance.

Read full article in The Guardian

 

Theresa May admits she knew about Leave rule flout before Article 50

Theresa May admits she knew about Leave rule flout before Article 50

Sep 12, 2018 | Articles, News

The confession came in response to a high court challenge to the Brexit vote being pursued by British citizens living in France, Italy and Spain.

The expats want to stop the UK leaving the EU, and went to the courts after the Electoral Commission found “beyond a reasonable doubt” that Vote Leave and BeLeave broke the law during the 2016 referendum campaign by exceeding spending limits.

They argue that the conduct of the Brexit backing campaigners should nullify the result.

But May’s lawyer says their argument is “unsustainable”.

In his submission to the court, which was released by the Brits abroad, Joseph Barrett of 11KBW chambers says: “At the time the decision to give article 50 notice was taken, it was a matter of public record that campaigners may have breached campaign finance requirements, and other requirements, during the EU referendum campaign.

Read full article in The National

Brexit: May knew leave campaigners may have broken financial rules

Brexit: May knew leave campaigners may have broken financial rules

Sep 12, 2018 | Articles, News

Theresa May knew leave campaigners may have breached financial limits during the EU referendum campaign when she triggered article 50 initiating Brexit, her lawyers have admitted.

In a formal response to a high court challenge over the legitimacy of the vote, lawyers for the prime minister have been attempting to dismiss the action brought by Britons living in France, Italy and Spain.

By suggesting flaws in the referendum process were already anticipated, Joseph Barrett, the barrister who wrote the response, has implied there was nothing new for the court to investigate.

The rival submissions and responses were released on Monday by lawyers acting for the organisation UK in EU, which had crowdfunded the legal challenge.

Its claim argued that the Electoral Commission’s findings on BeLeave and Vote Leave, which resulted in two officials being reported to the police and fines being imposed, mean the 2016 EU referendum was not a lawful, fair or free vote.

Read full story in The Guardian