In this essay, we will consider and analyse the effect of Brexit upon the rights of individuals as well as the effect it will have upon the competence of the devolved Scottish government and its relationship with the UK.
Treaties, regulations and directives make up the European Union (EU) law. They have a direct effect which means that they are directly implemented in United Kingdom(UK) law. However, a Directive is ‘binding to the result to be achieved, upon each member state to which it is addressed, but shall leave to the national authorities the choice of form and methods '. The national law is legislated in a way that gives effect to the directive. As a result of Brexit treaties and regulations will no longer have effect in the UK, …show more content…
The charter was still carrying out its main role of reaffirming rights, but the UK did not allow it to go beyond this power.
Leaving the EU would mean that the charter would no longer apply in the UK, as a result a lot of our rights such as environmental protection, data protection etc would be lost. Also, EU regulations and any future or unimplemented legislation cannot be relied upon in UK courts. Therefore, any future improvements of fundamental rights protection will cease to apply in the UK
As the UK has now left the EU the most important question is what will happen to our rights. There is great uncertainty about this as it depends upon what path the UK takes and what sort of contact it maintains with the EU. For example, if it joins the European Economic Area (EEA) then the EU fundamental rights law will still apply, this is because the European Free Trade Association has held that the provisions of the EEA agreement are to be interpreted in the light of EU law. Additionally, the remedies available under the EU law are wider than those under the HRA 1998 because of the supremacy principle. The UK will have civil and political rights, but it will lose a wide range of rights and there will be less remedial options for violations. The Human Rights Centre at the University of Essex
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysGet Access
Human Rights Act 1998 – is an Act that gives legal effect in the UK to certain fundamental rights and freedoms contained in
“Some lawyers have been attracted to the argument that the union legislation placed constraints on the power of the UK Parliament to legislate, and that the UK Parliament might be unable to alter at least its most important terms. While there are powerful arguments against this view, - it continues to have its supporters. It famously received some judicial support from Lord Cooper in MacCormick v Lord Advocate, and has been referred to in several subsequent cases. However, there has been no case in which a Scottish court has questioned the validity of an Act of Parliament on these grounds. Indeed, whether an Act of the UK Parliament is compatible with the union legislation was treated as, in principle, a non-justiciable issue in MacCormick. However, supporters of the argument have taken comfort from the fact that in MacCormick, Gibson and Pringle Scottish judges reserved their opinion on what would be the case if legislation purported to amend 'fundamental provisions', for example, by abolishing the Church of Scotland or the Court of Session, or by replacing the Scottish system of private law with English
Parliament took away their power and returned it when they believed it was necessary. As with all delegated sovereignty, Parliament are able to return that sovereignty because they have the ultimate political power.
However the UK being part of the EU could be argued to increase the UK’s global influence and power as it is a international organisation which brings together many powerful sources of power from the world in effect creates a new source of ‘pooled’ sovereignty, this could be argued to have in fact very positive results for all members of the EU. Furthermore, if parliament does feel as if its sovereignty is being challenged and a government comes into power which disagrees with this, parliament still fundamentally has the right and power to withdraw from the EU at whatever time it wishes. Heywood argues that Parliament simply tolerates EU law and so still retains its own sovereignty efficiently. Finally the UK even has the right to veto certain legislation the which the UK does not want put into place within the UK, allowing another way for the UK to resist changes the EU may be trying to place in Britain.
In this essay, I would like to analyse why the reform of the British constitution is seen as unfinished business. Constitutional reform is when the system of government and how government institutions interact is changed. This has also meant the codification of some components of the constitution in the UK. Between 1997 and 2007, there were a considerable number of constitutional reforms introduced by the Blair governments. These reforms included devolution in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, decentralisation, reform of the House of Lords and Commons, creations of new legislation granting greater freedom and rights within the UK, and so on. However, some of them are yet to be accomplished or in progress related to the electoral and
The second reform of the constitution is the Human Rights Act that was Labour’s first major reform, that came in act in 1998. Before the Human Rights Act the Uk was part European Convention of Human rights that was adopted in 1950. The human rights(HRA) Act came into force in 2000 in the Uk. The HRA has the effect of of codifying the protections in the European convention in the Uk law. This act created a Uk bill of right that is more suitable to represent the population living in the Uk, because of adopting the convention to the needs of britain; this allows British judges to suggest their own way of Judging based on the British culture which is more appealing to the the British
The EU government comes before the government of your home country and the rules pertaining to it. So if the EU votes on a rule that will negatively impact your country or the economy there of, you will be forced to carry that rule out as a member of the EU. This takes away countries independence to make their own decisions and choices. This can be proven in the quote, “The Visegrad countries’ opposition to Brussels is different from Britain’s. They don't want to leave the union, they just refuse to abide by some of its rules…(Doc E).” Because of the large size of the EU, creating rules that are fair and pertain to all the counties is hard. The rules made are unfair to some parts of Europe and that can be represented by the following quote, “To Western Europeans, it is unsettling to see a new East-West divide emerging, threatening to fracture the the European Union itself (Doc E).” This quote is saying that because of the differences across the EU in many areas, it's becoming more likely that other countries will follow brexit and leave the
Within the United Kingdom, a recurring issue has been raised regarding the political position of Scotland and how the Scottish Parliament could better govern the country. To establish whether the quality of life could be improved for the Scottish people, key events, devolution, and the Scottish Parliament must be evaluated and analysed. The argument for greater power in decision making and the ability to implement change for the citizens of Scotland, has been central to Scottish politics for some time.
The purpose of this paper seeks to analyze the effects of prescription drug abuse. In the first article identified the author seeks to identify the differences between peer and parent influence on the misuse of prescription drug as it relates to ethnicity. The second article to be investigation into prescription drug use misuse and drug problems as it pertains to motivational context. The third and final article seeks to education young adults on medical prescription drug use. A parent’s attitudes regarding substance use may help to clarify practical racial/ethnic deviations in prescription drug misuse among teens. The findings add provision to the growing evidence that parents continue to endure a critical part of adolescents '
As part of the European Union, the UK is a subject to European law, with European law having authority and take the place of any domestic law. This means that domestic law should be done in the same way with European law.
When critically analysing how recent legislative developments have affected the British Constitution, there are many different aspects to take into consideration. We need to consider the nature of the British Constitution, which has been widely accepted as uncodified, being found in Acts of Parliament, Court Judgements and Conventions. Whilst there is no written document forming the Constitution, there are understood to be governing principles. These include the need for the separation of powers and Parliamentary sovereignty. Three primary legislative developments affecting these principles are: The separation of powers within the United Kingdom, the Legislature, the Judiciary and the Executive, have been made much clearer over the years,
“Parliamentary sovereignty is no longer, if it ever was, absolute” (Lord Hope). Discuss with reference to at least three challenges to the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty. Parliamentary sovereignty is the concept that Parliament has the power to repeal, amend or create any law it wishes and therefore no body in the UK can challenge its legal validity. There are many people who would argue that this is a key principle to the UK Constitution, on the other hand, there are those who strongly believe that this idea is one of the past, and that the idea of the UK Parliament being sovereign is false. One of these people is Lord Hope, who said “Parliamentary sovereignty is no longer, if it ever was, absolute”. During the last 50 years there have been a variety of developments that have proved to be a challenge for the legitimacy of parliamentary sovereignty, and the ones which will be examined in this essay are: the devolution of powers to the Scottish Parliament; The United Kingdom’s entry into the European Union in 1973; and finally the power of judicial review. Starting with the devolution of powers, these challenges will all be evaluated when discussing whether or not the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty applies to the United Kingdom. Westminster’s sovereignty has been gradually diminishing over time as varying amounts of power have been devolved to Northern Ireland, Wales and Scotland. In this essay, the devolution of powers to the Scottish Parliament will be
Britain has sacrificed power to treaties since the end of World War 2 in order for better relations with foreign countries, these treaties and others developed into what is now known as the European Union. Perhaps the most significant of these treaties is the Treaty of Rome (1957). The UK conceded to this treaty in 1972 and for the first time European Law was given power in the UK through an act of the UK
For example, every country has different currency and different legislation. They follow different set of rules and the value of currency differs from one country to another. According to EU’s rule and regulations member states don’t pay extra tax because they are a part of single access market. But for example another country outside of EU needs to pay tax and there is cost involved when the products or goods cross borders. Since Norway, Iceland and Lichtenstein are not European Union’s member states they pay higher tax to enter in European Union area moreover they are entitled to follow their rules and regulation and their own tariffs. If UK decides to not to be a part of EEA or single access market they will be subject to trade barriers. As a result Britain will loss vast amount of profit which they made when they were part of EU.
It is precise that we begin by explaining the meaning of the term “Brexit”; it is a portmanteau of the words “Britain” and “Exit”, which was just one of the terms for the results of the 2016 referendum, the other one was “Bremain” (Britain and remain) which was a lot less promoted and controversial. For the 2016 referendum, 52% of the votes went for Britain leaving the European Union, in a poll with 72% of participation, a total of 33.577.342 votes, 17.410.742 for Brexit and 16.577.342 for Britain staying in the European Union (BBC World, 2016). England voted for Brexit, by 53.4% to 46.6%, as did Wales, with Leave getting 52.5% of the vote and Remain 47.5%. Scotland and Northern Ireland both backed staying in the EU. Scotland backed Remain by 62% to 38%, while 55.8% in Northern Ireland voted Remain and 44.2% Leave (Hunt and Wheeler, 2016).