WEU Editor's Column

The British High Court ruled on November 3 that Parliament must approve the invocation of Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty in order for the United Kingdom to exit the European Union. British Prime Minister Theresa May immediately criticized the news and has stated her intent to appeal the court’s ruling in a hearing next month. Prior to the ruling, the executive branch of the UK, under May’s leadership, expected to begin Brexit negotiations before the end of March 2017. It would have initiated Article 50 through royal prerogative power, without any input from Parliament. Now, if the ruling holds, Parliament could choose to block the Brexit, although it will more likely delay the exit process.

May’s government explained that, whatever happens with its appeal, it will fight to begin Brexit negotiations before April 2017, as an uncertain timetable could lead to economic instability. Nigel Farage, leader of the pro-Brexit United Kingdom Independent Party (UKIP), remains especially concerned and tweeted on November 3 that he fears Parliament will attempt to block or delay the Brexit. Still, parliamentary procedures are often lengthy, and the future timeline of the process remains unclear.

Yet, many have lauded the High Court’s decision and argue that parliamentary input is a necessary step in the Brexit process. Judges involved in the case have claimed that giving Parliament a voice effectively returns will to the people.

The Brexit has been one of the largest Western European news stories over the past few months, and this landmark decision will undoubtedly shake-up British politics for the weeks to come. Until May’s appeal is heard in December, one can only speculate about whether the High Court’s ruling will be a momentary stay in an inevitable Brexit or the decision that ends the process entirely. In either case, this latest development represents yet another exciting twist in the evolution of the European Union.