Article 50

I see that the new UKIP Leader has demanded that we leave the EU immediately, without bothering with Article 50.This follows a report the other day from a leading European Lawyer from Sweden, who said that the UK does not need to imlement Artcle 50. she said that the Lisborn Treaty was for Countries that had a written Constitution, which the UK does not have.

Can anyone, who knows more than I do, give a reason why we have not even had this suggested?

Re: Article 50

Who is the new UKIP leader?

Re: Article 50

Because the UK HAS a written constitution.
It is found within all the legislation passed and written on vellum and kept in Westminster. It is found as precedent in law cases.

As much as I like the Swedes I think she may be proven wrong here.

Perhaps Muddy's question speaks volumes...

Re: Article 50

Ukip leader Paul Nuttall is 'game changer' for Labour, says Frank Field

Nuttall could help Ukip take string of seats from Jeremy Corbyn’s party in the north of England, says senior Labour MP

Re: Article 50

I see Muddy is au courant...

Re: Article 50

Hi

That would be economic suicide.

Re: Article 50

It has been suggested. Do your research. Start here:

http://www.eutruth.org.uk/

"There are 4 ways to leave the EU

1. The EU can pressure Britain to sign Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty to get us out 2 years.

2. The British Parliament can simply repeal the six EU treaties, and should anyway. That gets us out immediately without involvement by the EU. Will those 454 MP’s implement the wishes of the people?

3. Declare the six treaties null and void under the British Constitution. Teresa May could do that on her own.

Our pro-EU MPs' are unlikely to it, so Britain's courts could do it. The entire EU project was always illegal under British law, which our government has broken with impunity.

However, judges these days are mainly freemasons, and senior freemasonry see the EU as the way to the all-controlling, one world dictatorship they have been striving for, for centuries. They break the law when it suits them. So great pressure needs to be put on them to be honest.

4. The Queen could declare all six treaties null and void. But she put her name to them, broke the remainder of her coronation oaths, committed high treason, and risked her life to do so, because the punishment at common law, under the Constitution, and under our treason laws, for undermining our nation’s sovereignty is still to hang by the neck until dead. They are a German family. So with commitment like that, she’s not likely to help."

Re: Article 50

And as Flicker says, the UK DOES have a constitution though has never been properly formally coded and formulated. Nevertheless it has been there for 100s of years and includes things like the Magna Carta and Declaration Of Rights.

The fact that successive corrupt governments have undertaken actions which undermine this constitution and Common Law does NOT make those actions lawful, nor does it mean we should abide by any new justice system or legislation arising from those fraudulent actions. Hence I agree with UKIP.

We should simply pull out, declaring the EU treaties null and void and in breach of UK constitution.

It is imperative that we vote UKIP in at the earliest opportunity because no other party is going to take us out of the EU as they all work for the EU.

Re: Article 50

Thanks all. There is certainly food for thought.

Re: Article 50

You cannot in international law "declare a treaty null and void".
A treaty is between at least TWO countries and BOTH have to agree to cancel it.
Further you are forgetting that the UK form if democracy is a REPRESENTATIONAL DEMOCRACY which assumes that the MP's speak for the people and the people speak through them.
If Parliament agreed to the 5 treaties it is the same as the people agreeing IN LAW unless you have a referendum...which is not binding.
The accession of all the treaties was lawful because they were approved by Parliament.