Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees
So we agreed to something we didn’t fully understand? Else surely the government would have known that this would occur?
The EU are playing to the letter of the law, nothing more, nothing less.
|
The problem is it is not the letter of the law.
Quote:
It is common for trade agreements to contain provisions enabling either party to take unilateral action if the implementation of the agreement gives rise to negative consequences. In the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland, these measures are set out under Article 16.
Such ‘safeguards’ as those in the Protocol are not commonly used, but are included as a protective measure to give both parties a formal recourse of action should the agreement entail any unintended outcomes that present significant challenges in either place.
Article 16 provides both the UK and the EU with a unilateral power to take action should the application of the Protocol give rise to ‘serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties that are liable to persist, or to diversion of trade.’
Both parties are restricted in the action they can take to address any such issues. It must be limited to the scope of where the problems exist (i.e. a response cannot be taken that will alter the application of the Protocol in any unrelated respect) and there is a process in place which means action cannot happen on a whim or go unchecked.
Article 16 does not provide any detail on what constitutes a ‘serious’ impact or what is meant by ‘diversion of trade’. What causes a serious impact in one place might not in another, so this ambiguity allows for interpretation at a later point.
|
Link
There cannot be "letter of the law" where ambiguity exists.