e_Paper, Wednesday, September 6, 2017

Opinion 15
Brexit becomes more complex
The time left to strike a deal is limited
DT
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 6, 2017
P O S T
BREAKFAST
• Muhammad Zamir
Despite the charm
offensive initiated by the
recent visit to Europe by
British Prince William
and Princess Kate, reports have
indicated that Michel Barnier, a
former French foreign minister,
after his talks with his British
counterpart David Davis, has
reflected that the two sides were
still at odds over Britain’s divorce
bill.
This includes the rights of
European citizens living in Britain,
and whether Britain would
acknowledge jurisdiction of EU’s
top court with regards to the rights
of the 3 million European citizens
living in Britain.
It was hoped that the meeting
scheduled for August 28 would
The British Home Office, for
its part, also knows that if its
acclaimed goal of reciprocity of
treatment is to be achieved, British
citizens resident in the EU cannot
lay claim to more rights under EU
law than EU citizens who stay on
in Britain enjoy under British law.
2. Ireland
This question has arisen within
Phase I of the sequence of the
Article 50 negotiations concerning
the EU’s new frontier with
Northern Ireland. The ultimate
solution with regard to this
intractable question will require a
political solution if the UK chooses
to stay in the EU customs union. A
flexible interpretation of Article 50
could then enable the emergence
of a provisional solution.
3. Finance
This issue has difficult
connotations. On May 24,
the commission published its
proposals for the criteria to
determine what it calls a “single
The clock is ticking
REUTERS
Brexit is likely to create a 10 billion euro hole in
the EU’s annual revenue
focus specifically on removing
existing differences, and that a
“solution” might be found on
the basis of “flexibility from both
sides.” This does not appear to
have happened.
The EU is stressing on quick
removal of differences by October
2018, so that the European and
British parliaments can approve
the deal in time for Brexit day,
which is scheduled for March 29,
2019.
It is in this context that
one needs to understand the
nuances that are being taken into
consideration within this exercise.
The salient points are as follows.
1. Citizens
References in this regard need
to be understood within the
context of Article 50, and is now
in the hands of the lawyers. The
EU appears to be aware of the
apparent contradiction between,
on the one hand, wanting to treat
the UK like a third country, and on
the other, insisting on permanent,
continued direct jurisdiction of the
European Court of Justice (ECJ).
They are realising that extraterritorial
jurisdiction of the ECJ
cannot simply be presumed.
financial settlement.”
However, as yet there has been
no official response from London.
Without a bankable promise
from the UK on the budget, the
European Council will have
difficulty in judging whether
“sufficient progress” is being made
on Phase I to allow it to trigger
Phase II.
It also needs to be remembered
at this point that unless Phase II
starts, there will be no political
discussions on defining the
framework for the future
relationship between the UK and
the EU.
Consequently, without
agreement on Britain’s final
landing zone, clearly defined and
mapped out, it will be impossible
to proceed towards a negotiation
of the transitional arrangements.
Therein lies the rub, because the
transition period can only be
designed once it has been decided
how long the UK will continue
to honour its current budgetary
obligations under the EU’s multiannual
financial framework.
The importance of this exercise
arises from the fact that Brexit is
likely to create a 10 billion euro
hole in the EU’s annual revenue.
4. Transition
The lack of a concrete decision
on the transition arrangements is
likely to seriously impact business
in Britain, whose opportunities for
investment are already declining.
In any case, the longer it takes
to put the transitional apparatus
in place, the less valuable the
transition period will become.
Economists have indicated that
investors will not hang around the
City of London waiting for clarity
and purpose to emerge from
Whitehall.
A British response will also
be required with regard to
the proposal of the European
Commission made on June 28 that
a Joint Committee be set up to
manage the actual Brexit process.
This envisages a joint transition
authority that will ensure suitable
execution of various facets of the
Article 50 secession treaty; adjust
the secession treaty to reflect
the evolution of EU law; ensure
an agreed process aiming to find
a settlement to political and
technical disputes before they get
to litigation and also “perform any
other task conferred on it by the
Withdrawal Agreement.”
Only close coordination
between London and Brussels will
avoid any possible legal vacuum in
this respect.
5. The court
British Prime Minister Theresa
May in all likelihood will need to
prepare herself and her coalition to
agree to make a major concession
on the future role of the ECJ.
This will be insisted upon,
because as long as any transitional
period lasts, the ECJ will retain
its current powers to ensure
that relevant EU law is applied
appropriately in the UK. As a
result, they will have to accept the
legal obligations that flow from
those rights.
At this time, the British
government and its parliament
appears to be recovering slowly
from the double hangover of the
2016 referendum and the 2017
general election. This is affecting
its ability in being able to agree on
strategic decisions.
Nevertheless, the EU 27 also
needs to have patience with regard
to potential joint initiatives. They
also need to reflect on the future,
not just of the smaller European
Union, but of the wider Europe
after the forthcoming German
elections in September.
I shall conclude with Fabian
Zuleeg. He has pointed out:
“Back in Britain, the turmoil is
obvious, with different members
of government taking diverging
views, suggesting, at times,
that a soft Brexit or a transition
arrangement might be possible,
even if it means concessions on
the role of the European Court of
Justice (ECJ), the exit payment,
the rights of EU citizens and even
(temporarily) continued freedom
of movement of EU citizens.
Adding to this is a chorus
of voices outside government
demanding that the UK reconsider
its position, following the
indecisive general election.”
As former permanent
representative of Bangladesh to
the European Union, I feel that
Zuleeg has correctly warned that
“the assumption that the EU27 are
willing to accept any deal to avoid
Brexit is misguided.
“Not only are there red lines
that they will not cross, but the
clock is ticking as well. The time
left to strike a deal is limited.
“Otherwise the UK will end up
with no deal at all.
“The reason that the EU27 are
willing to accept this negative
outcome is that greater goods are
at stake: The unity of the EU27,
the integrity of the single market,
and the future of European
integration.”
Brexit has become more
complex, but a constructive
approach on both sides, based
on reason, will create a better
framework for the rest of the
world, particularly developing
countries like Bangladesh which
rely on both parties for support
in their quest for socio-economic
development.•
Muhammad Zamir, a former
Ambassador and Chief Information
Commissioner of the Information
Commission, is an analyst specialised in
foreign affairs, right to information, and
good governance. He can be reached at
muhammadzamir0@gmail.com.