Here are some examples of what we have been doing, with links to blog posts we have published over the past year.
We will be publishing further articles on our blog and the social media between now and polling day
Following the passing of the Benn Act, there was much speculation about whether the government could use EU law, an Order in Council or the Civil Contingencies Act to frustrate Parliament. Using our own expertise and pulling together other material, we were able to contribute to the debate by showing how it wasn’t possible for the Government to ignore Parliament.
As with everything we have done over the past 3 and a half years we have shared the results of our investigations ana analysis publicly through our blog and social media posts as well as directly to other campaign groups and co-ordination groups.
We have also been working with other campaigns to publicise how the Government is intent on excluding voters, or refusing to acknowledge how the democratic process in the UK fails to take into account the Internet world we live in and how vulnerable our democratic process is to being corrupted by moneyed interests and foreign countries’ interference.
Of course, there has been a great deal of work promoting the challenges flowing from the ground-breaking work we did which led to the Three Knights Opinion. We didn’t take a position as a claimant or intervener in the successful Andy Wightman challenge on the revocability of the Article 50 notification.
We judged, correctly, that there was nothing further that The People’s Challenge could add to the chances of success by doing so. Nevertheless, the ruling from the CJEU that the notification could be unilaterally revoked justified the money spent commissioning the Three Knights Opinion and the time explaining why the challenge was essential and would be successful, From the Three Knights Opinion to the CJEU ruling on Article 50 – A long year’s journey into light.
As the current, increasingly autocratic and “fact free” government takes a more and more extreme stance and is prepared to walk away from membership of the EU with “No-Deal”, we have to take stock of the consequences of that, so that we can engage the legal teams required to challenge/fight the inevitable consequences for UK citizens.
Whether it involves challenging the UK government again over its aspirations to ignore Parliament, challenging the EU on the way it has treated UK citizens, or challenging the discriminatory way UK citizens have been treated in general depends on collecting the evidence and being able to fund the challenges.
The work behind the Millions in The Margins will guide what needs to be done. That the UK and the EU have found it politically expedient to ignore UK citizens and their EU rights and interests is no reason to allow them to abrogate their responsibility to all 65 million UK citizens.
Although nobody will want to pay for visas or health insurance for trips (business or pleasure) to the EU, for example, that’s only part of what we are talking about here, UK citizens wherever they live are not getting a fair BREXIT deal from the EU.
When we can start a new CrowdJustice campaign, we will be asking for your help.
Do you own a business in the EU, or a UK one that trades in the EU, do you own property in the EU and reside in the UK, or do you have dependent family members elsewhere in the EU…? The list is extensive. Have you made a professional, family or financial commitment on the basis of your EU citizenship and the UK’s EU membership?
Apart from the Brexit related work, there are also worrying commitments in the General Election manifestos: both the Tories and Labour will repeal the Fixed Term Parliament Act, handing back to the Prime Minister the power to dissolve Parliament; the Tories will extend the Voter Id trials and “stop the harvesting of postal votes”, both of which will see people in the poorest groups of society, together with the elderly, ethnic minorities and the homeless, threatened with being disenfranchised.
There will undoubtedly be more “devil in the detail” of the manifestos, particularly with as yet vague proposals to examine “the relationship between Government, Parliament and the courts” and “ensure that judicial review is available to protect the rights of the individuals against an overbearing state, while ensuring that it is not abused to conduct politics by another means or to create needless delays”.
No prizes for guessing the government hasn’t enjoyed some recent appearances in the Supreme Court where it was judged to have fallen foul of the law (i.e. lost).
Please share this article as widely as you can, and thank you again for your support.
Published by Grahame Pigney on behalf of The People’s Challenge Ltd.