In article , Alan Dawes
writes
In article ,
pamela wrote:
On 10:30 27 Jun 2016, Capitol wrote:

pamela wrote:
On 13:24 26 Jun 2016, bm wrote:

Mark my words.


If a party campaigned not to leave the EU and won a general
election later this year then would they have a mandate to over
rule the referendum result?


No.


A referendum is not binding for all time and it's result can be
overturned by a later referendum.

My question is whether a general election mandate could overturn a
referendum. There is a lack of full democracy about such an approach
but I wonder if it would be consitutionally valid.

The constitutional position would be even more secure if the
referendum is seen not as a mandate but as a consultation. Ignoring
the reply of such a consultation may be politically very unwise but
that does not make it unconstitutional.

There is a well argued article from "UK Constituional Law Association" see

https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2016...-hickman-and-j
eff-king-pulling-the-article-50-trigger-parliaments-indispensable-role/

The only way that this or any future PM could justify triggering Article
50 without a statute voting for it passed by parliament would be by "royal
prerogative" but case law going back to "the case of proclamations of
1610" right through to the more recent "fire brigades union case of 1995"
limit the ability of the government or crown to use "royal prerogative"
and could not be used in this case.

"This case law forms a core part of the separation of powers in the
British Constitution: the Government cannot take away rights given by
Parliament and it cannot undermine a statute. For the courts to hold
otherwise would place the rights of British citizens at the mercy of the
Government and would be contrary to Parliamentary supremacy."

Read the article and the follow ups and make up your own mind as to what
the government can legally do.

Alan

One important omission was that worst case is that we leave the EU
reliant on WTO rules for trade tariffs and not with no deal at all.
--
bert