Skip to content

Brexit: NI Protocol 'incompatible with EU law'

BBC ProtestBBC
A barrister for unionist leaders argued the protocol was not compatible with EU law

The Northern Ireland Protocol is incompatible with EU law, the High Court in Belfast has been told.

The claim was made by a barrister for unionist leaders who are challenging the legality of the protocol.

John Larkin QC cited EU law on democratic accountability and the treatment of former member states.

The judicial review proceedings are being opposed by the government. The protocol is the part of the Brexit deal.

It creates a trade border between Northern Ireland and Great Britain and means EU rules governing trade in goods still apply in Northern Ireland.

Mr Larkin cited Article 10 of the Treaty on European Union which states the functioning of the EU shall be founded on representative democracy.

It also says citizens are directly represented at EU level in the European Parliament.

PA Media Boat at portPA Media
The protocol is opposed by Northern Ireland's unionist parties which have said it undermines their place in the UK

Mr Larkin said it was "incompatible with Article 10 for the EU to rule Northern Ireland in important areas without representation".

"No citizen of Northern Ireland is represented in the legislature which holds such important sway here," he said.

He sought to bolster this argument by reference to Article 3, Protocol 1 of the European Convention of Human Rights which concerns the right to free elections.

Mr Larkin also referred to Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union which sets out how a member state can go about leaving the EU.

Paragraph 3 of that article says the EU's treaties shall cease to apply to the state in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement.

However Mr Larkin said the protocol means the treaties continue to apply in Northern Ireland.

He argued that Article 50 should prevent the protocol from "applying the treaties in part in this part of the UK."

He concluded his submission by describing the protocol as "legally rotten to the core".

The case, being heard by Mr Justice Colton, is scheduled to last for up to four days.

Reserved judgement is expected to be delivered in the next few months.

That judgement is likely to be appealed and the case could ultimately be heard by the Supreme Court before the end of this year.