A Belfast court on Thursday rejected claims that the British government’s Brexit strategy will harm Northern Ireland’s peace process, the latest in a series of legal challenges to Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s plans.
Three linked cases had argued that a no-deal U.K. exit from the European Union on Oct. 31 would undermine agreements between the British and Irish governments that were struck during the peace process.
At the High Court in Belfast, judge Bernard McCloskey said the argument belonged in the world of politics, not law.
“Virtually all of the assembled evidence belongs to the world of politics, both national and supra-national,” he said.
If the claimants appeal the ruling, the case could join two other legal challenges to Johnson’s plan to take Britain out of the EU on Oct. 31 — with or without a divorce deal — to be heard at the U.K. Supreme Court next week.
The ruling was good news for the government, which is facing attacks to its plans on several fronts. It was forced to defend itself after publication of an official assessment that there could be food and medicine shortages, gridlock at ports and riots in the streets if there is a no-deal Brexit.
The stark picture of disruption represents the government’s “reasonable worst-case scenario” for leaving the European Union on Oct. 31 without a divorce agreement The government was forced to publish the document late Wednesday after lawmakers demanded it.
Johnson said the bleak scenario was “not where we intend to end up.”
“This is a worst-case scenario which civil servants obviously have to prepare for, but in the last few months, and particularly in the 50 days since I’ve been prime minister, we’ve been massively accelerating our preparations,” he said.
Opposition politicians said the “Operation Yellowhammer” document — the government’s code name for its Brexit preparations — proved that Johnson is reckless to consider leaving the EU without a deal.
Former Attorney General Dominic Grieve said it was extraordinary that a British government “is content on inflicting on the British public the level of disruption which is set out in the Yellowhammer papers.”
Defense Secretary Ben Wallace said the scenario was a “planning assumption” and would only come true if the government did nothing to offset it.
“We are spending the money on doing lots of things to mitigate those assumptions,” he told the BBC.
The six-page classified document, dated Aug. 2, said the number of trucks crossing the main freight route between Calais and Dover would drop by between 40% and 60% within a day of a no-deal Brexit, with disruptions possibly lasting up to three months. The supply of certain types of fresh foods and essential medicines would decrease, prices would go up and poor people would be hit hardest, it said.
The paper also describes major disruption for travelers between Britain and the EU, uncertainty for U.K. citizens living in Europe, and says attempts to maintain an open border between Ireland and Northern Ireland would probably fail. It also says a no-deal exit could trigger major protests and even riots.
The government refused to comply with another part of Parliament’s demand — that it hand over emails and texts among officials and aides discussing the government’s decision to suspend Parliament for more than a month before the Brexit deadline. Michael Gove, the minister in charge of Brexit planning, said the request was inappropriate and disproportionate.
Johnson insists the country must leave the EU on Oct. 31, with or without a divorce deal to smooth the way. But many lawmakers fear a no-deal Brexit would be economically devastating, and are determined to stop him.
Opposition lawmakers and rebel Conservatives have dealt the government’s Brexit plans a series of blows. They passed a law that orders the government to seek a three-month delay to Brexit if no agreement has been reached by late October, rejected Johnson’s call for a snap general election and ordered the release of the Yellowhammer document.
Then on Tuesday, Johnson suspended Parliament for five weeks until Oct. 14, sparking outrage among legislators and several legal challenges.
The U.K. Supreme Court is set to consider next week whether the shutdown should be reversed, after conflicting rulings in lower courts.
Last week, the High Court in London said the decision was inherently political and “not a matter for the courts.” But Scotland’s highest civil court ruled Wednesday that the shutdown was illegal “because it had the purpose of stymieing Parliament.”
The Supreme Court is set to make the final decision after a hearing next week.
Johnson says he suspended Parliament so that he can launch a fresh domestic agenda at a new session next month. He said he had “absolutely not” misled Queen Elizabeth II — whose formal approval was needed to suspend Parliament — about his motives.
Johnson said he was “working very hard” to strike a new deal with the bloc after the agreement made by his predecessor Theresa May was rejected three times by Britain’s Parliament.
Johnson’s envoy David Frost has been holding talks in Brussels this week but no breakthrough has been made, and the EU says it is still waiting for firm proposals from the U.K.
The bloc’s chief Brexit negotiator, Michel Barnier, told reporters that “we are still ready to examine objectively any concrete and legally operational proposals from the U.K.”