It seems that in the United Kingdom the government might want to observe the majority will to leave the European Union… however those plans might be scuppered by a few citizens from the minority that clearly lost the vote.
Why is this?
The United Kingdom has Parliamentary Sovereignty and therefore any vote of the people is purely “advisory”, the vote that took place on 23 June 2016 was an Advisory Referendum. This has no legal standing and is merely “advice” for the government and does not bind government. Technically, it could be seen that the High Court has made the correct ruling, however we should wait and see what the ruling of the Supreme Court is.
How did this happen?
That the case was brought by ordinary citizens, presumably “miffed” at voting for the losing side of the referendum, and not Members of Parliament who were on the losing side of the campaign speaks volumes. Would any self-respecting politician want to be seen to go against the will of the majority of the people and risk losing their seat at the next election?
What is more intriguing is that the case was led by a “businesswoman” (Gina Miller) who has clearly failed to see the unique situation that invoking Article 50 puts the United Kingdom in. The UK has been one of the largest financial centres in the world since well before the European Union was even a fledgling customs union with a handful of countries.
Leaving the EU is not going to end the UK’s leading position in financial markets. The freedom it will gain by no longer being constrained by the dictates of Brussels in dealing with the rest of the world will free it up to move into an even more dominant position globally.