Create an FP account to save articles to read later and in the FP mobile app.

Sign Up

ALREADY AN FP SUBSCRIBER? LOGIN

The Cable

The Cable goes inside the foreign policy machine, from Foggy Bottom to Turtle Bay, the White House to Embassy Row.

Some Italians Blame Brexit, Which Is Now Before the U.K. Supreme Court

Brexit is blamed for the disintegration of Europe. But will Brexit even happen?

By Emily Tamkin, a global affairs journalist and the author of The Influence of Soros and Bad Jews.

December 5, 2016, 2:50 PM

The outgoing Italian government is blaming Brexit for the surprise defeat in Sunday’s referendum which cost Prime Minister Matteo Renzi his job.

“I think that the beginning of European disintegration has started with Brexit,” said Sandro Gozi, an ally of Renzi, who tendered his resignation Monday, to the delight of Italian populists.

The Italian referendum, unlike its British counterpart, was not explicitly about whether to leave the European Union, but rather about whether and how to centralize power inside Italy. While the populist Five Star Movement has called for a referendum on ditching the euro, it is unclear if or when that vote might come.

Nevertheless, on Monday, Gozi told BBC Radio 4’s Today that his country’s problems began with Brexit, and that “It is up to the other 27 governments to re-launch Europe. That was our policy, that was our goal as the Renzi government. It is clear that now Europe loses a major political actor to its relaunch.”

But the future of Brexit itself is also still unclear. On Monday, the U.K. Supreme Court opened a four-day hearing to determine whether Prime Minister Theresa May alone can trigger Britain’s departure from the European Union, or whether she needs approval from parliament, which would almost certainly be withheld or delayed indefinitely.

May had planned to draw on royal prerogative — the power once allowed monarchs to enter and leave international treaties without Parliament’s approval — to trigger Article 50 of the European Union’s Lisbon Treaty by April 2017. Last month, however, an entrepreneur and a hairdresser brought the case to the High Court, which ruled that only Parliament, and not the government, could formally file divorce papers with Europe. (The three-judge High Court was promptly excoriated by Britain’s pro-Brexit tabloids.)

And, since members of Parliament were overwhelmingly in the “Remain” camp, it is possible that they would either decide not to leave the European Union, or refuse to do so until they were happy with the terms of their departure (i.e. never).

The government appealed the High Court’s decision, and so Brexit now, once again, stands before the court. Supreme Court President Lord Neuberger said that he understood this case inspired “strong feelings,” but added, “This appeal is concerned with legal issues, and, as judges, our duty is to consider those issues impartially, and to decide the case according to the law.” Wider political questions, he bravely ventured, were not the subject of the appeal.

Photo credit: Franco Origlia/Getty Images

Emily Tamkin is a global affairs journalist and the author of The Influence of Soros and Bad Jews. Twitter: @emilyctamkin