As the British electorate once again head to the poll this Thursday to elect the next Prime Minister of the 5th largest economy in the world, the stakes have never been higher and democracy has never been volatile. This election is different from any in recent memory for the simple reason that depending on the result, it will represent a quintessential rebuff or bulwark of the 2016 referendum result, where the people of the United Kingdom voted in favour of leaving the European Union. Notwithstanding the arguments for and against Brexit, which for the past 3 years has provoked political manoeuvres from both sides, what is at stake however is our democratic integrity as a nation on the one hand and the violations of human rights on the other. The EU referendum Under the provisions of the European Union Referendum Act 2015 and also the Elections and Referendums Act 2000 asked the entire electorate to either accept or reject a proposal; that proposal was clearly stated in the form of a question; “should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union”? It’s stale news now that the UK voted leave, but enforcing that result hasn’t been as simple as the result itself.
Throughout the history of referendums all over the world, there has never been one so acrimonious than the Brexit referendum. It has rendered the political atmosphere extremely toxic and divisive, worst still, politicians from all parties have become political chauvinist – every politician on both sides of the debate increasingly displaying exaggerated patriotism, each one of them portraying the other as anti-democratic. The fallout of the referendum has created more division than unity in the society, even in a household, families are torn apart by the convoluted arguments of their political representatives. The pompous git of Westminster has derailed democracy, marching from court to court and one media outlet to the other defending the indefensible. The trouble with reversing the results of the referendum or holding another to stop the first one, rapes democracy albeit the meritorious arguments of economic downturn, but it would appear that the electorates accepted that plausibility when they voted to leave the EU.
The United Kingdom has undertaken to hold free elections under Article 3 of the first protocol of the Human Rights Act, which will not only ensure the free expression of the opinion of the people in making a political decision as in this instance through a referendum, but that their opinion would be enforced. The significance of this undertaking is that it is crucial to sustaining meaningful democracy governed by the rule of law. Therefore, to trump the result of the referendum would weaken democracy, a country cannot be truly democratic if it chooses which democratic exercise it will enforce and which one it would ignore. That is not how democracy works, anything short of implementing the results of the referendum, which by the way the political class in their entirety promised they will enforce, could make the UK cease to exemplify one of the robust democracies in the world. There is no time better than 12th December to defend our democracy and to send a message to the rogue political class that democracy is still meaningful in this country, I mean, it just has to be, and we send another clear message to the future political class to steer off violating human rights in this country just as the Human Rights Act protect our right to our democratic exercise to be honoured. Doing otherwise will set a bad precedent, a new norm, lest the UK becomes the first county in western Europe to rape democracy and then what morale ground would the UK have to criticise Russia, China or Venezuela when they fail to uphold democracy and human rights.
