Bruce Arnold: We ignore legal challenge to ESM Treaty at our peril
There has been little praise for Thomas Pringle's legal action to try and stop the Government from its foolishness in seeking to push through the ratification of the ESM Treaty. And there has been virtually no interest in the media and very little intelligent comment.
Since early April, I have been writing about the Pringle challenge. His case was rooted in the idea that both Irish and European law were being breached in the interest of a new euro-centred group and not the whole EU, thus invisibly rewriting treaties. Our constitutional duty was to protect the (EU) Treaties as written and not defend the euro on behalf of the 17 euro states at the expense of the interests of the remaining 10 members who are not yet part of the euro.
Last week in the Supreme Court, Mr Pringle achieved judgments of a kind that recognised this new European dilemma. The court, it seems, is prepared to hand over to the European Court of Justice the points in the case as made by Mr Pringle that require further analysis and judgment. The hearing was unprecedented in many ways, including the number of Supreme Court judges -- seven -- who conclude their judgment tomorrow.