Letter: ​Article 6 is central to our Union and its restoration is necessary

It takes a very skewed view of history and constitutional law to conclude that the restoration of Art 6 would be “disastrous”. Art 6 is not some incidental or archaic provision - it is fundamental to the very existence of the UK.

Whereas Prof Patterson draws heavily on the historic exceptions in Art 6 and, indeed, the self-inflicted divergence by Stormont, what he fails to mention is that all such was marginal and with the consent of the affected parties.

However, the protocol’s destruction of Art 6 is both fundamental and externally imposed through subservience of NI to foreign laws and jurisdiction. If the professor reads the Supreme Court judgement he will be left in no doubt as to the supremacy accorded to the protocol and its incompatibility with the unfettered internal UK trade guaranteed by Art 6.

It is the fact that, pursuant to the protocol, NI is placed under the EU Customs Code which requires GB to be treated as foreign territory and NI as EU territory, which makes its suspension of Art 6 so constitutionally catastrophic.

Never, until now, has UK internal trade been governed by foreign law and jurisdiction. If Prof Patterson thinks that is of no consequence, then, I respectfully disagree. I can’t think of anything more destructive of the integrity of the UK and our place within it.

These things matter and no amount of academic or political spin can diminish the centrality of Art 6 to our Union. Hence, the need for its restoration, without which any operation of Stormont is endorsement of its abandonment.

Jim Allister KC MLA, TUV leader