Northern Ireland as a Commonwealth Dominion

[nelson]

Apparently Harold Wilson seriously considered making Northern Ireland a Commonwealth Dominion in late 1975, it was met with resistance within the cabinet and from SDLP leaders fearing the Unionists would use it to reestablish "institutionalised discrimination", and presumably also from mainstream Unionists. 

But I wondered, if Wilson had the backing of his cabinet and had been determined to get rid of the problem, would it have been legally possible to expel a part of the UK without the population's consent? Can parliament just decide that region X is no longer part of the United Kingdom but a separate entity? 

[johnloony]

Jul 9, 2023 12:30:57 GMT nelson said:

Apparently Harold Wilson seriously considered making Northern Ireland a Commonwealth Dominion in late 1975, it was met with resistance within the cabinet and from SDLP leaders fearing the Unionists would use it to reestablish "institutionalised discrimination", and presumably also from mainstream Unionists. 

But I wondered, if Wilson had the backing of his cabinet and had been determined to get rid of the problem, would it have been legally possible to expel a part of the UK without the population's consent? Can parliament just decide that region X is no longer part of the United Kingdom but a separate entity? 

Of course it’s legally and constitutionally possible; that is a different question from whether it’s wise

[nelson]

Jul 9, 2023 16:56:27 GMT johnloony said:

Jul 9, 2023 12:30:57 GMT nelson said:

Apparently Harold Wilson seriously considered making Northern Ireland a Commonwealth Dominion in late 1975, it was met with resistance within the cabinet and from SDLP leaders fearing the Unionists would use it to reestablish "institutionalised discrimination", and presumably also from mainstream Unionists. 

But I wondered, if Wilson had the backing of his cabinet and had been determined to get rid of the problem, would it have been legally possible to expel a part of the UK without the population's consent? Can parliament just decide that region X is no longer part of the United Kingdom but a separate entity? 

Of course it’s legally and constitutionally possible; that is a different question from whether it’s wise

I'm not interested in whether it's wise, it's fairly clear it would have been a disaster at the time Wilson considered it, although you can debate the exact way said disaster would have unfolded. 

It would not be possible in many countries where the constitution explicitly guarantee the territorial integrity of the state e.g. Spain and Turkey, so I was wondering whether parliamentary sovereignty means they could just cede territory or if there is any mechanism in place that would prevent parliament from dissolving the British state. I'm not convinced it's a question that can be answered with "of course". 

Even constitutions that don't explicitly guarantee the territorial integrity of the nation often include clauses that mean it couldn't legal be done, e.g. the US Constitution allows the federal government to cede territory that hasn't been made a state (such as the Panama Canal Zone) but not states since it has a duty to protect every state against both external invasion and internal rebellion, and a duty to ensure every state has some sort of democracy ("a republican form of government"), neither of which could be guaranteed if it was ceded to a foreign country. So even with an unwritten constitution there may be elements that would prevent parliament from dissolving the state (e.g. would the monarch be required to give Royal Assent to a bill that would reduce the territory of the state?). 

[greenchristian]

Jul 9, 2023 18:25:34 GMT nelson said:

Jul 9, 2023 16:56:27 GMT johnloony said:

Of course it’s legally and constitutionally possible; that is a different question from whether it’s wise

I'm not interested in whether it's wise, it's fairly clear it would have been a disaster at the time Wilson considered it, although you can debate the exact way said disaster would have unfolded. 

It would not be possible in many countries where the constitution explicitly guarantee the territorial integrity of the state e.g. Spain and Turkey, so I was wondering whether parliamentary sovereignty means they could just cede territory or if there is any mechanism in place that would prevent parliament from dissolving the British state. I'm not convinced it's a question that can be answered with "of course". 

Even constitutions that don't explicitly guarantee the territorial integrity of the nation often include clauses that mean it couldn't legal be done, e.g. the US Constitution allows the federal government to cede territory that hasn't been made a state (such as the Panama Canal Zone) but not states since it has a duty to protect every state against both external invasion and internal rebellion, and a duty to ensure every state has some sort of democracy ("a republican form of government"), neither of which could be guaranteed if it was ceded to a foreign country. So even with an unwritten constitution there may be elements that would prevent parliament from dissolving the state (e.g. would the monarch be required to give Royal Assent to a bill that would reduce the territory of the state?). 

There wasn't any constitutional problem with granting independence to the Irish Free State in 1922. I don't see how this plan would have been any different from a constitutional perspective. We wouldn't have passed any laws that would have prevented Parliament from doing this. And if there had been some international treaty obligation that would be a problem it surely would have been brought up both during the Northern Ireland peace talks in the 90s and the Scottish IndyRef campaign, since we don't seem to have abandoned any major international treaties in the relevant timescales.