This article aims to describe the possible variants of the course of events after Brexit, from a Scottish perspective. Three dimensions are taken into the account: future model of UK–EU relations, symmetry of Brexit inside the UK and possibility of the second independence referendum in the near future (less than five years). These dimension have allowed to distinguish three main variants of further development, that are in short named by the author as: passive variant, Scottish exception and another referendum. It seems at this point that the Scottish Government is bound to carry out the second referendum, especially if the British government chooses a variant of the so-called hard Brexit. The European argument, which is so often used by Sturgeon in political debate does not necessarily lead to an increase in support for the independence, especially when eventual membership in the European Union of an independent Scotland is burdened with so many question marks.

On June 23rd, 2016, the United Kingdom (UK) held an EU-Referendum which resulted in a vote in favor of withdrawing from the European Union (EU). However, in a post-referendum reality, several constitutional issues have become apparent. On one hand, it is not certain whether the Prime Minister, under the royal prerogatives, can trigger Art. 50 of the EU Treaty. On the other hand, the scope of Westminster’s approval must still be determined. It is believed that the judiciary will end up in a constitutional crisis, especially the Supreme Court. At the very least, the suspension of ‘Brexit’ procedures is causing uncertainty on both sides i.e. UK and EU. This paper will pose some of the essential questions being discussed on the eve of the Supreme Court’s decision over ‘Brexit’ in December of 2016/January of 2017.

The two European referendums of 1975 and 2016 are examined in their historical, political and constitutional context. The paper provides a short account of United Kingdom’s accession and participation in the European Union. The uneasy relationship with the EU is shown, with reference to political process of negotiating Britain’s position in the Union. Some political, economic and cultural factors that have shaped British attitudes towards European integration are analysed. A legislative framework for both referendums is described and the dynamics of pre-referendum debates and campaigns are discussed. The political implications of ‘Leave’ vote (in favour of Brexit) are indicated. Finally, certain constitutional and legal issues surrounding UK withdrawal from the EU are considered, also in the context of the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty.

EEC/EU membership has been one of the thorniest issues in British politics over the last 45 years. The 1975 referendum confirmed the UK’s will to stay in the EEC, but it failed to put to rest the argument over Europe. The 2016 referendum took Britain into the opposite direction, but it also reinstated the issue of the EU to the prime slot in British politics, where it is going to stay for the many years needed to settle the new relationship with the EU. The main drivers behind both referenda were the power struggle between the main parties and the gradual entrenchment of Euroscepticism as the dominating standpoint in British right-wing politics. The substantive concerns with EEC/ EU membership were merely a backdrop to the partisan battles leading to both referenda, but the crucial differentiating factor in 2016 was the Conservative perception of the threat posed by UKIP. The Eurozone crisis and austerity policies at home added to the potent mix of disillusion among the voters, who became receptive to promises of return to past glories of the UK freed from the shackles of Brussels.

The article analyses the potential impact of Brexit and the new legal framework for European statistics in demography on the formal voting power of Poland in the Council of the European Union, in the case of adopting decisions by the qualified majority of votes. The leading hypothesis of the paper assumes that the fact of leaving the European Union by Great Britain and the new method of determining the population of EU Member States for the purposes of making decisions in the Council of the European Union leads to another transfer of formal voting power to the benefit of countries with the largest populations, as well as reduces the ability of Poland to build strictly minimally blocking coalitions, in particular in opposition to the coalition being formed by France and Germany or the so-called “Trio of Ventotene”.

The article is focused on the political and economic relations between Poland and Great Britain in last three decades. In first part of the article it was introduced the evolution of the most important political events in bilateral relations and convergent and divergent matters relates to the business of both states before and after the obtainment by the Poland of the membership in NATO and the European Union. Asymmetry among both countries in the political and economic aspect was also underlined. In second part of the article, the attention was concentrated on the analysis of mutual economic relations, in this the growth of trade turnover, services and investments. Consequences for Poland connected with the exit of Great Britain from European Union become also approximate. Four principal conclusions were introduced in the end of the article.

Ujawniające się w ramach Unii Europejskiej (UE) procesy dezintegracyjne wywołują potrzebę i postulaty stworzenia teorii dezintegracji europejskiej. Obecnie możemy mówić co najwyżej o istnieniu zaczątków takich teorii. W niniejszym opracowaniu podjęto próbę wykazania, że istniejące teorie integracji europejskiej mogą być z powodzeniem wykorzystane do analizy procesów dezintegracyjnych. Można tego dokonać relatywnie prostym zabiegiem, poprzez potraktowanie ich w sposób „odwrócony”. Innymi słowy, teorie te – tak jak można stosować przy eksplanacji procesów integracji, tak też można zastosować dla wyjaśnienia, dlaczego niektóre państwa nie chcą lub nie mogą uczestniczyć w procesach zbyt daleko idącej integracji europejskiej. W artykule niniejszym, wykorzystując metodę studium przypadku, wskazano na potencjał, jaki posiadają dwie teorie integracji: federalistyczna i międzyrządowa w wyjaśnieniu fenomenu Brexitu. Rozpoczęcie negocjacji o wyjściu Wielkiej Brytanii z UE przedstawia się jako skutek bądź to nieprzystawalności i braku akceptacji dla modelu federalistycznego, bądź to jako fiasko promowanego modelu integracji międzyrządowej.

The upcoming withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union is a source of tensions within the political system of the UK. Devolution is most likely to be affected by Brexit which can lead to conflicts between the UK as a whole and Scotland as its part. The Sewel Convention is a political constitutional norm establishing non-legal rules of cooperation between these two political bodies. Despite having been written in a statute, the Sewel Convention remains unenforceable by the courts. Nonetheless, the political consequences of diminishing it may be severe. The discrepancy between the political strength of Scottish nationalism, confirmed in the latest general election, and constitutional lack of Scottish “voice” in regard to Brexit may lead to a severe political crisis within the UK.

The abject failure of British Prime Minister Theresa May to get the United Kingdom’s (UK) Withdrawal Agreement from the European Union (EU) through Parliament on 15 January 2019, with MPs overwhelmingly rejecting it by 432 votes to 202, has been put down to a variety of reasons. Primary among them has been the question of the post-Brexit status of the land border between the Republic of Ireland and the UK’s province of Northern Ireland. Although an issue which was initially seen as of minor importance, the significance of the Irish border steadily grew over time until it became the main stumbling block in UKEU Brexit negotiations brought about by the decision of the British people to leave the EU in a referendum held on 23 June 2016. Indeed, the key term of the ensuing debate, namely ‘the Irish backstop’, produced such confusion among politicians, political pundits and the general public that the House of Commons, split between so-called Brexiteers and Remainers, decided to reject May’s deal out of hand. This article seeks to argue that, from June 2016 (the time of the referendum) up to January 2019 (the time of the first vote on May’s Brexit deal in Parliament), the issue of the Irish backstop was seriously underestimated before suddenly taking centre stage and ultimately sabotaging the Withdrawal Agreement from within.

The article is devoted to the characteristics of Theresa May minority government and its impact on foreign policy. The author concentrated on the political situation in Great Britain in the context of Brexit. Some interesting aspects have been chosen to illustrate the problem of minority government existence in Great Britain. Author explains various factors that influenced the foreign policy and negotiations with EU of the government cabinets without a sufficient majority in the parliament. The main thesis is that minority governments is not able to lead a successful foreign policy in long term and usually fails to be effective in this sphere and Brexit process is a visible example of such situation.

The article is devoted to the problem of further steps that Great Britain could take to break the stalemate in which it found itself after June 2016 when the British decided to leave the European Union. Despite making this decision, it turned out that its implementation was unexpectedly difficult, which in turn caused a political crisis in Great Britain that has not been seen in this country for a long time. The aim of the article is to try to find answers to two research questions. First of all, could the Brexit process – both from a legal and political point of view – have been stopped and reversed, for example, by holding a second referendum? Secondly, whether, since Brexit has become a fact, we can expect a quick return of Great Britain to the European Union (“Breturn”). Using the method of institutional and legal analysis and the content analysis method, the Author tries to prove the thesis that the idea of a second referendum seemed unlikely, and hence – Brexit was rather inevitable. As for “Breturn” – this scenario also looks unrealistic, as it would involve various legal and political obstacles as well as practical inconveniences for Great Britain.

The article presents the main parties (i.e. the Conservative Party, Labor Party, Liberal Democrats and Scottish National Party) results of the 2019 UK general election as well as an analysis of the most important issues (i.e. correct identification of voters’ expectations, simplicity and clarity of the messages, leaders’ personalities) which determined each party success or loss. The author proves that since Brexit was the primary focus of voters, the level of support for particular parties remained dependent on the solutions presented in this issue. This basis explains why the Conservatives in the whole UK and the SNP in Scotland won (and the Labor Party and the Liberal Democrats lost) the battle of Brexit.

“Get Brexit Done!” Comments on the election to the UK House of Commons on December 12, 2019

The 12 December 2019 General Election was a turning point in the recent political history of the United Kingdom. It ended one turbulent period in which British politics was characterized by high instability and indecision. Above all, it ended the extended deadlock with the work on ending the exit of the United Kingdom of the European Union (Brexit). It is clear that the result of the 2019 General Election was the culmination of the 2016 referendum on EU membership. The ruling Tories led by Prime Minister Boris Johnson stood for the elections under the slogan “get Brexit done”. As a result, the elections met the criteria for a second, indirect Brexit referendum. By winning the elections, the conservatives obtained a public mandate to complete the process of leaving the EU. The purpose of this article is to analyze the genesis and course of the 2019 elections to the House of Commons and to attempt to answer the question about the consequences of the election results.

Populizm jest zjawiskiem skomplikowanym, ponieważ koncepcja ta nie tylko różni się zarówno w podejściu, jak i przejawach, ale także ukształtowała się w krajach i regionach poza Europą. Podczas gdy intelektualiści nieustannie krytykują i postrzegają to zjawisko jako zagrożenie, któremu należy zapobiegać, miliony ludzi w całej Europie jednocześnie okazują poparcie dla ruchów, partii i osób o ideologii populistycznej. Ten sprzeczny obraz pokazuje, że pojawienie się populizmu jest w istocie odzwierciedleniem szeregu niestabilnych i niepokojących problemów społeczno-politycznych, a także skrajnych emocji i bezsilności ludzi w takich sytuacjach. Celem artykułu jest zatem przyjrzenie się czynnikom napędzającym Brexit, a tym samym zbadanie populizmu na poziomie analizy na poziomie indywidualnym, grupowym, państwowym i systemowym. Wyjaśniając poglądy wietnamskich intelektualistów na temat populizmu, artykuł następnie omawia możliwość wzrostu populizmu w obecnej sytuacji społeczno-politycznej w Wietnamie.

Polish migrants in the United Kingdom in the face of the upcoming Brexit

The main aim of the article is to present the situation of Polish migrants in the United Kingdom in the face of regulations related to Brexit. The main research is focused on the Polish community, its features and structure. The author analyzed new living conditions of Poles in Great Britain. Poles are concerned about the change in the economic and political situation. The functioning in a multicultural country, the continuous process of acquiring a foreign reality, seeking a balance between established values, customs and traditions, and finding a new home – fills them with fear and anxiety.

Brexit Negotiation Process in David Cameron and Theresa May’s Policy

Great Britain’s decision to leave the European Union (aka Brexit) is one of the most significant events in the history of European integration. It is also the first event in the history of the Community, yet not the only one proposed by the UK government. This article aims at the analysis of political activity of British Prime Ministers: David Cameron and Theresa May related to the United Kingdom’s leaving the European Union structures. British Government’s decision was taken after the referendum, which was held on June 23, 2016, followed by invoking Article 50 of the EU’s Lisbon Treaty. Consequences of Brexit are highly dependent on the results of negotiations, although most definitely they will have political, economic and social implications. The most important conclusions are contained in the summary.

The subject of the article is trade cooperation between Great Britain and Kenya in the context of the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union. The article characterizes the commercial cooperation of Great Britain and Kenya and discusses the trends existing in this field in recent years. The main threats to this cooperation that Brexit brings are presented, as well as the actions that states must implement to counteract the negative consequences of Brexit and the opportunities that Brexit potentially gives to deepening trade cooperation between countries. In addition, the political climate change that has occurred between countries in recent years, which has a significant impact on the implementation of economic cooperation, including trade, has been outlined. The purpose of the article is to present and evaluate the challenges that the countries face in the context of Brexit, which they must overcome in order to maintain and deepen trade cooperation. The main research problem is whether Brexit will weaken or accelerate trade relations between Great Britain and Kenya? The main hypothesis of the article is that Brexit causes great uncertainty about the future of trade cooperation between Great Britain and Kenya. However, it gives the opportunity to dynamize this cooperation, and Kenya can become a model partner for the United Kingdom within the concept of „Global Britain” promoted by London. Kenya’s positive development trends make it an increasingly attractive trading partner for Great Britain. However, Kenya wants to take advantage of the UK’s search for trading partners outside the European Union.

The flexible formula of the British Constitution results in a relative openness to external influences. Notwithstanding this fact, the United Kingdom’s (UK’s) membership in the European Union’s (EU’s) structures (1973–2020) resulted in a progressive limitation of the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty. Brexit will not reverse the effects of the ‘soft’ modification of the foundations of the UK’s system, which occurred in the sphere of the practical implementation of the competencies of the branches of governance. Prima facie, the decision on the UK’s withdrawal from the EU should result in a ‘renaissance’ of the traditional doctrine of Westminster sovereignty, per A.V. Dicey. However, judicial activism, continued validity of the European Convention on Human Rights (incorporated on the basis of Human Rights Act 1998) and the irreversible consequences of the devolution of competencies in the UK for Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland are the factors that hinder the possible revitalisation of the sovereignty of the British Parliament.

The article is devoted to the analysis of the United Kingdom’s foreign policy after its withdrawal from the European Union, which finally took place on February 1, 2020. Brexit made it necessary to redefine British foreign policy, including modification of the strategy aimed not only at maintaining but even strengthening the global position of the United Kingdom. A key element of this new strategy seems to be the strengthening of the US-British alliance, traditionally referred to as the Special Relationship. The author tries to prove the thesis that for the British government, reinforcing the cooperation with the United States is one of the most important ways to counteract the negative effects of Brexit. The experience so far shows, however, that it is not so easy, because after leaving the European Union, the United Kingdom has become for the United States, for many reasons, an increasingly less attractive partner.

Sovereignty of Parliament and Stability of Great Britain’s Political System in the Perspective of Consequences of the Brexit

Regime changes that occurred in Great Britain as the effect of Brexit have led to explicit reactivation of the sovereignty of parliament principle. Main warrant of political stability is identified with the Parliament of the United Kingdom. Main hypothesis of this article is that stabilizing activities that are undertaken by this institution influence three possible layers: stabilizing the community, political system and authorities. This overgrowth of competences can affect constitutional fundamentals of the regime. Probable effect of this ongoing process of changes will be endeavours to codify a constitution. Method that is employed in this paper is a method of system analysis, which seems to be the most adequate approach for researches of political stability. Considerations presented in the paper are included within the remit of political theory, political comparativism and constitutional systems.