Brexit Voters To
Face Prosecution
Activists from the EU
referendum Remain Campaign are continuing with
plans to pursue criminal prosecutions for many of
those who voted to leave the EU.
‘We do not wish to be
divisive or retaliatory,’ said a spokesman
for the activists, ‘but advice from our
legal team confirms that many Brexit voters may
be guilty of negligence – and some may be
guilty of treason. We believe it to be our public
duty to bring these unspeakable criminals to
justice.’
The action by Remain
activists was triggered by a report published in
late November 2016 by the UK Office for Budget
Responsibility. The OBR placed a figure on the
cost to the British public of the decision to
leave the EU. They calculated that the sum
involved would reach £220bn by 2020 –
around £12,000 for every Brexit vote cast.
‘Negligence is defined
in law as: “A failure to behave with the
level of care that someone of ordinary prudence
would have exercised under the same circumstances,”’
explained the activists’ spokesman. ‘The
OBR report illustrates that significant harm will
be caused by Brexit, particularly to the poor and
most vulnerable in our society. If Brexit voters
were negligent in making their decisions then
they should be accountable for that outcome.
Culpability in individual cases will be judged on
the motivation of the accused.
‘We certainly wouldn’t
wish to criminalise anyone for making an honest
error – even such an incredibly crass and
stupid one,’ continued the spokesman for the
Remain activists. ‘If a voter had considered
the full economic, political and social
implications of his or her decision, and had
still voted for Brexit, then that person would
not be negligent. It is becoming increasingly
apparent, however, that many Brexit votes were
based on anything but an objective appraisal of
the facts.’
Remain activists have
already referred many known Brexit voters to the
police, and forces throughout the UK have begun
to arrest and interview suspects. A freedom of
information request has revealed a list of the
most frequent justifications for a Brexit vote
cited during those police interviews.
These include:
- I was feeling a bit cross about life in general,
blamed David Cameron, and voted Brexit to annoy
him and his type.
- I dislike and distrust foreigners of all kinds,
and I voted Brexit to reduce the risk of
encountering any.
- I was doing what the tabloids wanted me to do,
as usual, without thinking for myself.
- Boris Johnson supported Brexit, and he was
great fun on the UK TV programme, “Have I
Got News For You”.
- I resent people who are younger (or better
educated) (or better off) than I am. I thought
voting Brexit would irritate the hell out of all
of them.
- I really believed that there would be £350m
extra each week for the NHS. I was never much
good at maths at school.
- I thought Jeremy Corbyn supported Brexit. I can’t
recall him saying otherwise.
- I’m quite comfortably off, and, at my
advanced age, I don’t have to worry too much
about the future, so I thought: “up-yours
Brussels!”
‘If someone chose to
drink and drive, and then seriously hurt someone
as a result,’ continued the spokesman for
the Remain activists, ‘most people would
agree that legal action against that person was
appropriate. Most people would conclude that the
decision to drink and drive had been negligent.
‘An ill-thought-through,
irresponsible vote that contributed to Brexit
must surely be considered in a similar way.
‘We accept that many
Brexit voters may have failed to grasp the
seriousness of what they were doing,’ he
continued. ‘The same could be said of many
drunk drivers, however, but such a lack of
foresight does not absolve them from guilt.
‘It’s also true
that the voting process may have encouraged
silliness,’ the spokesman noted. ‘A
secret ballot means that people can be tempted to
vote for anyone or anything – however
bizarre. As a result, it’s easy for
individual voters to overlook personal moral
responsibility for their choices.
‘With democratic
rights, however, come responsibilities, and it’s
simply unacceptable to make capricious decisions
that seriously harm fellow citizens without being
subject to accountability.’
Many Brexit voters now, of
course, vehemently deny that they voted in the
way they did and rely on the secrecy of the
ballot to preserve their confidentiality.
Remain activists believe it
inappropriate for this protection to continue.
They, once again, draw an analogy with drink-driving:
‘Many Brexit voters have behaved like
inebriated hit-and-run drivers,’ continued
the spokesman for the Remain activists. ‘It’s
simply wrong that anonymity should shield them
from justice.’
Despite the secrecy of the
EU referendum ballot, police have confirmed that
it will be straightforward to identify Brexit
voters. The Representation of the People Act 1983
requires that ballot papers used to cast votes in
British elections or referenda must be stored for
a year and a day, prior to their destruction. All
such papers for the EU referendum are currently
held in a warehouse in Hayes, Middlesex.
Modern developments in
forensic science have allowed DNA and other
chemical markers to be recovered from any object
that a person has handled. It is now possible,
therefore, to chemically analyse those papers,
compare the results with medical and forensic
databases, and electoral registers, and establish
a list of all those who voted for Brexit.
It is expected that most
Brexit voters will be charged with negligence and,
if convicted by a jury of Remainers, be ordered
to repay to the treasury the £12,000 that their
vote will cost the country. Due to the enormous
damage that will be caused to the UK by Brexit,
however, an alternative charge of treason may be
brought in some circumstances.
‘The charge of treason
will be reserved for exceptional cases,’
confirmed the spokesman for the Remain activists.
‘That may include, for example, public
figures who cynically supported Brexit to further
their political careers. In the case of Boris
Johnson we will lobby for a charge of high
treason and, if he is convicted, the death
penalty.’
Remain activists hope that
prosecution of Brexit voters will send a clear
message to the voting public about their
responsibility to make sensible decisions based
on an intelligent appraisal of facts –
rather as if they were serving on a jury in a
court of law.
The progress of the Remain
activists’ campaign is being closely
monitored elsewhere in the world. There has
already been interest from the US where
consideration is being given to the prosecution
of Donald Trump’s supporters on similar
grounds.
|
