Jakob Nehls
Three men and one woman sit on a podium, answer questions and talk about Brexit. This is either the beginning of a bad joke or an ordinary event at the LSE. In fact, on Monday evening (17 Feb.), LSE professors Sara Hobolt, Tony Travers and Erik Berglof, as well as University of Buckingham’s vice-chancellor Sir Anthony Seldon, sat together in the Old Theatre to discuss the topic ‘Brexit and the Future of British Politics’ jointly with the audience. The not unusual setting for a Brexit panel made it into this blog article because it revealed and reflected two basic and often overlooked aspects of Brexit. First, after 90 minutes and a considerable number of contributions by men, Sara Hobolt remained the only woman who shared her assessment. Brexit was a project dominated by men and also seems to remain one. Second, a variety of issues were raised during the course of the evening. Immigration and trade policy, the security of supply as well as fundamental freedoms – everyone talked about it, but no one expressed what it ultimately is about: human rights.
Brexit is sexist
In a political sphere that tends to be patriarchal, it is perhaps not surprising and yet still striking that the Brexit project has been male-dominated from the beginning. It’s not just that David Cameron initiated the referendum: The campaigns of both the leave and the remain camps were widely male-led. Those women who were visible within the respective campaign were considered to be valuable less for idealistic and more for strategic reasons. Furthermore, Brexit’s actual implications on women’s rights, gender equality and its intersections with other forms of discrimination like race or class were not an essential part of either campaign. Instead, especially on the side of the Brexiteers, the image of the ‘ordinary man’, who is threatened by forces from outside – be it the EU, migrants or refugees – was established and successfully used (see MacLeavy 2018).
Today, three and a half years after the referendum and a few weeks after the formal withdrawal from the EU, many things remain highly unclear – but certainly women’s rights cannot be ignored when evaluating of the consequences of the Brexit. Since a multitude of principles for the protection of women is enshrined in EU law, their rights are particularly threatened by the withdrawal. In a report published last September, the campaign group ‘Best for Britain’ described in detail how Brexit increases the vulnerability of women. They looked at issues such as maternity leave, domestic abuse, and equal treatment – all of which are subject to EU legislation – and also highlighted the risks to women with disabilities or women of colour. Several MPs around the leadership of Green politician Caroline Lucas subsequently sent an open letter to the government, urging it to ‘not turn back the clock on this critical issue’. After a male-dominated Brexit, feminists now feel compelled to defend the hard-won rights of women – and theirs are not the only human rights threatened by the withdrawal.
Brexit is a human rights issue
It is indeed not only women’s rights that are put at risk by Brexit, but ultimately the whole human rights framework of the UK. A revision of the Human Rights Act of 1998 (HRA), the incorporation of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in UK law, had long been planned by the Conservatives. The window of opportunity is now open. In contrast to the ECHR, the European Charter of Fundamental Rights is linked to EU membership. Although the government under Theresa May explained in detail how the protection of the rights enshrined in ‘the Charter’ would be guaranteed even after Brexit, this view was contested by experts on the Equality and Human Rights Commission or the Joint Committee on Human Rights.
While human rights agreements and conventions at first appear abstract, a look at the possible impacts of Brexit makes its human rights consequences tangible. Although Amnesty International has never per se taken a stand against Brexit, the organisation has repeatedly pointed out the potential risks and reminded the government of its human rights obligations. For example, the situation in Northern Ireland is complex and threatens the rights of individuals on both sides of the contested Irish border. Citizens’ rights, for example the right of free movement, must be preserved. If they are not, many EU citizens living in the UK face restrictions in their human rights as well. In addition to that, the new design of migration laws must also be in line with human rights standards – a difficult task, perhaps, in the wake of an anti-immigration Brexit debate. The widespread uncertainties surrounding trade relations give rise to reasonable concerns about economic, social and cultural rights. To maintain the right to health for all people, access to medicine must be ensured. Finally, food insecurity, an issue that has already reached alarming proportions in this country, threatens to become a larger problem if the UK does not end this transition phase with a comprehensive economic plan.
Brexit has just begun, and we must defend human rights within the process
By leaving the EU, the UK is separating itself from a far from perfect supranational entity. Yet the EU is getting closer to the human rights-oriented principle of universality, which goes hand in hand with a transnational and cross-border character. The UK now faces the difficult task of protecting human rights within its own borders again without being able to rely on already codified EU legislation. This very fact seems to be a step backwards. Now, the UK needs to take two steps forward to further secure and improve human rights. Brexit is far from over. The campaign, the referendum, the negotiations of recent years and the formal withdrawal on January 31st were only the beginning of a long and difficult process in which human rights must be defended. This requires not only supporters and campaigners, but also a critical and strong civil society that allows them to create a movement – preferably, a powerful feminist and intersectional movement that vehemently demands its rights. At the very least, the contributions at Brexit discussions in the Old Theatre will then be more balanced.
Works Cited
MacLeavy, J. (2018) Women, equality and the UK’s EU referendum: locating the gender politics of Brexit in relation to the neoliberalising state. Space and Polity. [Online] 22 (2), 205–223.
LSESU AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL 