Thread by @RobertCPalmer13

1. [THREAD]

Brexit CAN be declared VOID!!!

Here's how 👇

#FBPE #WATON #FBR #StopBrexit #VoteLeaveBrokeTheLaw #PeoplesVote #FinalSay #BlueWave #resist #TheResistance @abcpoppins @acgrayling @Lawyers4EU @LPrivileged @Anna_Soubry @Andrew_Adonis @LordRennard

2. A fundamental principle of the common law is that votes can be declared void for substantial irregularity. If irregularity affects the result of an election it is by itself enough to compel the tribunal to declare the election void.

3. The result doesn't need to be affected. Only a ‘substantial departure’ from the rules, or the election being ‘conducted so badly that it was not substantially in accordance with the law’ is needed to void the ballot.

4. The right to free and fair voting is an inalienable principle of UK law. A statute providing that a ref can be void for overspending isn't needed: it is a fundamental constitutional principle. The larger a vote’s impact, the greater amount of integrity is placed on it.

5. ‘No judgment of a court, no order of a Minister, can be allowed to stand if it has been obtained by fraud. It doesn't matter if separate legal entities did the spending because, with collusion, ‘fraud unravels everything’.

6. According to evidence heard by a HoCs Committee on 27/3/18, the overspend on the ref went into online ads that targeted people based on FB data, without consent or knowledge of UK voters. Cambridge Analytica sold the data to a Canadian corporation, Aggregate IQ Ltd.

7. Dominic Cummings (Vote Leave) employed Aggregate IQ to target 6 m UK voters using psychologically manipulative technology. It is alleged that they had a common plan to exceed spending limits. But, can it be proven that overspending changed the result of the Brexit referendum?

8. Numbers suggest, yes. Just 634,751/33.5 m voters (1.8%) needed to switch to leave over remain. Causation can't be certain. But faced with uncertainty causation is proven not on the ‘balance of probabilities’, but whether an action ‘materially increased the risk’ of a wrong

9. If a court asked, ‘did overspending by Vote Leave materially increase the risk of Brexit?' the answer must be ‘yes’. Time to declare Brexit void? You tell me....