Brexit and the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement: the case for reform amid evolving political, legal, and international norms

Abstract

This article offers an appraisal of the case for reform of the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement in the light of international law. It begins with an appraisal of the Agreement’s performance after almost three decades of practice and the challenges that have been posed by intervening events, with Brexit the most obvious and pertinent example. The Agreement is then examined from the perspective of international law, and through the lens of Articles 2(3) and 33 of the United Nations Charter, as an example of peaceful dispute settlement. It is posited that the obligation to peacefully settle disputes is not a static one, but one that evolves over time, and that good faith adherence to this obligation may require both monitoring and updating of existing agreements in the light of intervening events. In this context, the respective shifts in position by the United Kingdom, Ireland and the European Union are all germane and must be taken into account if any revised agreement is to adequately affect the new status quo and thus preserve the delicate peace originally brought about by the Agreement. The article proposes that the original framework of the Agreement can no longer be assumed to function as intended, which necessitates not only a careful reassessment of the Agreement’s terms but also a willingness to consider innovative approaches that respond to current realities.