Great thread by Katy. But “ambiguity” isn’t quite right. The Protocol isn’t ambiguous. It’s absolutely clear on these points.
But - like a classic English detective novel - though the answer is clear, it’s deliberately disguised for those who aren’t paying attention (or want to take a Victor Meldrew approach).
See my thread here.
And note two further critical points.
1. Though the JC can agree provisions that mean that some goods imported to NI from GB don’t pay EU *duties*, it can’t change the rule (set out in the Protocol) that the UK has to apply the *procedures and checks* laid down in the Union Customs Code to those imports.
And in applying those rules on checks and procedures - which have direct effect in UK law and are to be enforced by UK courts - the UK is under the supervision of the Commission and ECJ.
2. As to duties, if the JC (ie the EU and UK jointly) fails to agree the precise scope of provisions relaxing the (disguised but clear) default rule that goods imported into NI from GB pay EU duties, then there are no such provisions. All such imports will have to pay EU duties.
Btw the Stephen Weatherill piece is a great read (and should be read by all MPs and anyone else wanting to understand what has already been agreed) eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/2020/03/the-pr…
And in evaluating the Govt’s “we don’t need to negotiate anything complicated, we don’t need time, and we will avoid any ECJ role stance”, you need to start by understanding what it has *already* agreed and whether it can really live with what it has *already* agreed.
