Thanks for sharing your perspective. My response:
‘The rule of law’ is not referring to an actual law or to the legal status of the referendum. I was referring to the contest being governed by rules that should apply no matter which side won. The point is that the government and the opposition agreed that the people would decide and their decision would be implemented. The rules of the contest had been set and politicians should abide by them.
You make wild claims about the Leave campaign. If you have evidence, please provide it.
You write, “The rule of law is that the government cannot make a law that is breaking an existing law.” — But it doesn’t need to break the law. It can just change the law.
You write, “the invitation of Article 50 is breaking Good Friday agreement.” But please quote the section of the Good Friday Agreement that you say is being broken.
You write, “It is also clear now that the promises of the leave campaign were lies in order to misinform the public.”
But what promises are you referring to? In any case, the Leave campaign was not the government (or a prospective government) and so not in a position to promise what the government would do in the event of Brexit. And I doubt if the Leave campaign were any more guilty of lies and misinformation than the Remain campaign, with their ‘Project Fear.’
You write: “There was also an election where the conservative government agreed to leave, became a minority.”
But this doesn’t change the fact that the promise was made to implement the decision made in the referendum. And at the election, both main parties agreed to respect the result of the referendum.