BREXIT: Was it Fraud?

A recent Guardian article unveiled some of the immediate effects of a possible no-deal Brexit. And guess what, everything will cost more money!

Directly or indirectly Brits all over will be seeing an assault on their wallets, and by then it will probably be too late to look for culprits.

The Fraud Act 2006

According to the Fraud Act 2006, fraud is a crime punishable by law if perpetrated in the form of either

a) ‘false representation’

b) ‘failing to disclose information’;

c) ‘abuse of position’.

The first, in a simplified manner, means that an individual dishonestly and consciously making false claims in order to achieve a personal goal is breaking the law.

The second, being pretty much self-explanatory, establishes that whoever purposefully withholds vital information in order to pursue a hidden agenda is engaging in fraudulent activity.

And finally the third, recounts that if a person has a privileged stance in their respective field (which accounts him or her to a certain set of standards and equips the person in question with advantageous means), the individual in question is committing fraud if using such position for particular gains.

By these standards those involved in campaigning and attempting to implement Brexit might have engaged in fraudulent activity.

With Boris Johnson being formally indicted by private prosecutor Marcus J. Ball over his lies in the course of Brexit campaigning, there is now some credibility to the claim that Brexit might have indeed been a fraud. And if justice is truly blind, Boris could be held accountable for his alleged part.

But Johnson did not act alone, and if the law is generalisable enough there will be more people facing a judge, and soon.

False Representation

Remember the big red bus? The one promising £350m for the NHS?

That claim, which has been proved to be false, was one of the flagship selling points that the Leave campaign adopted in order to sway people to vote towards their cause.

Brexiteers also claimed Turkey would be joining the European bloc, and with it millions of new immigrants would be coming to the UK; Or that the UK could disengage from the EU while remaining in the single market.

These are but some examples, amongst many others, of misinformation and blatant lies told in the course of campaigning to leave the EU.

Failing to Disclose Information

Institutions like the Bank of England, the International Monetary Fund, or the Confederation of British Industry warned against the very plausible risks of divorcing Britain from the European Union.

Currency fluctuation, inflation, business relocation, or higher unemployment rates, were some of the factors which leading experts and organisations warned about in the prospect of a Brexit scenario. Most of which have been fulfilled in a quasi-prophetic manner.

Instead of allowing their supporters to make a rational decision based on the facts and figures available, leading Brexiteers chose to dub the warnings as ‘Project Fear’.

This allowed those in charge of the campaign to mask truth for fiction, to paint facts as lies, and in the process to conceal or discredit most forms of vital information.

Abuse of Position

This clause is almost self-evident. People campaigning for Brexit, had access to tools necessary to reach and influence the masses, and were either civil servants or leaders of industry with direct or indirect responsibilities to the communities they serve.

As far as politicians go, they had an obligation to serve their constituents and not abuse their trust. With their post comes a set of representative tools and status that separates them from average citizens.

MPs like Michael Gove, Frank Field, or Nigel Dodds hold privileged positions, which could allegedly be considered abused when utilised to spread misinformation and attempt to influence their constituents in a possibly dishonest fashion.

As far as leaders of industry are concerned, they have material resources and human networks that grant them a probable privileged stance in society. People such as JD Wetherspoon’s Tim Martin, and multi-millionaire Arron Banks have granted large amounts of money to actively support possibly fraudulent actions of the Leave campaign.

These people, whether politicians or wealthy individuals, all used their resources and societal stances in order to sell the public on a venture which they probably knew was flawed and potentially damaging for those voting for it.

Alleged Motives

One can hardly have an alleged crime without probable motives, especially when it comes to something as complex as fraud. And since there are so many individual players in the Leave campaign, personal motives may be hard to generalise.

For instance, in the case of Boris Johnson there was the not-so-secret aspiration of becoming PM, which would have been made plausible, back then, by getting rid of Cameron.

Moreover, Nigel Farage’s personal vendetta against the European Union coupled with his outright racist and xenophobic ideals, are motivations enough to allegedly engage in fraudulent activity.

Also, Theresa May’s husband, Phillip May, works for an American fund manager who intends to make a profit out of Brexit-generated instability.

Finally, the now mediatic James Dyson, who recently uprooted his company to Singapore and who can profit from a more deregulated Britain, outside of the single market and desperate to attract investment.

So as far as motives go, they can allegedly be summed up to power, ideology, greed or any combination of the three.

The Conclusion

Leave.EU broke spending electoral law and made promises that were simply not true. The consequence of such is to be felt by the people whom they convinced to do their bidding for them. The same exact individuals who are going to suffer from the alleged con that they have been sold.

These people were promised more money, for the NHS for example, and ended up receiving a collapsing economy, higher inflation and decaying health system.

If there was ever a mass endeavour that appeared awfully close to that of a scam, Brexit could certainly look like it: Promises made, money lost, promises broken, and perpetrators at large.

The real question we should be asking, is who is going to pay for the apparent fraudulent scheme that crashing out of the European Union is? Farage, Boris, May, Dyson, Banks (the list goes on)?

Are the earnings accumulated from this enough to stop the socio-financial haemorrhage that Brexit has come to represent? The country is bleeding out in the form of money, industry, services and jobs. And all thanks to a nightmare that was sold to the British public in the form of a dream.

All that is left to ask at this point is: Who are the perpetrators, and will they be brought to justice?

*This article is a purely intellectual exercise. The author is not skilled, nor trained in law, and all thoughts are written on a speculative basis, as conceptualised by publicly available information.