Revista Temas de Derecho Constitucional

331 La cuestión preliminar del TJUE sobre la revocatoria del brexit: fortaleciendo el derecho constitucional de la unión europea. for Europe. During the drafting period of the clause, modifications proposed to allow the expulsion of a Member State, to avoid the abuse during the withdrawal procedure or to make the withdrawal decision more difficult. However, those amendments were all rejected on the grounds that the voluntary and unilateral nature of the withdrawal decision should be ensured and it would otherwise thwart the voluntary and unilateral character of the withdrawal decision. 61 Turning to the object and purpose of the TEU and the interpretation of Article 50, the ECJ investigates the purpose of Article 50 TEU. The Court concludes that Article 50’s ob- jective is twofold: to reconise the sovereign right of a Member State to withdraw and to regulate the steps for such a withdrawal to take place. 62 The ECJ avails of the Advocate General’s opinion to support the conclusion of a unilateral right to revoke notification, for as long as a withdrawal agreement has not entered into force, or in absence of agree- ment, for as long as the two-year period and any possible extension has not expired. 63 The notification by a Member State of its intention to withdraw does not lead inevita- bly to the withdrawal of that Member State from the European Union. According to the Court, “a Member State that has reversed its decision to withdraw from the European Union is entitled to revoke that notification for as long as a withdrawal agreement con- cluded between that Member State and the European Union has not entered into force or, if no such agreement has been concluded, for as long as the two-year period laid down in Article 50(3) TEU, possibly extended in accordance with that provision, has not expired”. 64 To come to that conclusion, the Court referred to the provisions of the Vienna Conven- tion on the Law of Treaties, which was taken into account in the preparatory work for the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe. In the event that a treaty authorises withdrawal under its provisions, Article 68 of the VCLT specifies inter alia, in clear and unconditional terms, that a notification of with- drawal, as provided for in Article 65 or 67 thereof, may be revoked at any time before it takes effect. The Court revised the Council and the Commission’s position affirming that the right of the Member State concerned to revoke the notification of its intention to withdraw should be subject to the unanimous approval of the European Council. However, this requirement would transform the nature of the revocation as unilateral sovereign right into a conditional right subject to an approval procedure. Such an approval procedure would go against the principle, that a Member State cannot be forced to leave the Euro- pean Union against its will. This would be tantamount to a compulsory withdrawal. The ECJ thesis is further corroborated in the analysis of the nature of revocation. 61 Judgment, paras 68. 62 Judgment, para 56. 63 Judgment, para 57. 64 Ibid.