The former Tory leader called for the end of the ECJ’s rule over Britain if the country agrees to make financial contributions to the European Union during any implementation period.
He said that the final sum of the Brexit divorce bill – reported to be between £40bn to £50bn – must allow Britain to break free from the EU’s trade protectionist programme and let the UK trade globally.
He added that the continuation of the EU’s bullying tactics must be dropped and they must stop treating the UK as a “client state”.
Writing in The Sunday Telegraph, the former leader of the Conservative Party said: “Most people who take an interest in the EU recognise that the single most important definition of taking back control is the moment we leave the authority of the ECJ.
“For it is this court which has been the ever present ratchet of the concept of ever closer union.
“Judgment after judgment has redefined our relationship with the EU and, more often than not, widened the authority of the commission over nation states.”
Earlier this year the EU declared that they wanted continued application of law on citizens’ rights as well as interpretation – meaning the UK will still effectively be under the thumb of the ECJ.
Prime Minister Theresa May reportedly held talks with EU officials about the referral system to the ECJ for EU nationals who remain in the UK.
Under the proposal UK judges would refer a case to Luxembourg if a query arose on a point of law that has not previously been addressed during our time as a member state.
Mr Duncan Smith slammed the EU’s demand that the jurisdiction of the ECJ should be maintained, branding the move “preposterous”.
He said: “This would be quite unacceptable, as it would confound the PM’s red line and put the UK in the position of ceding power to a foreign court on which it has no representation to rule on those who would and should normally have their rights adjudicated by British courts.
“For as the letter from Sir Richard Aikens, a distinguished former judge of appeal, puts it, to do this would in effect place the ECJ in a position of authority over UK courts as though we had never left the EU.
“If true, then this would pose a serious problem, impinging on the UK’s sovereignty. For even someone close to the court, a former ECJ judge, Franklin Dehousse, has dismissed such a proposal as meaning that the UK would become some kind of new 1930 Shanghai.”
He added: “The need for the government to agree to a court of arbitration to come into force as we leave is vital.
“That and not extending the authority of the ECJ is the right way to go and such proposals from the EU should be dismissed as a vain attempt treat the UK as a client state.”
Mrs May is set to meet European officials tomorrow to discuss whether “sufficient progress” has been made in the ongoing Brexit negotiations.