Yesterday I wondered if EU theology needed to introduce the term ”limbo” to explain the whereabouts of the Action Plan Implementing the Stockholm Programme (entry in Swedish; use Google translation and the sources in English or your own language if you are interested): Handlingsplanen för Stockholmsprogrammet: I limbo? (16 November 2010)
The Council of the European Union (Justice and Home Affairs) twice accused the Commission of deviating from scripture sacralised by the European Council (with the head of state or government from each member state). On the Commission's tracking system PreLex all traces of the proposed Action Plan are lost since 3 June 2010.
The Council was critical enough, but it failed to specify the issues which in its view went beyond the limits of the Stockholm Programme, or those questions which had not been addressed in a satisfactory manner. Thus, the Council conclusions do not meet adequate standards of openness, i.e. being readily understood by outsiders such as EU citizens, without extensive comparative study.
Accusations of heresy become grave matters when they emanate from the Inquisition, so instead of speeding towards the future, we need to go back to how the area of freedom, security and justice (AFSJ) is doing, now that the Lisbon Treaty is in force.
P.S. Despite its English name, Diner’s room is a blog in French, where “Jules” writes about European and French law as well as politics. Don’t read Diner’s room if you have preconceived ideas about blogs being uncouth, and want to cling to your prejudices. Otherwise, feel free to enjoy well researched and argued posts on a quality blog.