Aland Parliament approves EU Lisbon Treaty

Today, a few days before the Lisbon Treaty enters into force in the European Union, the Åland Parliament (Ålands lagting) has approved the amending treaty with respect to the territory of the Aland Islands and the areas covered by the legislation of this autonomous province of Finland.


The press release, available through the home page of the Aland Parliament (in Swedish) states that the Lisbon Treaty was approved by 24 votes (out of a total of 30 local parliamentarians):

Ålands lagting röstade idag ja till Lissabonfördraget

Lagtingets behandling av Lissabonfördraget avslutades idag med en tredje behandling då en slutlig omröstning hölls. Lagtingets samtycke gavs med 24 röster. Obunden samlings, Ålands framtids ledamot samt en ledamot från Centern röstade nej. För samtycke krävs kvalificerad majoritet av de närvarande ledamöterna som såleddes uppnåddes.

Till grund för behandlingen låg republikens presidents framställning nr. 6/2007-2008. Samtidigt behandlades landskapsregeringens meddelande nr 4/2007-2008. De klämmar om bl.a. inflytandefrågor som lagutskottet fogat till sitt betänkande om presidentframställningen antogs samtigt av lagtinget.

För den som är intresserad av lagtingets hela behandling av ärendet hänvisas till lagtingets web-sida, www.lagtinget.ax. Klicka på "Dokument och ärenden och skriv Lissabonfördraget i sökformuläret.

A two thirds majority was required for approval.

The decision means that the Åland Islands do not enter a legal grey zone when the Lisbon Treaty becomes law on 1 December 2009. Finland ratified the reform treaty in 2008.



Ralf Grahn



P.S. Do you find EUSSR myths fascinating? Are we EU citizens worth a better European Union? Read some or all of the 481 Euroblogs aggregated on multilingual Bloggingportal.eu. On most of the blogs you can comment and discuss our common European future.

EU Lisbon Treaty in Aland Islands ─ new step

The home page of the Åland Parliament (Ålands lagting) has been updated with information (in Swedish) telling us that the Legal Committee (Lagutskottet) has fine-tuned its report on the EU’s Lisbon Treaty 15 November 2009:

”Lissabonfördraget Publiceringsdatum 16.11.2009
Lagutskottet justerade på söndagen den 15 november sitt betänkande om Lissabonfördraget. Betänkandet kan du få fram via lagtingets ärendesökning. Klicka på länken "SÖK ÄRENDEN OCH DOKUMENT" på denna sida. Skriv in "Lissabonfördraget" eller bara "Lissabon" som sökord. Välj Repuplikens presidents framställning om Lissabonfördraget....Klicka sedan på Betänkande från lagutskottet.”

The report we find behind the link is dated 12 November 2009, so we cannot be sure about the later changes, but basically the report proposes that Åland approves the Lisbon Treaty. There are then a number of points which require the Åland Government to continue its work to wrest more influence for Åland in Finnish EU affairs and in the European Union, as well as about the demilitarised status of Åland.



On 16 November 2009 the Åland Parliament plenary has tabled the report for debate on 23 November.

Approval of the Lisbon Treaty requires a qualified majority of two thirds of the 30 members in the regional parliament, and the decision concerns the application of the Lisbon Treaty in the Åland Islands, with regard to the areas with autonomous legislation.

The Lisbon Treaty enters into force on 1 December 2009, and it was written on the assumption that it applies to the whole territory of Finland, including the Åland Islands (according to the exemptions contained in the Åland Protocol).

Finland formally ratified the EU Treaty of Lisbon 30 September 2008.


***


Åland news and comment

Here are some news items and comments with further information about the Lisbon Treaty in the Åland Islands (all in Swedish).



Ålandstidningen, Kerstin Österman: Lagtinget säger ja till Lissabon (16 November 2009) The final decision will be taken 25 November 2009. The opposing minority is too small to reject approval.



Ålandstidningen (editorial), Niklas Lampi: Ett klokt och genomtänkt ja (17 November 2009) Åland has shown great skill in widening its autonomy, but it is time to make the decision, as the last in Europe, to avoid placing Åland in no man’s land, when the Lisbon Treaty enters into force.


Nya Åland (Nyan.ax), Annika Kullman: Lagutskottet: ja till Lissabonfördraget (17 November 2009) The opposition has only five votes, so the Lisbon Treaty will probably pass. Åland continues to press for an own member of the European Parliament.



Nya Åland (Nyan.ax), Annika Kullman: Åland får inte en av Finlands platser (17 November 2009) Prime minister Matti Vanhanen has stated that the Finnish government is not prepared to give Åland (population 27,000) a member of the European Parliament, when there were 408,000 citizens per MEP in the rest of Finland.

***


Mini-states

By the way, one letter to the editor illustrated what in my view is the absurd over-representation of the smallest EU member states: An independent Åland, which became a member state of the European Union, would have six members of the European Parliament under the Lisbon Treaty. (Cf. minimum threshold in Article 14 TEU)

In a democratic European Union, each citizen would have a vote with (roughly) the same weight.


***


Lisbon Treaty ratifications



The Council of the European Union has now updated its web page on the Lisbon Treaty. The notification of the Czech Republic on 13 November 2009 has been noted, so all 27 ratifications have now been formally recorded.




Update 21 November 2009



I happened to find the following characterization of this blog post on Your Freedom and Ours, Helen: Not all in (19 November 2009):

“I very much fear that horrid hectoring bullies of the Ralf Grahn variety will triumph and the defiant Islands will sign up. But I cannot help wishing that they would imitate that little village in Gaul that refused to be conquered by the Romans or to be divided into three parts.”

***

I ask my readers to explain to me how my blog post turned me into a horrid hectoring bully.

If my facts were wrong, or my writing offensive, I want to correct the breach of civility.




Ralf Grahn



P.S. Do you find EUSSR myths fascinating? Are we EU citizens worth a better European Union? Read the Euroblogs aggregated on multilingual Bloggingportal.eu, and discuss our common European future.

Aland Islands and EU Lisbon Treaty (November 2009 update)

The Autonomy Committee (Självstyrelsepolitiska nämnden) of the Åland Parliament (Ålands lagting) has prepared an 18 page opinion for the Legal Committee (Lagutskottet), published 27 October 2009, and available in doc format through the link: Lissabonfördraget Självstyrelsepolitiska nämnden har avgivit sitt utlåtande till lagutskottet om Lissabonfördraget. Klicka här om du vill läsa utlåtandet.

The Legal Committee will issue a report on the application of the EU Treaty of Lisbon in the Åland Islands.

As yet, there is no plenary date for the debate and decision to approve or reject the amending treaty with regard to Åland.

Approval by the Åland Parliament plenary requires a qualified majority of two thirds of the 30 members in the regional parliament, and the decision concerns the application of the Lisbon Treaty in the Åland Islands, with regard to the areas with autonomous legislation.



Finland formally ratified the EU Treaty of Lisbon 30 September 2008.

The formal ratification process of the Lisbon Treaty will be concluded, when the Czech prime minister Jan Fischer deposits the 27th and last ratification instrument with the Italian government (foreign ministry) in Rome next Friday, 13 November, which means that the Treaty of Lisbon enters into force on 1 December 2009.

Thus, the Åland Islands can be expected to make its decision during the course of November in order to avoid a legal grey zone.




Ralf Grahn




P.S. Get to know the real EUSSR by reading and commenting on the good, the better and the best Euroblogs on multilingual Bloggingportal.eu. Propose your own blog or another blog with a European (EU) theme.

Lisbon Treaty ratifications

Take a stroll down the Wikipedia article on the Treaty of Lisbon until you reach the updated table of ratifications. (Yes, formal German ratification is has been noted.)

By now, the national parliaments in 26 member states have approved the Lisbon Treaty, and they are all hoping for Ireland to join them after Friday’s referendum.

Given the varying domestic political scenes, it is almost a miracle that any new treaty can reach this far, but one striking feature is how large the majorities have been in most national parliaments.

Would they vote for the amending treaty without good reason?


Ralf Grahn

Lisbon Treaty: Åland Islands (July “update”)

Fifteen months have now passed since the Åland Parliament registered the request from the President of Finland, Tarja Halonen, to approve the European Union’s Treaty of Lisbon (on 21 April 2008).

This morning, the matter was still lingering in the Legal Committee of the Åland Parliament, which has failed to issue a report for the plenary.


National parliaments in 26 EU member states have approved the reform treaty. Finland has completed its ratification procedure, but the Åland Islands have not resolved if they want the Lisbon Treaty to apply, if it becomes the primary law of the European Union.

A positive vote requires a two thirds majority in the regional parliament, if the matter ever advances that far. (Earlier posts have dealt with the background.)


Ralf Grahn

Lisbon Treaty: Åland Islands

Fourteen months have now passed since the Åland Parliament registered the request from the President of Finland, Tarja Halonen, to approve the European Union’s Treaty of Lisbon (on 21 April 2008).

The matter is still lingering in the Legal Committee of the Åland Parliament, which has failed to issue a report for the plenary. (Earlier posts have dealt with the background.)

National parliaments in 26 EU member states have approved the reform treaty. Finland has completed its ratification procedure, but the Åland Islands have not resolved if they want the Lisbon Treaty to apply, if it becomes the primary law of the European Union.

A positive vote requires a two thirds majority in the regional parliament, if the matter advances that far.


Ralf Grahn

Did the European Council nominate Barroso?

The European Council giveth and the European Council taketh away?

Yes, I have to admit that I find the antics of the European Council disturbing. The media have reported that José Manuel Barroso has been nominated as the intended President of the Commission, but read the Presidency Conclusions carefully:



European Council 18 to 19 June 2009 – Presidency Conclusions (Council document 11225/09 CONCL 2)




“Nomination of the President of the Commission

6. The Heads of State or Government agreed unanimously on the name of Mr. José Manuel DURÃO BARROSO as the person they intend to nominate as President of the European Commission for the period 2009-2014.

7. The Prime Minister of the Czech Republic and the Prime Minister of Sweden, as the present and the incoming Presidents of the European Council, will have discussions with the European Parliament in order to determine whether the Parliament is in a position to approve that nomination at its July plenary session.

8. In the light of these discussions, the Council, in the composition of Heads of State or Government, will, on the basis of Article 214(2), 1st subparagraph, of the EC Treaty, formalise its decision on the nomination of the person it intends to appoint as President of the Commission.

9. The process of nomination of the other persons who will be appointed as members of the Commission can only be initiated when the legal basis for the nomination procedure has become clear.”

***

Point 6 tells the same story as the media reports, but point 8 of the Presidency Conclusions makes the nomination conditional. There will be a formal nomination only at a later date.

How can the European Parliament (and the newly elected EP convenes and constitutes the political groups only on 14 July 2009) respond formally to an informal inquiry?

Are the heads of state or government going to formalise their nomination before the EP’s inaugural session, if the informal discussions with the EP indicate that a majority would be prepared to back Barroso?

Has the European Council scored an own goal, by being too clever by half? If not, what does it expect to gain during the coming three weeks?



Ralf Grahn

EU Commission President: Facts and speculation Barroso vs Verhofstadt

If the European Council 18 to 19 June 2009 nominates José Manuel Barroso, by a qualified majority, to become President of the Commission, the matter appears before the newly elected European Parliament for approval.

Under the Treaty of Nice, still in force, the approval requires a simple majority (Article 214 of the Treaty establishing the European Community; TEC).

The political groups in the European are not fully formed yet, but with 264 MEPs the biggest group, the European People’s Party (EPP) is still far from a majority for Barroso.

The official Election results are somewhat behind the events with regard to the groups, but offer the main facts.




Rainbow coalition?

In principle, a rainbow coalition of the Left, ASDE (ex PES), the Greens and ALDE (Liberals) would now have 347 votes, after the Italian Partito Democratico joined the renamed Socialist Group.

This is fairly close to a majority of the representatives (369), but it still looks like a chimera, even if Barroso is seen as a weak choice by swathes of politicians and public opinion.

Many socialist and liberal MEPs belong to national parties led by heads of governments behind a re-election of Barroso.

British, Spanish and Portuguese PES representatives were among these long before the European elections. Only the Democrats part of ALDE has indicated that it will vote against Barroso. Other groups and individual MEPs might fall into line with the nomination by the European Council, possibly unanimous.

Without clear indications to the contrary, there is no pot of gold at the end of this rainbow, although a secret ballot offers MEPs with reservations about Barroso the chance to defy their national party leaders by voting for Guy Verhofstadt.


EPP plus?

The ‘European Conservatives’ of the UK Tories, the Polish Law and Justice Party (PiS) and the Czech ODS have 49 MEPs at the moment, but we are still waiting for the announcements on further recruitment among the remaining 76 MEPs (provisionally classified as Others, UEN, IND/DEM).

In theory, these presently unsorted MEPs could boost the EPP vote to 389, and it is possible that many among the 125 nationalists, anti-federalists and others prefer Barroso as the lesser evil.

However, some of them are rejectionists at heart, with scant inclination to vote constructively. For Barroso and the heads of state or government it would be an embarrassment to have the Commission President carried into office on the votes of ultra-nationalists, xenophobes and fascists.

Therefore, expect the members of the European Council to lean on MEPs to pre-empt a rainbow coalition.


Ralf Grahn

Åland Islands: Lisbon Treaty & ratification update

Not much of an update, actually, but to keep the editors of Wikipedia and other observers informed.

This blog post can only state that 13 months have now passed since the Åland Parliament registered the request from the President of Finland, Tarja Halonen, to approve the European Union’s Treaty of Lisbon (on 21 April 2008).

The matter is still lingering in the Legal Committee, which has failed to issue a report for the plenary. (Earlier posts have dealt with the background.)

National parliaments in 26 EU member states have approved the reform treaty. Finland has completed its ratification procedure, but the unresolved issue is if the Lisbon Treaty will be applicable in the Åland Islands. A positive vote requires a two thirds majority in the regional parliament.


Ralf Grahn


P.S. The loose ends with regard to the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty are:

• In the Czech Republic, President Vaclav Klaus seems bent upon doing all he can to disrupt or delay the procedure, despite ratifications in nearly all member states and the amending treaty now approved by two chambers of the national parliament. The latest excuse is a planned new complaint to the Constitutional Court, which has already ruled on the constitutionality of the Lisbon Treaty.

• In Poland President Lech Kaczynski has withheld his signature from the Lisbon Treaty approved by both houses of parliament.

• In Germany the Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht) is expected to ponder the constitutionality of the Lisbon Treaty until after the European elections.

• Ireland has been given political assurances about maintaining the oversized Commission and assurances concerning sensitive areas (abortion, tax, neutrality) if the Lisbon Treaty is approved in the second referendum, probably in October. The final wording of these guarantees is expected at the European Council 18 to 19 June 2009.

Heritage Foundation: Dividing USA and EU

Yesterday evening the Irish blog Semper Idem drew my attention to one of the more astounding positions I have seen on the EU Treaty of Lisbon: The Heritage on the Lisbon Treaty (13 May 2009).


On the Heritage Foundation’s blog The Foundry, Sally McNamara presents her view on the relations between the United States and Europe: A Lisbon Treaty Retrospective? (Posted May 13th, 2009 at 11.41am)



The last paragraph is worth reading on both shores of the Atlantic:

“The Lisbon Treaty is an affront to democracy that lacks any semblance of popular support or legitimacy. It also threatens the transatlantic relationship, and underscores the EU’s ambitions to become a global power and challenge American leadership on the world stage. If the Conservative’s make good on their pledge to take the Treaty to the British public, it will almost certainly be rejected and hopefully save Europe from itself.”

***

Legitimacy of Lisbon Treaty

First, we look at the legitimacy and popular support of the Treaty of Lisbon.

The Treaty of Lisbon was agreed by the democratically legitimate national governments of all 27 EU member states. It has been approved, according to their constitutional requirements, by the national parliaments in 26 of these member states.

The Lisbon Treaty does not alter the fundamental basis of the European Union.

Lisbon remains an international treaty and the European Union is still an organisation based on an international treaty between states.

Objectively, there was little cause to subject either the Constitutional or the Lisbon Treaty, of incremental reform, to a referendum.

It is absurd to contend that the Lisbon Treaty lacks legitimacy, where it has been approved.

Some national leaders had stupidly promised national referendums on the previous Constitutional Treaty, but these were settled during the parliamentary ratification processes concerning the slightly watered-down Treaty of Lisbon. The legitimacy point is moot.

The exception is Ireland, where a constitutional interpretation requires a referendum. A majority of the Irish rejected the Lisbon Treaty, hoping for at “better deal”.

The No side never presented a credible formula for the better deal, but the second referendum in Ireland will be based on the “better deal” the Irish government has secured (although the finer details have not been published).

Popular support for the Lisbon Treaty as for many government measures is far from overwhelming, but we live under the rules of representative democracy. Governments are even expected to “do the right thing” for the long term, despite short term unpopularity.

The Lisbon Treaty is a complicated document, resembling a technical manual more than a rousing political document. It is hard to understand for ordinary voters, and much of the vocal opposition seems to be based on misunderstanding or misrepresentation of its contents and implications. The less educated were more prone to vote No in Ireland.

Lacking “any semblance of popular support” is a wild exaggeration, but the political atmosphere in one major member state, the United Kingdom, can be described as Eurotoxic. Still, even there both Houses of Parliament approved the Lisbon Treaty and the ratification procedure has been formally concluded. Under the rules of representative democracy, the decision is legitimate.

If we want to discuss lack of democratic legitimacy, we have to move to the European level.

The Lisbon Treaty fails to bring about an effective and democratically legitimate government at EU level, but that is hardly what McNamara is complaining about.

Following the Golden Rule, she should advocate the Articles of Confederation for the United States, if she wants Europe to preserve the Treaty of Nice.

I find it astounding when someone extols the virtues of the US Constitution, but wants to deny Europeans even a pale shadow.


Ralf Grahn

EU Lisbon Treaty countdown

After the adoption of the EU Treaty of Lisbon by the Czech Senate, 26 member states of the European Union have concluded the parliamentary ratification process.

The following loose ends remain:

• In the Czech Republic President Vaclav Klaus seems bent upon doing all he can to disrupt the procedure despite ratifications in nearly all member states and an amending treaty now approved by two chambers of the national parliament.

• In Poland President Lech Kaczynski has withheld his signature from the Lisbon Treaty approved by both houses of parliament.

• In Germany the Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht) is expected to ponder the constitutionality of the Lisbon Treaty for a month or two.

• Although Finland has formally concluded the ratification process, the Aland Parliament has still not produced the committee report needed for a vote on the application of the new treaty in the territory of the Åland Islands.

• Ireland has been given political assurances about maintaining the oversized Commission and assurances concerning sensitive areas, if the Lisbon Treaty is approved in the second referendum, probably in October.


Loose cannon

Libertas has rejected the better deal for Ireland, in practical terms in favour of a costly campaign to retain the Treaty of Nice. A certain disdain for representative democracy can be noted.

The unclear situation complicates the European elections (number of MEPs) and the election of Commission President and Commissioners, and time is wasted before the reforms foreseen by the Lisbon Treaty can be put into practice (if ever).


Ralf Grahn

Aland Islands: Lisbon Treaty

What is so special about 21 April 2009?

Very little, in fact. It is just the anniversary of the EU Treaty of Lisbon in the Åland Islands (population 27,500). On this day a year ago, the authorities in autonomous Åland registered the arrival of the request by the President of Finland to approve the amending treaty with regard to the areas subject to local legislation.

About a month and four plenary sessions later the Åland Parliament sent the proposal to its Legal Committee, responsible for legal business which relates to the autonomy of Åland and to international treaties which are applicable to Åland.



No report has appeared. The status file this morning tells us that the matter is still being prepared.

Approval of the Lisbon Treaty is not listed on the preliminary agendas of the three coming plenary sessions.

***

How should we interpret the situation?

Two conflicting forces are at work. The European Union is a project of deepening integration, in other words lowering barriers. The driving force of local politics in Åland is to strengthen the particular traits of local society (language, culture, political and economic rights, administration, businesses, legislation etc.). The special status of Åland was accepted by the European Union when Finland became a member state in 1995; the Åland Protocol, enshrined by the Lisbon Treaty, even condones practices, which are contrary to core internal market principles (as long as discrimination of outsiders is practiced equally).

The Lisbon Treaty affects areas of autonomous Åland legislation only marginally, but a positive response requires a two thirds majority in the local parliament with 30 members.

The slow response has little to do with the Lisbon Treaty ‘per se’, but has been used as a bargaining chip to press for concessions from the Finnish Government with regard to EU affairs. Åland already is fully involved in the preparation and conduct of these matters, so the aspirations have taken aim at representation (Council, European Parliament, Court of Justice), a harder nut to crack.

If a coming proposal to approve the Lisbon Treaty fails to get the required qualified majority, it would lead to an unprecedented situation. The amending treaty would not be applicable in a part of the territory of a member state. But what would follow, if the rest of the European Union had moved forward from the Treaty of Nice?

Finland would have to notify the European Union, and it would have to negotiate some sort of new status for Åland. But what would the EU accept today, given that exemptions increasingly complicate the application of EU legislation in an expanding union?

If the Treaty of Lisbon falls in the Czech Republic, Germany, Ireland or Poland, the problem disappears. But so does Åland’s bargaining chip.

NB: Finland has concluded its ratification process. Åland decides only with regard to its own territory.


Ralf Grahn

Gibraltar & Lisbon Treaty

A while back I wrote that the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office and Gibraltar have not answered my questions about possible approval of the EU Treaty of Lisbon in Gibraltar.

The geographical scope - Article 355(3) and (4) TFEU - includes the Aland Islands and Gibraltar (additionally Declaration 55), but the Wikipedia article on the Lisbon Treaty reports that these territories with self-rule are to decide on the applicability in their territories.

The Wikipedia information is correct as to Aland, but I had failed to find information to confirm or deny that Gibraltar would need to approve the Lisbon Treaty.

***

Today I received an answer from the Minister of Justice of Gibraltar D A Feetham, saying that Gibraltar is part of the European Union by virtue of UK membership on the basis that the UK is responsible for the external affairs of the territory. Gibraltar is not a Member State and does not ratify treaties.

Once the Lisbon Treaty is ratified by the UK it will then be applicable to Gibraltar.


***

I am grateful for the response.

A few remarks:

The answer is official, so the editors of the Wikipedia article on the Lisbon Treaty need to take the position into account.

The autonomy of the Aland Islands is roughly comparable, but there the treaty needs to be approved with regard to its territory and the policy areas pertaining to self rule (and my question did not imply formal ratification).

The answer does not contain any legal references, but if someone has more exact information to share, I am grateful.

The concept ‘external affairs’ is given a wide interpretation for direct applicability, given the subject matter of the EU treaties (a number of internal policy areas, some of which probably are included in Gibraltarian self-rule).

The United Kingdom has ratified the Treaty of Lisbon, so its entry into force awaits the final ratifications by the last member states.

The UK FCO has not responded yet.


Ralf Grahn

UK FCO and Gibraltar: Responsive government?

Good governance, Government 2.0 and responsiveness may appear in politicians’ speeches, but how are things on the ground?

My two latest test cases concern the EU Treaty of Lisbon and the position of Gibraltar.

***

GIBRALTAR

Way back, I sent an e-mail to the Gibraltar government’s office in London asking if the Lisbon Treaty needs approval by Gibraltar (as indicated by the Wikipedia article on the treaty) and on the plans to deal with the question.

After a while I received a response telling me that the question had been referred to someone in the Gibraltar government, who would get back to me with an answer as soon as possible.

A few more weeks went by, so I decided to make a new enquiry. The only suitable contact address I found on the net was the Citizens’ Advice Bureau.

Three more weeks passed. I wrote a reminder to the Bureau, and this time I received a reply wondering how I hadn’t received their answer of 27 February 2009. Anyway, they gave me the advice to contact the local Ministry of Justice (something beyond their capacity?).

Well, I e-mailed my query to the Ministry of Justice of Gibraltar, but this time I decided to publish my observations after only one and a half working days:

Nada.

***

UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO)

On 18 February 2009 I sent the following question to the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) in London to the e-mail address specifically mentioned for questions Gibraltarian:

enquiry.gibraltar@fco.gov.uk


Sir / Madam,

I present the contents of the EU Treaty of Lisbon on my blog and I have followed the ratification procedures. The geographical scope - Article 355(3) and (4) TFEU - includes the Aland Islands and Gibraltar (additionally Declaration 55), but the Wikipedia article on the Lisbon Treaty reports that these territories with self-rule are to decide on the applicability in their territories.

The Wikipedia information is correct as to Aland, but I have failed to find information to confirm or deny that Gibraltar would need to approve the Lisbon Treaty.

Could you kindly fill me in on that?

In case Gibraltar will make a decision, I would be grateful for exact information, such as possible proposals, acts or memos on the matter, as well as an estimate of when a decision might be taken.
I thank you in acvance for your time and trouble.

Sincerely,

Ralf Grahn

***

Three weeks later, having received no answer I sent a reminder to the FCO at the same address, telling them that I would publish my findings.

Admittedly somewhat impatient by now, only one and a half working days later, this is it:

No reply.

***

I am still interested in the position of Gibraltar and its self-rule with regard to the Lisbon Treaty, so if someone is able to give me useful information, I am grateful.

But I am fascinated by the responsiveness of Her Majesty’s government (known for mislaying sensitive information which should be kept secret), but seemingly incapable of delivering timely answers to simple questions.

My special thanks go to the FCO and the government of Gibraltar for bringing this home.

The next time I hear some minister utter good governance, Government 2.0 or responsive, guess what my reaction is going to be?

I am going to check if we live on the same planet.


Ralf Grahn

Lisbon Treaty: Aland Islands and Gibraltar

I have noticed that some people are looking for information about the approval of the EU Treaty of Lisbon in Aland and Gibraltar.

Finland and the United Kingdom have ratified the Lisbon Treaty, but these autonomous regions decide if the treaty is to be applied in their territories.

This post can be called an update ─ in theory.

Three weeks since my latest post on the Aland Islands and the EU Treaty of Lisbon, no report has emanated from the Legal Committee of the Aland Parliament. If the treaty reaches the plenary a two thirds majority is needed for approval.

The other self-ruling region with a population of 28,000 is Gibraltar. A government official was kind enough to promise an answer about the plans for the approval of the Lisbon Treaty as soon as possible, but nothing has been heard of since.

Scanning speeches, press releases etc. on the web pages of the Government of Gibraltar (no search function available) drew a blank, as did a search on Laws of Gibraltar, although at least the Wikipedia article on the Lisbon Treaty tells us that Gibraltar is supposed to decide on approval. The Gibraltar Parliament seems to have but one all-purpose home page, without any links to political business.

***

The Treaty of Lisbon was signed 13 December 2007. It was published in the Official Journal of the European Union on 17 December 2007. Fourteen months have now passed.

Self-rule, population count and discretion seem to be common characteristics despite the geographical distance between Aland and Gibraltar.

Small and agile? Open communications?


Forget it.


Ralf Grahn

Åland: Lisbon Treaty

If deliberation is part of democracy, the Åland Parliament belongs to a European regional master class. Thirteen months have passed since the signing of the Treaty of Lisbon, nine months since the President of Finland Tarja Halonen formally proposed approval of the amending treaty to the regional parliament.

The Finnish Parliament approved the Lisbon Treaty in June 2008, and the ratification instrument has been deposited in Rome. Even latecomer Sweden has managed to ratify the new EU treaties.

In other words, if the Lisbon Treaty enters into force, it will bind Finland and neighbouring Sweden, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Denmark, but it is still unclear if it will apply to Åland in between (to the extent that questions are within the remit of the autonomy).

In the Åland Islands the matter remains at the committee stage. No committee report has been published and it is impossible to get an answer as to when this might happen or when the plenary might make a decision either for or against approval of the Lisbon Treaty.

Ten out of thirty local legislators are enough for a negative outcome, which would lead to a highly interesting situation.

***

Gibraltar seems to be in the same category. I have been unable to uncover information about if and when the local Parliament might deal with the Lisbon Treaty, but I would be grateful if someone has information to offer the readers of this blog.

In the member state league, the Czech Council Presidency, Polish President Lech Kaczynski and the Irish voters are still among the political stumbling blocks, whereas the German Constitutional Court has at least announced two days for hearings a fortnight from now.

***

The unanimous conclusion and ratification of treaties has proven to be highly rewarding for obstructionists. They have created a Europe in their image.


Ralf Grahn

EU Lisbon Treaty ratifications for purists

The media and this blog have usually concentrated on the parliamentary ratification stage of the EU Treaty of Lisbon. This is natural, because we live in parliamentary democracies. Approval by parliament is seen as politically decisive, which it normally is. Currently 24 member states’ parliaments out of a total of 27 have already given their approval.

One country, Ireland, has rejected the Lisbon Treaty in a referendum, and in two member states, the Czech Republic and Sweden, the parliamentary process has hardly begun.

This blog has employed expressions like parliamentary approval or ratification, the parliamentary ratification stage and other words to that effect to remind readers of the difference between the main political decision and final ratification.

***

As with other international treaties, the Lisbon Treaty needs the additional signature of the president or royal assent in most member states to comply with their internal procedures (constitutional requirements). In parliamentary democracies functioning normally, this stage is ordinarily a formality.

There may, however, exist ‘benign’ reasons for delaying the signature.

Administrative delays are normal. In principle, there is no hurry before the end of 2008.

In Germany the president awaits the outcome of the judicial challenges filed with the Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht).

In Finland – although I have seen no official confirmation of the reasons – the president may be waiting (within a three month time limit) for the autonomous Åland Islands to approve or reject the Lisbon Treaty concerning their own territory.

The vagaries of politics being what they are, other reasons may enter into play. For instance, seen from the outside the Polish president Lech Kaczynski seems to be engaged in populist politicking and a power struggle with Poland’s government and parliament. Perhaps one of the Polish readers of this blog could present an expert comment on the constitutional matters and the political questions involved.

***

Externally, states finalize their approval by notification of their intent to be bound by a treaty. According to Article 54 of the consolidated Lisbon Treaty version of the Treaty on European Union provides that ‘The instruments of ratification shall be deposited with the Government of the Italian Republic’.

The EU Council web site tells us that thirteen ratifications have been deposited:

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/cms3_Applications/applications/Accords/details.asp?cmsid=297&id=2007133&lang=EN&doclang=EN

The group of finalized ratifications includes the following member states: Austria, Bulgaria, Denmark, France, the United Kingdom, Hungary, Luxembourg, Latvia, Malta, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia.

***

Eleven member states have parliamentary approval, but their ratification instruments have still to be deposited. They are: Belgium, Cyprus, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Greece, Italy, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Poland and Spain,


Source: Wikipeadia: Treaty of Lisbon (8 August 2008)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Lisbon

***

By the way, there is a misconception in the Wikipedia article about the Åland Islands (Finland). Currently there is no Åland Islands MEP.

With a population of 28,000 Åland has lobbied for a member of the European Parliament since the beginning of Finnish EU membership, but the chances to succeed are slim, given almost 408,000 inhabitants for each of the 13 future Finnish mandates (presently 14).

Åland has a guaranteed member in the Finnish parliament, which is close to proportional representation given the size of the Finnish population (5.3 million) and 200 MPs.

If the regional parliament of the Åland Islands rejects the Lisbon Treaty, the legal situation would become unclear, leaving part of Finland’s territory outside the geographical scope of the amending treaty and the relations between Åland and the EU to be determined.

***

The UK territory Gibraltar (28,750) has about the same population size as Åland, but I could find no information on its government’s London web site about the approval of the Lisbon Treaty:

http://www.gibraltar.gov.uk/int/index.asp

Another 8 km2 to watch, for purists.


Ralf Grahn