The Swedish government has embarked on the first leg of the process to ratify the EU Treaty of Lisbon. The government has published two tomes of about 400 pages each. The first one contains the legislative proposals and an extensive presentation of the amendments to the existing Treaty on European Union (TEU) and the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC), to be called the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union (TFEU). The second tome contains seven appendixes: the final documents of the intergovernmental conference (IGC 2007).
Sweden did not ratify the Constitutional Treaty of 2004, but left it hanging. Thus, the present stage is a wide-ranging consultation exercise, with 214 government bodies and civil society actors being offered the possibility to express their views. The dead-line for contributions is 25 March 2008.
This clearly means that Sweden is not going to be among the first member states to ratify the Lisbon Treaty, although the government mentions the target date of 1 January 2009 in its press release.
The government of Sweden has clearly stated that the ratification procedure is going to be parliamentary.
Ralf Grahn
Source:
Regeringskansliet: Lissabonfördraget – Ds 2007:48; Press release, 20 December 2007 and downloadable pdf files; Part I with proposals and presentation, Part II with appendixes: 1. the Treaty of Lisbon, 2. Protocols and appendices, 3. the Final Act, 4. Articles with ordinary legislative procedure, 5. Articles with special legislative procedures, 6. Articles with unanimous decision making, 7. the Charter of Fundamental Rights (all in Swedish; I found no information in English);
http://www.regeringen.se
Thursday, 27 December 2007
EU Treaty of Lisbon: democratic principles
Citizens’ representation at the European level has evolved slowly. The European Coal and Steel Community had a Common Assembly, with indirectly appointed representatives and consultative powers.
The Assembly formally became the Parliament by the Single European Act (1986). Direct elections to the European Parliament were introduced in 1979. Gradually, the role of the European Parliament has changed from a consultative “talking shop” into a co-legislator.
The so called double legitimacy of the European Union is based on direct representation for the citizens in the European Parliament and representation for the member states in the European Council and the Council.
The Treaty of Lisbon opens up new areas to co-legislation, although the decisive issues are still going to be in the hands of the governments of the member states (the European Council and the Council).
Separate scrutiny of European level decisions of the European Council and Council by the parliaments (and electorates) in 27 member states is less than satisfactory from a democratic point of view.
Disregard for participatory rights of citizens, for openness and for decision making as closely as possible to the citizens has been shown by the Council, when it has refused to publish consolidated versions of the Lisbon Treaty.
Innovative European level parties could offer citizens possibilities to debate common questions and to participate in the formulation of political objectives.
***
In large parts of Europe, the European Union and its predecessors managed to strengthen representative democracy at the national level. The challenge for the 21st century is to establish a fully democratic system at the EU level.
***
The Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (OJ 16.12.2004, C 310), Article I-46 had the headline The principle of representative democracy, which took over the draft text of the Convention, Article I-45.
Paragraphs 1 – 3 of Article 8a are new. Article 8a(4) is derived from Article 191 TEC.
Although the wording is new, it does not change much in practice. Article 8a TEU mainly clarifies the existing situation.
***
The Treaty of Lisbon (OJ 17.12.2007, C 306/1) introduces a new Article 8a into the Treaty on European Union, TEU (latest consolidated version OJ 29.12.2006, C 321 E):
Article 8a
1. The functioning of the Union shall be founded on representative democracy.
2. Citizens are directly represented at Union level in the European Parliament.
Member States are represented in the European Council by their Heads of State or Government and in the Council by their governments, themselves democratically accountable either to their national Parliaments, or to their citizens.
3. Every citizen shall have the right to participate in the democratic life of the Union. Decisions shall be taken as openly and as closely as possible to the citizen.
4. Political parties at European level contribute to forming European political awareness and to expressing the will of citizens of the Union.
***
Dialogue with citizens and consultation are among the questions for the following posting on the Treaty of Lisbon.
Ralf Grahn
The Assembly formally became the Parliament by the Single European Act (1986). Direct elections to the European Parliament were introduced in 1979. Gradually, the role of the European Parliament has changed from a consultative “talking shop” into a co-legislator.
The so called double legitimacy of the European Union is based on direct representation for the citizens in the European Parliament and representation for the member states in the European Council and the Council.
The Treaty of Lisbon opens up new areas to co-legislation, although the decisive issues are still going to be in the hands of the governments of the member states (the European Council and the Council).
Separate scrutiny of European level decisions of the European Council and Council by the parliaments (and electorates) in 27 member states is less than satisfactory from a democratic point of view.
Disregard for participatory rights of citizens, for openness and for decision making as closely as possible to the citizens has been shown by the Council, when it has refused to publish consolidated versions of the Lisbon Treaty.
Innovative European level parties could offer citizens possibilities to debate common questions and to participate in the formulation of political objectives.
***
In large parts of Europe, the European Union and its predecessors managed to strengthen representative democracy at the national level. The challenge for the 21st century is to establish a fully democratic system at the EU level.
***
The Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (OJ 16.12.2004, C 310), Article I-46 had the headline The principle of representative democracy, which took over the draft text of the Convention, Article I-45.
Paragraphs 1 – 3 of Article 8a are new. Article 8a(4) is derived from Article 191 TEC.
Although the wording is new, it does not change much in practice. Article 8a TEU mainly clarifies the existing situation.
***
The Treaty of Lisbon (OJ 17.12.2007, C 306/1) introduces a new Article 8a into the Treaty on European Union, TEU (latest consolidated version OJ 29.12.2006, C 321 E):
Article 8a
1. The functioning of the Union shall be founded on representative democracy.
2. Citizens are directly represented at Union level in the European Parliament.
Member States are represented in the European Council by their Heads of State or Government and in the Council by their governments, themselves democratically accountable either to their national Parliaments, or to their citizens.
3. Every citizen shall have the right to participate in the democratic life of the Union. Decisions shall be taken as openly and as closely as possible to the citizen.
4. Political parties at European level contribute to forming European political awareness and to expressing the will of citizens of the Union.
***
Dialogue with citizens and consultation are among the questions for the following posting on the Treaty of Lisbon.
Ralf Grahn
British consolidated Lisbon Treaty promised
The UK government has promised a consolidated version of the EU Treaty of Lisbon, but the answer does not specify when the consolidation is going to be available to the House of Lords and, presumably, to the public. This is from the parliamentary record of 4 December 2007:
“EU: Reform Treaty
Lord Stoddart of Swindon asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they will ensure that a full official consolidated text of the European Union reform treaty signed in Lisbon showing all changes to previous treaties in readable form is made available before the ratification process begins in Parliament. [HL11]
The Lord President of the Council (Baroness Ashton of Upholland): I apologise to the noble Lord for the delay in answering this Question. The House of Lords European Union Select Committee has proposed to conduct its assessment of the impact of the reform treaty on the basis of the changes it makes to the treaties which are currently in force. As the committee has requested, we will provide a comparison of the reform treaty with the existing treaties and a consolidated text of the treaties as amended by the reform treaty.”
***
If the House of Lords needs consolidated versions of the amending Treaties, so do the interested citizens.
If a consolidated version of the Treaty of Lisbon is needed in English, so do consolidations in every official language of the European Union.
Ralf Grahn
“EU: Reform Treaty
Lord Stoddart of Swindon asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they will ensure that a full official consolidated text of the European Union reform treaty signed in Lisbon showing all changes to previous treaties in readable form is made available before the ratification process begins in Parliament. [HL11]
The Lord President of the Council (Baroness Ashton of Upholland): I apologise to the noble Lord for the delay in answering this Question. The House of Lords European Union Select Committee has proposed to conduct its assessment of the impact of the reform treaty on the basis of the changes it makes to the treaties which are currently in force. As the committee has requested, we will provide a comparison of the reform treaty with the existing treaties and a consolidated text of the treaties as amended by the reform treaty.”
***
If the House of Lords needs consolidated versions of the amending Treaties, so do the interested citizens.
If a consolidated version of the Treaty of Lisbon is needed in English, so do consolidations in every official language of the European Union.
Ralf Grahn
Wednesday, 26 December 2007
EU Treaty of Lisbon: equality and citizenship
The Laeken declaration (2001) expressed the ambition to bring the European institutions closer to the citizens of the Union. The Union needed to become more democratic, more transparent and more efficient. It also had to resolve three basic challenges: how to bring citizens, primarily the young, closer to the European design and the European institutions, how to organise politics and the European political area in an enlarged Union and how to develop the Union into a stabilising factor and model in the new, multipolar world.
The Laeken declaration led to the Convention on the future of Europe, which drafted the Constitutional Treaty, approved by the intergovernmental conference (IGC 2004) with modifications and signed by all member state governments on 29 October 2004.
Equality and citizenship are two of the cornerstones of the relationship between the Europeans and the European Union.
The Treaty of Maastricht (1992) established the citizenship of the European Union.
Equality
The existing Article 12 TEC prohibits discrimination on the grounds of nationality: Within the scope of application of this Treaty, and without prejudice to any special provisions contained therein, any discrimination on grounds of nationality shall be prohibited.
Article 13(1) TEC offers the legal basis for “appropriate action to combat discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation”.
The Lisbon Treaty broadens the scope of these prohibitions on discrimination by adding positive obligations to observe equality and equal treatment in all Union action.
In the draft Constitution, the Convention proposed a new Article I-44, which became the basis for the wording of the Constitutional Treaty. The Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (OJ 16.12.2004, C 310), Title VI , The democratic life of the Union, Article I-45, The principle of democratic equality: In all its activities, the Union shall observe the principle of equality of its citizens, who shall receive equal attention from its institutions, bodies, offices and agencies.
This sentence was taken over by the intergovernmental conference (IGC 2007) and inserted into the new article 8 TEU.
Citizenship
More than half a century since the beginning of European integration, we are still in the middle of a process of transforming economic communities into a Union of people, with full rights for its citizens.
The so called Spinelli project of the European Parliament (1984), the draft Treaty establishing the European Union, would have established the EU and introduced a citizenship of the Union. These reforms had to wait until 1992, when the European leaders were ready to introduce them in the Treaty on European Union (Treaty of Maastricht).
Article 17(1) of the present Treaty on establishing the European Community (TEC): Citizenship of the Union is hereby established. Every person holding the nationality of a Member State shall be a citizen of the Union. Citizenship of the Union shall complement and not replace national citizenship.
There seem to be people out there, horrified by the prospect of becoming citizens and acquiring fundamental rights in the European Union. Let it therefore be said:
In the new Article 8 TEU there is no need to establish the citizenship of the European Union, because it exists since the Treaty of Maastricht, which entered into force in November 1993.
Then to the wording:
“Every person” becomes “every national” in the amending Lisbon Treaty, but the meaning of the second sentence is the same as in Article 17(1) TEC.
The third sentence alters the wording slightly. Citizenship of the Union shall “complement” national citizenship becomes shall be “additional to” in the new Article 8 TEU, without altering the meaning.
In the draft Constitutional Treaty the corresponding clause was Article I-8(1). In the Constitutional Treaty the wording of Article I-10(1) was already the same as the second and third sentences of Article 8 TEU in the Lisbon Treaty.
***
My consolidated version: The Treaty of Lisbon (OJ 17.12.2007, C 306/1) amending the Treaty on European Union (latest consolidation OJ 29.12.2006, C 321 E), new Title II, Provisions on democratic principles, with new Article 8:
Article 8
In all its activities, the Union shall observe the principle of the equality of its citizens, who shall receive equal attention from its institutions, bodies, offices and agencies. Every national of a Member State shall be a citizen of the Union. Citizenship of the Union shall be additional to national citizenship and shall not replace it.
***
My next Lisbon Treaty instalment is going to look at the democratic principles of the European Union.
Ralf Grahn
The Laeken declaration led to the Convention on the future of Europe, which drafted the Constitutional Treaty, approved by the intergovernmental conference (IGC 2004) with modifications and signed by all member state governments on 29 October 2004.
Equality and citizenship are two of the cornerstones of the relationship between the Europeans and the European Union.
The Treaty of Maastricht (1992) established the citizenship of the European Union.
Equality
The existing Article 12 TEC prohibits discrimination on the grounds of nationality: Within the scope of application of this Treaty, and without prejudice to any special provisions contained therein, any discrimination on grounds of nationality shall be prohibited.
Article 13(1) TEC offers the legal basis for “appropriate action to combat discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation”.
The Lisbon Treaty broadens the scope of these prohibitions on discrimination by adding positive obligations to observe equality and equal treatment in all Union action.
In the draft Constitution, the Convention proposed a new Article I-44, which became the basis for the wording of the Constitutional Treaty. The Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (OJ 16.12.2004, C 310), Title VI , The democratic life of the Union, Article I-45, The principle of democratic equality: In all its activities, the Union shall observe the principle of equality of its citizens, who shall receive equal attention from its institutions, bodies, offices and agencies.
This sentence was taken over by the intergovernmental conference (IGC 2007) and inserted into the new article 8 TEU.
Citizenship
More than half a century since the beginning of European integration, we are still in the middle of a process of transforming economic communities into a Union of people, with full rights for its citizens.
The so called Spinelli project of the European Parliament (1984), the draft Treaty establishing the European Union, would have established the EU and introduced a citizenship of the Union. These reforms had to wait until 1992, when the European leaders were ready to introduce them in the Treaty on European Union (Treaty of Maastricht).
Article 17(1) of the present Treaty on establishing the European Community (TEC): Citizenship of the Union is hereby established. Every person holding the nationality of a Member State shall be a citizen of the Union. Citizenship of the Union shall complement and not replace national citizenship.
There seem to be people out there, horrified by the prospect of becoming citizens and acquiring fundamental rights in the European Union. Let it therefore be said:
In the new Article 8 TEU there is no need to establish the citizenship of the European Union, because it exists since the Treaty of Maastricht, which entered into force in November 1993.
Then to the wording:
“Every person” becomes “every national” in the amending Lisbon Treaty, but the meaning of the second sentence is the same as in Article 17(1) TEC.
The third sentence alters the wording slightly. Citizenship of the Union shall “complement” national citizenship becomes shall be “additional to” in the new Article 8 TEU, without altering the meaning.
In the draft Constitutional Treaty the corresponding clause was Article I-8(1). In the Constitutional Treaty the wording of Article I-10(1) was already the same as the second and third sentences of Article 8 TEU in the Lisbon Treaty.
***
My consolidated version: The Treaty of Lisbon (OJ 17.12.2007, C 306/1) amending the Treaty on European Union (latest consolidation OJ 29.12.2006, C 321 E), new Title II, Provisions on democratic principles, with new Article 8:
Article 8
In all its activities, the Union shall observe the principle of the equality of its citizens, who shall receive equal attention from its institutions, bodies, offices and agencies. Every national of a Member State shall be a citizen of the Union. Citizenship of the Union shall be additional to national citizenship and shall not replace it.
***
My next Lisbon Treaty instalment is going to look at the democratic principles of the European Union.
Ralf Grahn
Tuesday, 25 December 2007
EU Treaty of Lisbon: neighbourhood policy
I continue my presentation of the consolidated Treaty of Lisbon. But first, let us take a look at the existing Treaty Establishing the European Community.
The TEC (latest consolidation OJ 29.12.2006, C 321 E) Article 310 states: The Community may conclude with one or more states or international organisations agreements establishing an association involving reciprocal rights and obligations, common action and special procedure.
This text was, more or less, taken over, via the Constitutional Treaty, to become Article 7a(2) of the Treaty of Lisbon.
TEU Article 7a(1) is new, and it owes its existence to the Convention (Article I-56(1) in the draft Constitutional Treaty). The new paragraph underlines the importance of the relations with the Union’s Eastern and Southern neighbours.
The wording of the whole Article 7a in the Lisbon Treaty is the same as in the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (OJ 16.12.2004, C 310) Article I-57.
The intergovernmental conference (IGC 2007) took over the contents of Declaration 11 annexed to the Constitutional Treaty. In the Treaty of Lisbon the now Declaration (number 3) on Article 7a of the Treaty on European Union states: The Union will take into account the particular situation of small-sized countries which maintain specific relations of proximity with it.
In practice, the European Neighbourhood Policy already exists, with specific partnership plans for each country.
***
The EU Treaty of Lisbon (OJ 17.12.2007, C 306/1) inserts a new
Article 7a
1. The Union shall develop a special relationship with neighbouring countries, aiming to establish an area of prosperity and good neighbourliness, founded on the values of the Union and characterised by close and peaceful relations based on cooperation.
2. For the purposes of paragraph 1, the Union may conclude specific agreements with the countries concerned. These agreements may contain reciprocal rights and obligations as well as the possibility of undertaking activities jointly. Their implementation shall be the subject of periodic consultation.
***
Our next stop is going to be TEU Title II and its Provisions on democratic principles.
Ralf Grahn
The TEC (latest consolidation OJ 29.12.2006, C 321 E) Article 310 states: The Community may conclude with one or more states or international organisations agreements establishing an association involving reciprocal rights and obligations, common action and special procedure.
This text was, more or less, taken over, via the Constitutional Treaty, to become Article 7a(2) of the Treaty of Lisbon.
TEU Article 7a(1) is new, and it owes its existence to the Convention (Article I-56(1) in the draft Constitutional Treaty). The new paragraph underlines the importance of the relations with the Union’s Eastern and Southern neighbours.
The wording of the whole Article 7a in the Lisbon Treaty is the same as in the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (OJ 16.12.2004, C 310) Article I-57.
The intergovernmental conference (IGC 2007) took over the contents of Declaration 11 annexed to the Constitutional Treaty. In the Treaty of Lisbon the now Declaration (number 3) on Article 7a of the Treaty on European Union states: The Union will take into account the particular situation of small-sized countries which maintain specific relations of proximity with it.
In practice, the European Neighbourhood Policy already exists, with specific partnership plans for each country.
***
The EU Treaty of Lisbon (OJ 17.12.2007, C 306/1) inserts a new
Article 7a
1. The Union shall develop a special relationship with neighbouring countries, aiming to establish an area of prosperity and good neighbourliness, founded on the values of the Union and characterised by close and peaceful relations based on cooperation.
2. For the purposes of paragraph 1, the Union may conclude specific agreements with the countries concerned. These agreements may contain reciprocal rights and obligations as well as the possibility of undertaking activities jointly. Their implementation shall be the subject of periodic consultation.
***
Our next stop is going to be TEU Title II and its Provisions on democratic principles.
Ralf Grahn
Monday, 24 December 2007
EU Treaty of Lisbon: breach of values with sanctions
The values of the European Union, as amended by the Treaty of Lisbon (in the Treaty on European Union, TEU) are:
Article 1a
The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. These values are common to the Member States in a society in which pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men prevail.
***
These values should guide every action by the EU, both internal and external. Countries applying for EU membership have to show that they fulfil the criteria.
The values of the Union apply to the present member states, too. Backsliding on, e.g. democracy, the rule of law or human rights is not allowed. Already a clear risk of a serious breach may be determined, and the procedure may lead to recommendations being issued to the member state.
If a serious and persistent breach is determined, this may lead to sanctions against the culprit. These include suspension of voting rights of the member state in question, but this state is still bound by its membership obligations.
From a citizen’s point of view, the procedures and sanctions mentioned in both the present and the amended Article 7 strengthen democratic and legal rights.
***
The changes between the existing TEU Article 7, Article I-59 of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe and the TEU Article 7, as amended by the Treaty of Lisbon, are of minor importance.
The wording is altered to a degree, e.g. the values referred to are found in Article 1a (presently Article 6), the European Parliament gives its consent (not assent), the European Commission replaces the Commission, and the European Council replaces the Council, meeting in the composition of the Heads of State or Government. The more technical voting arrangements (amended paragraph 5) are moved to Article 309 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
***
The drafting technique used in Article 7, despite the relative simplicity of the amendments, is a convincing example of extreme reader-unfriendliness, with horizontal amendments and minor changes being listed separately from the text of the Article. Not even the paragraphs amended are written in full.
Try yourself to write down the exact contents of this one Article, and multiply the efforts needed by all the teachers and students and other interested citizens all over Europe trying to construct the exact wording of Article 7 (and many more like it), and you understand why centrally compiled, consolidated versions of the Treaty of Lisbon in all the official languages are absolute necessities.
Why has no one stepped forward to claim responsibility for these choices?
Why has no one offered reasons for these choices?
Failing that, the IGC 2007 drafting and the Council’s refusal to publish consolidated versions of the TEU and the TFEU can hardly be seen as inspired by other than an evil genius.
The citizens of the European Union have simply been told to wait for consolidated versions until the ratification processes are over and the Treaty of Lisbon has entered into force.
***
The Treaty on European Union (latest consolidated version OJ 29.12.2006, C 321 E/1) is amended by the Treaty of Lisbon (OJ 17.12.2007, C 306/1), with Article 7 amended and consolidated to read as follows:
Article 7
1. On a reasoned proposal by one third of the Member States, by the European Parliament or by the European Commission, the Council, acting by a majority of four fifths of its members, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament, may determine that there is a clear risk of a serious breach by a Member State of the values referred to in Article 1a. Before making such a determination, the Council shall hear the Member State in question and may address recommendations to it, acting in accordance with the same procedure.
The Council shall regularly verify that the grounds on which such a determination was made continue to apply.
2. The European Council, acting by unanimity on a proposal by one third of the Member States or by the European Commission and after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament, may determine the existence of a serious and persistent breach by a Member State of the values referred to in Article 1a, after inviting the Member State in question to submit its observations.
3. Where a determination under paragraph 2 has been made, the Council, acting by a qualified majority, may decide to suspend certain of the rights deriving from the application of the Treaties to the Member State in question, including the voting rights of the representative of the government of that Member State in the Council. In doing so, the Council shall take into account the possible consequences of such a suspension on the rights and obligations of natural and legal persons.
The obligations of the Member State in question under the Treaties shall in any case continue to be binding on that State.
4. The Council, acting by a qualified majority, may decide subsequently to vary or revoke measures taken under paragraph 3 in response to changes in the situation which led to their being imposed.
5. The voting arrangements applying to the European Parliament, the European Council and the Council for the purposes of this Article are laid down in Article 309 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
***
My next look at the Treaty of Lisbon is going to concern the Union’s neighbourhood policy.
Ralf Grahn
Article 1a
The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. These values are common to the Member States in a society in which pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men prevail.
***
These values should guide every action by the EU, both internal and external. Countries applying for EU membership have to show that they fulfil the criteria.
The values of the Union apply to the present member states, too. Backsliding on, e.g. democracy, the rule of law or human rights is not allowed. Already a clear risk of a serious breach may be determined, and the procedure may lead to recommendations being issued to the member state.
If a serious and persistent breach is determined, this may lead to sanctions against the culprit. These include suspension of voting rights of the member state in question, but this state is still bound by its membership obligations.
From a citizen’s point of view, the procedures and sanctions mentioned in both the present and the amended Article 7 strengthen democratic and legal rights.
***
The changes between the existing TEU Article 7, Article I-59 of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe and the TEU Article 7, as amended by the Treaty of Lisbon, are of minor importance.
The wording is altered to a degree, e.g. the values referred to are found in Article 1a (presently Article 6), the European Parliament gives its consent (not assent), the European Commission replaces the Commission, and the European Council replaces the Council, meeting in the composition of the Heads of State or Government. The more technical voting arrangements (amended paragraph 5) are moved to Article 309 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
***
The drafting technique used in Article 7, despite the relative simplicity of the amendments, is a convincing example of extreme reader-unfriendliness, with horizontal amendments and minor changes being listed separately from the text of the Article. Not even the paragraphs amended are written in full.
Try yourself to write down the exact contents of this one Article, and multiply the efforts needed by all the teachers and students and other interested citizens all over Europe trying to construct the exact wording of Article 7 (and many more like it), and you understand why centrally compiled, consolidated versions of the Treaty of Lisbon in all the official languages are absolute necessities.
Why has no one stepped forward to claim responsibility for these choices?
Why has no one offered reasons for these choices?
Failing that, the IGC 2007 drafting and the Council’s refusal to publish consolidated versions of the TEU and the TFEU can hardly be seen as inspired by other than an evil genius.
The citizens of the European Union have simply been told to wait for consolidated versions until the ratification processes are over and the Treaty of Lisbon has entered into force.
***
The Treaty on European Union (latest consolidated version OJ 29.12.2006, C 321 E/1) is amended by the Treaty of Lisbon (OJ 17.12.2007, C 306/1), with Article 7 amended and consolidated to read as follows:
Article 7
1. On a reasoned proposal by one third of the Member States, by the European Parliament or by the European Commission, the Council, acting by a majority of four fifths of its members, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament, may determine that there is a clear risk of a serious breach by a Member State of the values referred to in Article 1a. Before making such a determination, the Council shall hear the Member State in question and may address recommendations to it, acting in accordance with the same procedure.
The Council shall regularly verify that the grounds on which such a determination was made continue to apply.
2. The European Council, acting by unanimity on a proposal by one third of the Member States or by the European Commission and after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament, may determine the existence of a serious and persistent breach by a Member State of the values referred to in Article 1a, after inviting the Member State in question to submit its observations.
3. Where a determination under paragraph 2 has been made, the Council, acting by a qualified majority, may decide to suspend certain of the rights deriving from the application of the Treaties to the Member State in question, including the voting rights of the representative of the government of that Member State in the Council. In doing so, the Council shall take into account the possible consequences of such a suspension on the rights and obligations of natural and legal persons.
The obligations of the Member State in question under the Treaties shall in any case continue to be binding on that State.
4. The Council, acting by a qualified majority, may decide subsequently to vary or revoke measures taken under paragraph 3 in response to changes in the situation which led to their being imposed.
5. The voting arrangements applying to the European Parliament, the European Council and the Council for the purposes of this Article are laid down in Article 309 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
***
My next look at the Treaty of Lisbon is going to concern the Union’s neighbourhood policy.
Ralf Grahn
Sunday, 23 December 2007
Isolationist UK
Yesterday I wrote about the new core areas of European integration, with new member states steadily advancing into the growing Schengen area, the expanding Eurozone and the shared values of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, as well as most of them being dual EU and NATO members.
The more striking contrasts between old and new members are gradually disappearing, and the core groups are growing.
***
The coin has a flip side. The old member states staying aloof from these areas of deeper integration are gradually marginalising themselves.
Rickety rules for unanimous decision making give ample scope for obstructionist tactics, but blocking decisions and hailing aborted deals as success stories is hardly a constructive line to take. It is hard to believe that isolationist policies are going to win friends and help to influence people within the European Union in the long run.
***
One example of the political price self-imposed marginalisation may entail, came when Valéry Giscard d’Estaing answered a question about the new President of the European Council on his blog. VGE emphasised that the person should be selected with care, and he went on to say that he or she should come from a country which belongs to the Schengen area and the Eurozone and adheres to the Charter.
Any British candidate (including Tony Blair) was eliminated 3 to 0.
Of course, VGE is not part of the European Council now, but I imagine that his line of reasoning strikes a note with many European leaders.
***
No wonder that the new Danish government wants to offer its people a chance to abolish the peculiar opt-outs of the country.
Not surprisingly the new Polish government wants to repair the damages caused by its predecessor.
***
The United Kingdom has shown few such signs. These last months Great Britain seems to have drifted farther out into the Atlantic, without getting closer to the United States. The UK used the negative referendums on the Constitution for Europe for domestic purposes, having little to do with the reasons for failure in France and the Netherlands.
The UK launched new demands to generally weaken the treaty it had already signed in 2004 and to introduce non negotiable specific “red lines”. Once again, the European partners showed flexibility.
***
Prime Minister Gordon Brown has not visited the European institutions specifically, something Chancellor Angela Merkel and President Nicolas Sarkozy did instantly after being installed.
The present European Commission is fairly pro-business, pro-globalisation and pro-enlargement. As such it could be an important ally for Britain, but nurturing constructive alliances does not seem to top the British agenda.
Brown has said little about the European Union, except that it should have a more global view and stop reforming its institutions. By signing the Treaty of Lisbon but missing the ceremony, Brown managed to harvest scorn from both anti-EU and pro-EU quarters. This snub to Britain’s oldest ally can have done little to enhance Brown’s prestige among European leaders or further British interests.
There are few indications that Brown’s grumpiness has placated the rabid domestic EU detractors, egged on by an imaginative tabloid press. (Calling this crowd eurosceptic is a euphemism.)
Failing to communicate clearly, why Britain’s interests lie within Europe, is a long term legacy of successive British governments, but Gordon Brown has let the situation worsen.
The Tory opposition has done its utmost to make Gordon Brown look like a real statesman, painting itself into a corner on European affairs, should it win a majority with an obligation to pursue real British interests.
***
Perhaps we have to admit that Schengen, the euro and shared values are hopeless causes in Britain for domestic reasons, in spite of the negative consequences of being an outsider. There is one area, crucial for the future, where the United Kingdom could make a signal contribution, if it wanted to: defence.
The UK is a leading member of NATO and it has the best military capabilities among the EU countries. Here it is more difficult to see domestic reasons for the lack of progress. It rather looks like the umbilical cord tying Britain to the USA is the main reason for the failure to advance decisively to build a common European defence.
In the long run there seem to be few options to a common European defence (built on democratic accountability) in conjunction with the transatlantic ties offered by the intergovernmental NATO alliance. In these questions President Sarkozy seems to be somewhat closer to the truth.
As it is, Britain is decidedly an EU outsider, a leader of steadily shrinking groups of like-minded self-marginalising powers.
***
The regional parliament in Scotland has demanded a British referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. This is only an opinion, since ratification is to be decided by the UK Parliament. But it shows that the pressure is growing.
At the same time, Labour is sinking like a stone in opinion polls. This might lead to Brown’s choice of parliamentary ratification being defeated, by the parliament most keen to be seen as the hallmark of parliamentary sovereignty. Hardly anyone believes that a referendum on an EU Treaty (regardless of content) can be won in Britain.
If the ratification process fails in Britain, it is hard to believe that EU leaders, fed up with 35 years of British obstructionism, would embark on a new round of negotiations to bring the UK on board.
A more probable scenario would be that the rest of the European Union, or at least the more willing member states, would re-establish the EU and upgrade its capacity at the same time.
The end result might come as a blessing for secessionist opinion, but it is hard to see how British long term interests would be served by reverting to isolationist policies.
For Great Britain insularity, isolation and exclusion may soon be more than mere mindsets, unless Scotland and Wales decide on a change of Union, leaving England behind.
Ralf Grahn
The more striking contrasts between old and new members are gradually disappearing, and the core groups are growing.
***
The coin has a flip side. The old member states staying aloof from these areas of deeper integration are gradually marginalising themselves.
Rickety rules for unanimous decision making give ample scope for obstructionist tactics, but blocking decisions and hailing aborted deals as success stories is hardly a constructive line to take. It is hard to believe that isolationist policies are going to win friends and help to influence people within the European Union in the long run.
***
One example of the political price self-imposed marginalisation may entail, came when Valéry Giscard d’Estaing answered a question about the new President of the European Council on his blog. VGE emphasised that the person should be selected with care, and he went on to say that he or she should come from a country which belongs to the Schengen area and the Eurozone and adheres to the Charter.
Any British candidate (including Tony Blair) was eliminated 3 to 0.
Of course, VGE is not part of the European Council now, but I imagine that his line of reasoning strikes a note with many European leaders.
***
No wonder that the new Danish government wants to offer its people a chance to abolish the peculiar opt-outs of the country.
Not surprisingly the new Polish government wants to repair the damages caused by its predecessor.
***
The United Kingdom has shown few such signs. These last months Great Britain seems to have drifted farther out into the Atlantic, without getting closer to the United States. The UK used the negative referendums on the Constitution for Europe for domestic purposes, having little to do with the reasons for failure in France and the Netherlands.
The UK launched new demands to generally weaken the treaty it had already signed in 2004 and to introduce non negotiable specific “red lines”. Once again, the European partners showed flexibility.
***
Prime Minister Gordon Brown has not visited the European institutions specifically, something Chancellor Angela Merkel and President Nicolas Sarkozy did instantly after being installed.
The present European Commission is fairly pro-business, pro-globalisation and pro-enlargement. As such it could be an important ally for Britain, but nurturing constructive alliances does not seem to top the British agenda.
Brown has said little about the European Union, except that it should have a more global view and stop reforming its institutions. By signing the Treaty of Lisbon but missing the ceremony, Brown managed to harvest scorn from both anti-EU and pro-EU quarters. This snub to Britain’s oldest ally can have done little to enhance Brown’s prestige among European leaders or further British interests.
There are few indications that Brown’s grumpiness has placated the rabid domestic EU detractors, egged on by an imaginative tabloid press. (Calling this crowd eurosceptic is a euphemism.)
Failing to communicate clearly, why Britain’s interests lie within Europe, is a long term legacy of successive British governments, but Gordon Brown has let the situation worsen.
The Tory opposition has done its utmost to make Gordon Brown look like a real statesman, painting itself into a corner on European affairs, should it win a majority with an obligation to pursue real British interests.
***
Perhaps we have to admit that Schengen, the euro and shared values are hopeless causes in Britain for domestic reasons, in spite of the negative consequences of being an outsider. There is one area, crucial for the future, where the United Kingdom could make a signal contribution, if it wanted to: defence.
The UK is a leading member of NATO and it has the best military capabilities among the EU countries. Here it is more difficult to see domestic reasons for the lack of progress. It rather looks like the umbilical cord tying Britain to the USA is the main reason for the failure to advance decisively to build a common European defence.
In the long run there seem to be few options to a common European defence (built on democratic accountability) in conjunction with the transatlantic ties offered by the intergovernmental NATO alliance. In these questions President Sarkozy seems to be somewhat closer to the truth.
As it is, Britain is decidedly an EU outsider, a leader of steadily shrinking groups of like-minded self-marginalising powers.
***
The regional parliament in Scotland has demanded a British referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. This is only an opinion, since ratification is to be decided by the UK Parliament. But it shows that the pressure is growing.
At the same time, Labour is sinking like a stone in opinion polls. This might lead to Brown’s choice of parliamentary ratification being defeated, by the parliament most keen to be seen as the hallmark of parliamentary sovereignty. Hardly anyone believes that a referendum on an EU Treaty (regardless of content) can be won in Britain.
If the ratification process fails in Britain, it is hard to believe that EU leaders, fed up with 35 years of British obstructionism, would embark on a new round of negotiations to bring the UK on board.
A more probable scenario would be that the rest of the European Union, or at least the more willing member states, would re-establish the EU and upgrade its capacity at the same time.
The end result might come as a blessing for secessionist opinion, but it is hard to see how British long term interests would be served by reverting to isolationist policies.
For Great Britain insularity, isolation and exclusion may soon be more than mere mindsets, unless Scotland and Wales decide on a change of Union, leaving England behind.
Ralf Grahn
EU Treaty of Lisbon: Fundamental Rights
Slowly but surely the people, the citizens of the European Union, emerge with legal rights and obligations.
The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union was prepared by the first broadly based Convention, encompassing members of the European Parliament and national parliaments. At the summit in Nice, in December 2000, the member states were not yet unanimously ready to incorporate the Charter into the Treaty of Nice.
The Charter was jointly proclaimed by the European Parliament, the Council and the European Commission on 7 December 2000, and it became politically but not legally binding (OJ 18.12.2000, C 364/1).
The second Convention incorporated the Charter into the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe signed in Rome on 29 October 2004 (OJ 16.12.2004, C 310/1), where it became Part II.
Since the Constitutional Treaty was not ratified by all member states, the Charter has continued to live on as a solemn political proclamation.
***
The intergovernmental conference (IGC 2007) decided, in line with its June mandate, to make the Charter legally binding without incorporating the text into the Reform Treaty, now called the Treaty of Lisbon.
One day before the signing of the Treaty of Lisbon, the Charter was solemnly proclaimed in Strasbourg by the European Parliament, the Council and the European Commission. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union has been published in the Official Journal of the European Union (OJ 14.12.2007, C 303/1) with the Explanations relating to the Charter of Fundamental Rights (C 303/17).
***
Since the solemn proclamation ceremony in Strasbourg was marred by unseemly protests in the European Parliament, it is appropriate to mention that the 27 member states’ governments and the European Commission have acted unanimously, and that the groupings against citizens’ rights had suffered a resounding defeat, 534 MEPs voting in favour of the Charter, 85 against and 21 abstentions.
This disgraceful tumult against the rights of EU citizens has been justly reprimanded, although friends of loutish behaviour have done their utmost to turn their soul buddies into champions of free speech for trying to disrupt a solemn and, for most Europeans, joyful occasion.
***
This is not the place for detailed analysis of the Charter, but a brief look at the headlines of the Articles gives an overview of the freedoms, rights and principles it contains:
TITLE I DIGNITY
Human dignity
Right to life
Right to the integrity of the person
Prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
Prohibition of slavery and forced labour
TITLE II FREEDOMS
Right to liberty and security
Respect for private and family life
Protection of personal data
Right to marry and right to found a family
Freedom of thought, conscience and religion
Freedom of expression and information
Freedom of assembly and of association
Freedom of the arts and sciences
Right to education
Freedom to choose an occupation and right to engage in work
Freedom to conduct a business
Right to property
Right to asylum
Protection in the event of removal, expulsion or extradition
TITLE III EQUALITY
Equality before the law
Non-discrimination
Cultural, religious and linguistic diversity
Equality between women and men
The rights of the child
The rights of the elderly
Integration of persons with disabilities
TITLE IV SOLIDARITY
Workers’ right to information and consultation within the undertaking
Right of collective bargaining and action
Right of access to placement services
Protection in the event of unjustified dismissal
Fair and just working conditions
Prohibition of child labour and protection of young people at work
Family and professional life
Social security and social assistance
Health care
Access to services of general economic interest
Environmental protection
Consumer protection
TITLE V CITIZENS’ RIGHTS
Right to vote and to stand as a candidate at the elections to the European Parliament
Right to vote and to stand as a candidate at municipal elections
Right to good administration
Right of access to documents
European Ombudsman
Right to petition
Freedom of movement and of residence
Diplomatic and consular protection
TITLE VI JUSTICE
Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial
Presumption of innocence and right of defence
Principles of legality and proportionality of criminal offences and penalties
Right not to be tried or punished twice in criminal proceedings for the same criminal offence
TITLE VII GENERAL PROVISIONS GOVERNING THE INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION OF THE CHARTER
Field of application
Scope and interpretation of rights and principles
Level of protection
Prohibition of abuse of rights
***
Why is the Charter important?
Indeed, the Charter contains no new rights. They all exist in the EU Treaties, in the the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (Council of Europe) and various other human rights documents.
But bringing these various rights together, and making them visible for the citizens of the Union, is a manifestation of shared European values. The result is the most up to date legally binding human rights document on earth, and it offers the citizens a basis for scrutiny of EU institutions and member states when they implement European Union law.
The political rights of the Union’s citizens are still underdeveloped, but otherwise the Charter is a step towards recognition of the interests of the citizens as the foundation for the European project.
The Charter is a source of pride for the EU citizens, and it is going to be a source of reference for human rights in the world.
Naturally, the Charter would have been more visible if it had become a part of the Lisbon Treaty (and of future consolidated versions of the Treaty).
***
The European Union is given leave to accede to the European Convention for the Protection of Humans Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.
The constitutional traditions common to the Member States form part of the general principles of European Union law.
***
The Treaty of Lisbon (Official Journal of the European Union 17.12.2007, C 306/1) repeals Articles 4 and 5 of the Treaty on European Union (latest consolidated version OJ 29.12.2006, C 321 E/1). Consequently, the following Article is numbered 6, the present one being replaced by the following
Article 6
1. The Union recognises the rights, freedoms and principles set out in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union of 7 December 2000, as adapted at Strasbourg, on 12 December 2007, which shall have the same legal value as the Treaties.
The provisions of the Charter shall not extend in any way the competences of the Union as defined in the Treaties.
The rights, freedoms and principles in the Charter shall be interpreted in accordance with the general provisions in Title VII of the Charter governing its interpretation and application and with due regard to the explanations referred to in the Charter, that set out the sources of those provisions.
2. The Union shall accede to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Such accession shall not affect the Union’s competences as defined in the Treaties.
3. Fundamental rights, as guaranteed by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and as they result from the constitutional traditions common to the Member States, shall constitute general principles of the Union’s law.
***
Unanimity among the member states’ governments has come at a price. The unity of EU law is diminished by the opt-outs of the governments of the United Kingdom and Poland.
See Protocol Number 7 on the application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights to Poland and the United Kingdom, as well as the Polish declarations 51 and 53 annexed to the Treaty of Lisbon.
The new Polish government has not been able to relinquish the opt-out, since it needs the support of the morally conservative opposition to ratify the Treaty of Lisbon. But the new government wants Poland to become a constructive force in EU politics, so a future renouncement of the opt-out seems to be hanging in the air.
That would leave Great Britain as the only member state fundamentally out of tune with mainstream European values on human rights.
Ralf Grahn
The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union was prepared by the first broadly based Convention, encompassing members of the European Parliament and national parliaments. At the summit in Nice, in December 2000, the member states were not yet unanimously ready to incorporate the Charter into the Treaty of Nice.
The Charter was jointly proclaimed by the European Parliament, the Council and the European Commission on 7 December 2000, and it became politically but not legally binding (OJ 18.12.2000, C 364/1).
The second Convention incorporated the Charter into the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe signed in Rome on 29 October 2004 (OJ 16.12.2004, C 310/1), where it became Part II.
Since the Constitutional Treaty was not ratified by all member states, the Charter has continued to live on as a solemn political proclamation.
***
The intergovernmental conference (IGC 2007) decided, in line with its June mandate, to make the Charter legally binding without incorporating the text into the Reform Treaty, now called the Treaty of Lisbon.
One day before the signing of the Treaty of Lisbon, the Charter was solemnly proclaimed in Strasbourg by the European Parliament, the Council and the European Commission. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union has been published in the Official Journal of the European Union (OJ 14.12.2007, C 303/1) with the Explanations relating to the Charter of Fundamental Rights (C 303/17).
***
Since the solemn proclamation ceremony in Strasbourg was marred by unseemly protests in the European Parliament, it is appropriate to mention that the 27 member states’ governments and the European Commission have acted unanimously, and that the groupings against citizens’ rights had suffered a resounding defeat, 534 MEPs voting in favour of the Charter, 85 against and 21 abstentions.
This disgraceful tumult against the rights of EU citizens has been justly reprimanded, although friends of loutish behaviour have done their utmost to turn their soul buddies into champions of free speech for trying to disrupt a solemn and, for most Europeans, joyful occasion.
***
This is not the place for detailed analysis of the Charter, but a brief look at the headlines of the Articles gives an overview of the freedoms, rights and principles it contains:
TITLE I DIGNITY
Human dignity
Right to life
Right to the integrity of the person
Prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
Prohibition of slavery and forced labour
TITLE II FREEDOMS
Right to liberty and security
Respect for private and family life
Protection of personal data
Right to marry and right to found a family
Freedom of thought, conscience and religion
Freedom of expression and information
Freedom of assembly and of association
Freedom of the arts and sciences
Right to education
Freedom to choose an occupation and right to engage in work
Freedom to conduct a business
Right to property
Right to asylum
Protection in the event of removal, expulsion or extradition
TITLE III EQUALITY
Equality before the law
Non-discrimination
Cultural, religious and linguistic diversity
Equality between women and men
The rights of the child
The rights of the elderly
Integration of persons with disabilities
TITLE IV SOLIDARITY
Workers’ right to information and consultation within the undertaking
Right of collective bargaining and action
Right of access to placement services
Protection in the event of unjustified dismissal
Fair and just working conditions
Prohibition of child labour and protection of young people at work
Family and professional life
Social security and social assistance
Health care
Access to services of general economic interest
Environmental protection
Consumer protection
TITLE V CITIZENS’ RIGHTS
Right to vote and to stand as a candidate at the elections to the European Parliament
Right to vote and to stand as a candidate at municipal elections
Right to good administration
Right of access to documents
European Ombudsman
Right to petition
Freedom of movement and of residence
Diplomatic and consular protection
TITLE VI JUSTICE
Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial
Presumption of innocence and right of defence
Principles of legality and proportionality of criminal offences and penalties
Right not to be tried or punished twice in criminal proceedings for the same criminal offence
TITLE VII GENERAL PROVISIONS GOVERNING THE INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION OF THE CHARTER
Field of application
Scope and interpretation of rights and principles
Level of protection
Prohibition of abuse of rights
***
Why is the Charter important?
Indeed, the Charter contains no new rights. They all exist in the EU Treaties, in the the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (Council of Europe) and various other human rights documents.
But bringing these various rights together, and making them visible for the citizens of the Union, is a manifestation of shared European values. The result is the most up to date legally binding human rights document on earth, and it offers the citizens a basis for scrutiny of EU institutions and member states when they implement European Union law.
The political rights of the Union’s citizens are still underdeveloped, but otherwise the Charter is a step towards recognition of the interests of the citizens as the foundation for the European project.
The Charter is a source of pride for the EU citizens, and it is going to be a source of reference for human rights in the world.
Naturally, the Charter would have been more visible if it had become a part of the Lisbon Treaty (and of future consolidated versions of the Treaty).
***
The European Union is given leave to accede to the European Convention for the Protection of Humans Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.
The constitutional traditions common to the Member States form part of the general principles of European Union law.
***
The Treaty of Lisbon (Official Journal of the European Union 17.12.2007, C 306/1) repeals Articles 4 and 5 of the Treaty on European Union (latest consolidated version OJ 29.12.2006, C 321 E/1). Consequently, the following Article is numbered 6, the present one being replaced by the following
Article 6
1. The Union recognises the rights, freedoms and principles set out in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union of 7 December 2000, as adapted at Strasbourg, on 12 December 2007, which shall have the same legal value as the Treaties.
The provisions of the Charter shall not extend in any way the competences of the Union as defined in the Treaties.
The rights, freedoms and principles in the Charter shall be interpreted in accordance with the general provisions in Title VII of the Charter governing its interpretation and application and with due regard to the explanations referred to in the Charter, that set out the sources of those provisions.
2. The Union shall accede to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Such accession shall not affect the Union’s competences as defined in the Treaties.
3. Fundamental rights, as guaranteed by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and as they result from the constitutional traditions common to the Member States, shall constitute general principles of the Union’s law.
***
Unanimity among the member states’ governments has come at a price. The unity of EU law is diminished by the opt-outs of the governments of the United Kingdom and Poland.
See Protocol Number 7 on the application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights to Poland and the United Kingdom, as well as the Polish declarations 51 and 53 annexed to the Treaty of Lisbon.
The new Polish government has not been able to relinquish the opt-out, since it needs the support of the morally conservative opposition to ratify the Treaty of Lisbon. But the new government wants Poland to become a constructive force in EU politics, so a future renouncement of the opt-out seems to be hanging in the air.
That would leave Great Britain as the only member state fundamentally out of tune with mainstream European values on human rights.
Ralf Grahn
Saturday, 22 December 2007
EU core areas
Quite a lot has been written about it already. Yesterday nine new countries, Estonia, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia became part of the Schengen area. Internal controls at land and sea borders were lifted, and the airports will follow shortly. The people of these new member states became equal EU citizens in an area of free movement consisting of 24 countries.
A year ago Slovenia was the first new member state to introduce the euro currency, and at the beginning of 2008 the country will be the first of the new members at the helm of the European Union, responsible for the Council presidency. At the same time Malta and Cyprus are going to become eurozone countries. New candidates are striving to achieve the criteria.
The Charter of fundamental rights of the European Union (OJ 14 December 2007, C 303/1) is set to become legally binding along with the Treaty of Lisbon (OJ 17 December 2007, C 306/1). This manifestation of shared European values is going to unite all but two member states, Poland and Great Britain.
The new Polish government looks set to become a constructive force within the European Union. It has not been able to renounce the opt-out from the Charter yet, because it needs the support of the populist and moral conservative opposition to secure ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon. But in due course the values of the Charter may join all the countries save one.
Ten out of twelve new member states are already dual EU and NATO members. Only Cyprus and Malta joined the group of militarily uncommitted (Austria, Finland, Ireland and Sweden). Sooner or later the European Union should be able to establish a common defence (democratically accountable) strengthened by the intergovernmental transatlantic NATO tie.
***
Increasingly the core areas of deeper European integration – Schengen, the euro, the Charter, and prospectively defence – attract new members. Ever more the advance groups are made up of both old and new member states. Progressively the distinctions between old and new are erased.
Ralf Grahn
Sources:
European Commission: Enlargement of the Schengen area: achieving the European goal of free movement of persons; Press release, 20 december 2007; http://europa.eu
European Commission: Background on Schengen enlargement; Memo, 20 December 2007; http://europa.eu
European Commission: Sixth report on practical preparations for the euro: countdown for Cyprus and Malta; Press release, 27 November 2007; http://europa.eu
Nato: NATO Member Countries; http://www.nato.int
A year ago Slovenia was the first new member state to introduce the euro currency, and at the beginning of 2008 the country will be the first of the new members at the helm of the European Union, responsible for the Council presidency. At the same time Malta and Cyprus are going to become eurozone countries. New candidates are striving to achieve the criteria.
The Charter of fundamental rights of the European Union (OJ 14 December 2007, C 303/1) is set to become legally binding along with the Treaty of Lisbon (OJ 17 December 2007, C 306/1). This manifestation of shared European values is going to unite all but two member states, Poland and Great Britain.
The new Polish government looks set to become a constructive force within the European Union. It has not been able to renounce the opt-out from the Charter yet, because it needs the support of the populist and moral conservative opposition to secure ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon. But in due course the values of the Charter may join all the countries save one.
Ten out of twelve new member states are already dual EU and NATO members. Only Cyprus and Malta joined the group of militarily uncommitted (Austria, Finland, Ireland and Sweden). Sooner or later the European Union should be able to establish a common defence (democratically accountable) strengthened by the intergovernmental transatlantic NATO tie.
***
Increasingly the core areas of deeper European integration – Schengen, the euro, the Charter, and prospectively defence – attract new members. Ever more the advance groups are made up of both old and new member states. Progressively the distinctions between old and new are erased.
Ralf Grahn
Sources:
European Commission: Enlargement of the Schengen area: achieving the European goal of free movement of persons; Press release, 20 december 2007; http://europa.eu
European Commission: Background on Schengen enlargement; Memo, 20 December 2007; http://europa.eu
European Commission: Sixth report on practical preparations for the euro: countdown for Cyprus and Malta; Press release, 27 November 2007; http://europa.eu
Nato: NATO Member Countries; http://www.nato.int
Thursday, 20 December 2007
German consolidation of the EU Treaty of Lisbon
Nanne on the DJ Nozem blog brought the German consolidated version of The Treaty of Lisbon to my attention (mentioned in my previous entry).
Markus Walther, a student in Leipzig, has compiled the amended Treaty on the European Union, the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union, the protocols to the treaties and the Charter of fundamental rights.
They are the final versions; the entry dated 18 December 2007. He has posted the documents on his web site, where they can be downloaded by all.
***
Isn’t it amazing, the information needs of about 90 million German speaking citizens in the European Union on proposed legislation are filled, not by the EU institutions, nor by the German government, but by a private citizen, probably without remuneration.
When the European Union and the national governments write their following report on communication policy, they could aptly name it “Absent at the creation”.
We just have to hope that they’ll catch up, someday, someway.
Ralf Grahn
Source:
Markus Walther: Das Primärrecht der Europäischen Union; Endfassung, Stand 18. Dezember 2007; http://www.mwalther.net/union.html
Markus Walther, a student in Leipzig, has compiled the amended Treaty on the European Union, the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union, the protocols to the treaties and the Charter of fundamental rights.
They are the final versions; the entry dated 18 December 2007. He has posted the documents on his web site, where they can be downloaded by all.
***
Isn’t it amazing, the information needs of about 90 million German speaking citizens in the European Union on proposed legislation are filled, not by the EU institutions, nor by the German government, but by a private citizen, probably without remuneration.
When the European Union and the national governments write their following report on communication policy, they could aptly name it “Absent at the creation”.
We just have to hope that they’ll catch up, someday, someway.
Ralf Grahn
Source:
Markus Walther: Das Primärrecht der Europäischen Union; Endfassung, Stand 18. Dezember 2007; http://www.mwalther.net/union.html
IGC 2007 like the Holy Alliance
The intergovernmental conference 2007 (IGC), which brokered the deal on the Treaty of Lisbon, is in some respects like a re-incarnation of the Holy Alliance, the compact between European sovereigns in 1815, well above the heads of their citizens.
Sometimes in mid October, if I remember correctly, I started looking and asking for readable, consolidated versions of the Reform Treaty, later to become the Treaty of Lisbon.
When I received an answer from a Finnish government source that the European Council had decided not to publish consolidations of the amending treaty, I could hardly believe my eyes. It just could not be true in our enlightened times, AD2007, I thought.
I pestered Finnish and Swedish authorities and EU institutions and received mostly vague and dilatory answers. Then I got a reply from the institutions of the European Union stating that consolidated versions of the amending treaty would be forthcoming only when the ratification processes were over and the treaty had entered into force.
This really got me going. How could the European Council and the Council, responsible for the intergovernmental conference, invent such a counter-productive ploy? How could the European Commission representing the general interest and the European Parliament representing the citizens acquiesce in this conspiracy of silence? Why did the main European think-tanks remain passive?
***
Everything in the European Union emanates from the treaties. No legislation and no action is allowed without a legal basis. The amending treaty was, this autumn, the single most important document of the European Union. If the whole communication effort of the EU had to be restricted to one matter, the new treaty had to be it, I thought.
Therefore, I started looking at the present and the coming treaties, the practices agreed by the institutions and the policy declarations of the Finnish and Swedish governments in order to evaluate the principles we have been taught and their application in practice.
What I found was a clash between words and deeds. Openness, transparency, accountability, equality, decisions taken near the citizens and hopeful blabber about re-engaging with the citizens, all lost their meaning when confronted with the maliciously imposed silence.
I can imagine few more effective means to self-tarnish the image of the member state governments and the EU institutions than to stonewall the publication of readable treaties.
Were it not for the complicity of the other EU institutions, this would be a damning picture of intergovernmentalism at work. Where was this counter-productive strategy invented? By diplomats less than totally committed to the light of day and public scrutiny? By their political masters, well versed in double-speak?
***
Principles aside, there are practical reasons for consolidated treaties well ahead of their entry into force. Actually, the EU institutions and national governments need handy tools, and probably have them. There are teachers and students, who need accessible materials. There are researchers, journalists, NGOs and businesses as well as regional and municipal officials. There are politicians at every level.
There are the citizens of the European Union. No matter if they are for or against the new institutional arrangements, or undecided, they have a right to user-friendly information. The opinions may differ, but the facts must be shared.
Since there are 23 official languages of the European Union, and the existing treaties as well as the new ones have been drafted jointly, the only sensible thing would be for the consolidated versions to be produced and published centrally, by the Council. Only this would guarantee equal treatment for (most) EU citizens.
***
Since the EU has failed miserably, one line of work has been to look for national or single language versions of the amending treaties. Before yesterday I had found ‘national’ consolidations in English, French, Spanish and Swedish.
Yesterday Nanne on the DJ Nozem blog (link in the column on the left) reported that a German student has compiled a consolidated version in German. With about 90 million Germanophones in the EU, this means plugging a really big hole. Only 18 more languages to go, said Nanne.
But it is almost unbelievable that the work has to be done by private individuals and more or less independent organisations. (That is why I likened the EU treaties to samizdat literature.)
Nanne’s post gave further backing to the claims about the deliberate nature of non-publishing from member states’ governments.
Yesterday another, positive but hesitant, step was taken. Eurooppatiedotus, i.e. Europe Information, which is part of the Finnish Ministry for Foreign Affairs, discreetly updated two of its press releases on the signing of the Treaty of Lisbon. The new text inserted promises consolidated versions (presumably in Finnish and Swedish) during the spring of 2008. I reported this on my Finnish and Swedish blogs.
This promise is a step forward. But, the consolidated treaties in force exist, and the final Treaty of Lisbon has been published in the Official Journal. Shouldn’t merging the two, and publishing the new consolidation on the web be a matter of days, rather than months?
***
I still am amazed at the short-sightedness of the European governments and their cronies. How could they knowingly enter upon a course which is bound to tarnish their image and undermine their credibility? Why did they embargo the convenient tools needed for democratic debate based on facts, not only by the rabid Europhobes, but by the pro-European citizens as well? Why have they chosen to multiply the efforts needed by students and teachers of EU politics and law?
The new Commission web site dedicated to the Treaty of Lisbon lacks the essential, i.e. the anticipatory consolidations of the treaties in every official language. Instead, it steadfastly refuses to give us consolidated versions before the Lisbon Treaty has entered into force.
Therefore, the search for consolidated treaties continues. All eyes are on individual governments, semi-private organisations and private individuals. It is up to you to break the deadlock.
Fortress Incommunicando is crumbling, but I am, as ever, grateful for every crumb of information on its demise.
Ralf Grahn
Sometimes in mid October, if I remember correctly, I started looking and asking for readable, consolidated versions of the Reform Treaty, later to become the Treaty of Lisbon.
When I received an answer from a Finnish government source that the European Council had decided not to publish consolidations of the amending treaty, I could hardly believe my eyes. It just could not be true in our enlightened times, AD2007, I thought.
I pestered Finnish and Swedish authorities and EU institutions and received mostly vague and dilatory answers. Then I got a reply from the institutions of the European Union stating that consolidated versions of the amending treaty would be forthcoming only when the ratification processes were over and the treaty had entered into force.
This really got me going. How could the European Council and the Council, responsible for the intergovernmental conference, invent such a counter-productive ploy? How could the European Commission representing the general interest and the European Parliament representing the citizens acquiesce in this conspiracy of silence? Why did the main European think-tanks remain passive?
***
Everything in the European Union emanates from the treaties. No legislation and no action is allowed without a legal basis. The amending treaty was, this autumn, the single most important document of the European Union. If the whole communication effort of the EU had to be restricted to one matter, the new treaty had to be it, I thought.
Therefore, I started looking at the present and the coming treaties, the practices agreed by the institutions and the policy declarations of the Finnish and Swedish governments in order to evaluate the principles we have been taught and their application in practice.
What I found was a clash between words and deeds. Openness, transparency, accountability, equality, decisions taken near the citizens and hopeful blabber about re-engaging with the citizens, all lost their meaning when confronted with the maliciously imposed silence.
I can imagine few more effective means to self-tarnish the image of the member state governments and the EU institutions than to stonewall the publication of readable treaties.
Were it not for the complicity of the other EU institutions, this would be a damning picture of intergovernmentalism at work. Where was this counter-productive strategy invented? By diplomats less than totally committed to the light of day and public scrutiny? By their political masters, well versed in double-speak?
***
Principles aside, there are practical reasons for consolidated treaties well ahead of their entry into force. Actually, the EU institutions and national governments need handy tools, and probably have them. There are teachers and students, who need accessible materials. There are researchers, journalists, NGOs and businesses as well as regional and municipal officials. There are politicians at every level.
There are the citizens of the European Union. No matter if they are for or against the new institutional arrangements, or undecided, they have a right to user-friendly information. The opinions may differ, but the facts must be shared.
Since there are 23 official languages of the European Union, and the existing treaties as well as the new ones have been drafted jointly, the only sensible thing would be for the consolidated versions to be produced and published centrally, by the Council. Only this would guarantee equal treatment for (most) EU citizens.
***
Since the EU has failed miserably, one line of work has been to look for national or single language versions of the amending treaties. Before yesterday I had found ‘national’ consolidations in English, French, Spanish and Swedish.
Yesterday Nanne on the DJ Nozem blog (link in the column on the left) reported that a German student has compiled a consolidated version in German. With about 90 million Germanophones in the EU, this means plugging a really big hole. Only 18 more languages to go, said Nanne.
But it is almost unbelievable that the work has to be done by private individuals and more or less independent organisations. (That is why I likened the EU treaties to samizdat literature.)
Nanne’s post gave further backing to the claims about the deliberate nature of non-publishing from member states’ governments.
Yesterday another, positive but hesitant, step was taken. Eurooppatiedotus, i.e. Europe Information, which is part of the Finnish Ministry for Foreign Affairs, discreetly updated two of its press releases on the signing of the Treaty of Lisbon. The new text inserted promises consolidated versions (presumably in Finnish and Swedish) during the spring of 2008. I reported this on my Finnish and Swedish blogs.
This promise is a step forward. But, the consolidated treaties in force exist, and the final Treaty of Lisbon has been published in the Official Journal. Shouldn’t merging the two, and publishing the new consolidation on the web be a matter of days, rather than months?
***
I still am amazed at the short-sightedness of the European governments and their cronies. How could they knowingly enter upon a course which is bound to tarnish their image and undermine their credibility? Why did they embargo the convenient tools needed for democratic debate based on facts, not only by the rabid Europhobes, but by the pro-European citizens as well? Why have they chosen to multiply the efforts needed by students and teachers of EU politics and law?
The new Commission web site dedicated to the Treaty of Lisbon lacks the essential, i.e. the anticipatory consolidations of the treaties in every official language. Instead, it steadfastly refuses to give us consolidated versions before the Lisbon Treaty has entered into force.
Therefore, the search for consolidated treaties continues. All eyes are on individual governments, semi-private organisations and private individuals. It is up to you to break the deadlock.
Fortress Incommunicando is crumbling, but I am, as ever, grateful for every crumb of information on its demise.
Ralf Grahn
Wednesday, 19 December 2007
EU Treaty of Lisbon: Spanish update
Real Instituto Elcano has swiftly updated its Spanish consolidated version of the Treaty of Lisbon to accord with the final text of the amending treaty. José Martín y Pérez de Nanclares and Mariola Urrea Corres handled the fine-tuning as well as the editing of the previous version.
The web page offers an introductory explanation to the Lisbon Treaty, written by Martín y Pérez de Nanclares.
The other consolidated language versions (English, French and Swedish) should be adjusted accordingly.
The real blot on the record is that nineteen language versions are still missing (as far as I know). Until they are published, all talk of openness, transparency, accountability, equality, decisions taken near the citizens and re-engaging citizens are rubbish.
Why does the Council want to alienate EU citizens?
Ralf Grahn
Source:
Real Instituto Elcano: Tratado de Lisboa (la versíon consolidada definitiva);
http://www.realinstitutoelcano.org/wps/portal/rielcano/FuturoEuropa/TratadodeLisboa2007
The web page offers an introductory explanation to the Lisbon Treaty, written by Martín y Pérez de Nanclares.
The other consolidated language versions (English, French and Swedish) should be adjusted accordingly.
The real blot on the record is that nineteen language versions are still missing (as far as I know). Until they are published, all talk of openness, transparency, accountability, equality, decisions taken near the citizens and re-engaging citizens are rubbish.
Why does the Council want to alienate EU citizens?
Ralf Grahn
Source:
Real Instituto Elcano: Tratado de Lisboa (la versíon consolidada definitiva);
http://www.realinstitutoelcano.org/wps/portal/rielcano/FuturoEuropa/TratadodeLisboa2007
Tuesday, 18 December 2007
EU Treaty of Lisbon published
Thanks to the EU Law Blog I noticed that the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union had been published sooner than I had thought, on 14 December (2007/C 303/1) along with the explanations.
Official publication of The Lisbon Treaty too, was swifter than anticipated. On 17 December (2007/C 306/01) we find the headline: Treaty of Lisbon amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community, signed at Lisbon, 13 December 2007.
The Treaty has been partitioned into quite a few files. My basic computer skills were not up to downloading the whole thing at a go, and if you are no better, some patience may be called for.
Sadly, the published version is no consolidation. You are going to find just the amendments.
Ralf Grahn
Source:
EU Law Blog: Lisbon Treaty and Charter Published; December 17, 2007; http://eulaw.typepad.com
Official publication of The Lisbon Treaty too, was swifter than anticipated. On 17 December (2007/C 306/01) we find the headline: Treaty of Lisbon amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community, signed at Lisbon, 13 December 2007.
The Treaty has been partitioned into quite a few files. My basic computer skills were not up to downloading the whole thing at a go, and if you are no better, some patience may be called for.
Sadly, the published version is no consolidation. You are going to find just the amendments.
Ralf Grahn
Source:
EU Law Blog: Lisbon Treaty and Charter Published; December 17, 2007; http://eulaw.typepad.com
Monday, 17 December 2007
EU Treaty of Lisbon: conferred powers
The Constitution of the United States of America (1787) is a wonder of brevity, made apparent when we read the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC).
The European Treaties have tried to define the respective powers of the EU / EC and the Member States in minute detail, which has led to unwieldy texts for the poor reader. Still, it is impossible to fix the boundaries exactly, if both the EU and the Member States are going to have powers.
In the United States, the Tenth Amendment states that the “powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people”.
More or less, the same principles apply within the European Community, TEC Article 5, although the people has been conveniently omitted. The Community shall act within the limits of the Treaty and its objectives. In areas, where the Community has been given exclusive powers, the situation is clear, in principle.
In areas of shared power, the objectives of the proposed action have to be weighed against the ability of the Member States to achieve the desired results on their own. If the results can be better achieved by the Community, by reason of the scale of the action or its effects, there may be grounds for Community action. This is the principle of subsidiarity, more or less letting the states including their sub-entities act if they are able to.
In addition, Community action shall be restricted to what is necessary to achieve the objectives of the Treaty. This is the principle of proportionality: to intrude no more than the objectives warrant.
The principles of subsidiarity and proportionality are elaborated further in a Protocol, added to the Treaty of Amsterdam, although it is debatable whether the Protocal clarifies matters substantially.
***
The Treaty of Lisbon merges the European Community into the European Union and consequently the treaty structure is clarified to some degree. The main principles and institutional clauses are found in the amended Treaty on European Union, and the “earthlier” questions of various policy areas are dealt with in the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union (the re-named TEC).
The principles of conferred competences (attributed powers), subsidiarity and proportionality remain essentially the same, but are moved to the amended TEU, where a new Article 3b has been dedicated to them.
Those who fear encroachment on states’ powers, may find pleasure in the fact that the IGC 2007 added the word “only” to the text of paragraph 2, compared to the Constitutional Treaty Article I-11, which offered the wording.
Additional guidelines are found in the Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality (CIG 14/07). The new protocol is clearer than the present one, since it is more focused on the procedural aspects of the application of TEU Article 3b.
Nine articles deal with wide consultation before legislative acts are proposed, sending proposals and amendments to national parliaments, appraisal of compliance with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality in draft legislative acts, reasoned opinions of national parliaments within eight weeks, taking reasoned opinions into account, possible review of a proposed act, jurisdiction for the EU Court of Justice and annual Commission reports on the application of Article 3b.
***
In the Treaty of Lisbon (CIG 14/07) version of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), the following Article 3b has been inserted, replacing Article 5 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC):
Article 3b
The limits of Union competences are governed by the principle of conferral. The use of Union competences is governed by the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality.
Under the principle of conferral, the Union shall act only within the limits of the competences conferred upon it by the Member States in the Treaties to attain the objectives set out therein. Competences not conferred upon the Union in the Treaties remain with the Member States.
Under the principle of subsidiarity, in areas which do not fall within its exclusive competence, the Union shall act only if and insofar as the objectives of the proposed action cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States, either at a central level or at a regional and local level, but can rather, by the reason of the scale or effects of the proposed action, be better achieved at Union level.
The institutions of the Union shall apply the principle of subsidiarity as laid down in the Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality. National Parliaments ensure compliance with the principle of subsidiarity in accordance with the procedure set out in that Protocol.
Under the principle of proportionality, the content and form of Union action shall not exceed what is necessary to achieve the objectives of the Treaties.
The institutions shall apply the principle of proportionality as laid down in the Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality.
***
My next article on the Treaty of Lisbon is going to look at questions concerning the citizens of the European Union more directly, namely the provisions on fundamental rights.
Ralf Grahn
The European Treaties have tried to define the respective powers of the EU / EC and the Member States in minute detail, which has led to unwieldy texts for the poor reader. Still, it is impossible to fix the boundaries exactly, if both the EU and the Member States are going to have powers.
In the United States, the Tenth Amendment states that the “powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people”.
More or less, the same principles apply within the European Community, TEC Article 5, although the people has been conveniently omitted. The Community shall act within the limits of the Treaty and its objectives. In areas, where the Community has been given exclusive powers, the situation is clear, in principle.
In areas of shared power, the objectives of the proposed action have to be weighed against the ability of the Member States to achieve the desired results on their own. If the results can be better achieved by the Community, by reason of the scale of the action or its effects, there may be grounds for Community action. This is the principle of subsidiarity, more or less letting the states including their sub-entities act if they are able to.
In addition, Community action shall be restricted to what is necessary to achieve the objectives of the Treaty. This is the principle of proportionality: to intrude no more than the objectives warrant.
The principles of subsidiarity and proportionality are elaborated further in a Protocol, added to the Treaty of Amsterdam, although it is debatable whether the Protocal clarifies matters substantially.
***
The Treaty of Lisbon merges the European Community into the European Union and consequently the treaty structure is clarified to some degree. The main principles and institutional clauses are found in the amended Treaty on European Union, and the “earthlier” questions of various policy areas are dealt with in the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union (the re-named TEC).
The principles of conferred competences (attributed powers), subsidiarity and proportionality remain essentially the same, but are moved to the amended TEU, where a new Article 3b has been dedicated to them.
Those who fear encroachment on states’ powers, may find pleasure in the fact that the IGC 2007 added the word “only” to the text of paragraph 2, compared to the Constitutional Treaty Article I-11, which offered the wording.
Additional guidelines are found in the Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality (CIG 14/07). The new protocol is clearer than the present one, since it is more focused on the procedural aspects of the application of TEU Article 3b.
Nine articles deal with wide consultation before legislative acts are proposed, sending proposals and amendments to national parliaments, appraisal of compliance with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality in draft legislative acts, reasoned opinions of national parliaments within eight weeks, taking reasoned opinions into account, possible review of a proposed act, jurisdiction for the EU Court of Justice and annual Commission reports on the application of Article 3b.
***
In the Treaty of Lisbon (CIG 14/07) version of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), the following Article 3b has been inserted, replacing Article 5 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC):
Article 3b
The limits of Union competences are governed by the principle of conferral. The use of Union competences is governed by the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality.
Under the principle of conferral, the Union shall act only within the limits of the competences conferred upon it by the Member States in the Treaties to attain the objectives set out therein. Competences not conferred upon the Union in the Treaties remain with the Member States.
Under the principle of subsidiarity, in areas which do not fall within its exclusive competence, the Union shall act only if and insofar as the objectives of the proposed action cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States, either at a central level or at a regional and local level, but can rather, by the reason of the scale or effects of the proposed action, be better achieved at Union level.
The institutions of the Union shall apply the principle of subsidiarity as laid down in the Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality. National Parliaments ensure compliance with the principle of subsidiarity in accordance with the procedure set out in that Protocol.
Under the principle of proportionality, the content and form of Union action shall not exceed what is necessary to achieve the objectives of the Treaties.
The institutions shall apply the principle of proportionality as laid down in the Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality.
***
My next article on the Treaty of Lisbon is going to look at questions concerning the citizens of the European Union more directly, namely the provisions on fundamental rights.
Ralf Grahn
Sunday, 16 December 2007
New Treaty of Lisbon web site
After the signing of the Treaty of Lisbon, the European Union has launched a new web site, dedicated to the amending Reform Treaty.
Already, there is an assortment of useful information: speeches, press releases, frequently asked questions, links to the Treaty etc.
But, as if to prove that the European Council, the Council and the other institutions are hard of hearing, there is this sentence on much needed consolidated versions of the Lisbon Treaty:
“A consolidated version of the Treaty will be published once it enters into force.”
Well, the quest for 19 more consolidated language versions of the amended Treaty on European Union (TEU) and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) must continue outside the institutional framework.
I sincerely hope that there are civic-minded organisations out there, ready to serve the citizens of the European Union.
By the way, the existing consolidations in English, French, Spanish and Swedish have to be brushed up, since minor corrections have been posted on the Council web site. It should not take too long before the corrections are inserted into the final text and published in the Official Journal.
Ralf Grahn
Source: New EU web site dedicated to the Treaty of Lisbon;
http://www.europa.eu/lisbon_treaty/index_en.htm
Already, there is an assortment of useful information: speeches, press releases, frequently asked questions, links to the Treaty etc.
But, as if to prove that the European Council, the Council and the other institutions are hard of hearing, there is this sentence on much needed consolidated versions of the Lisbon Treaty:
“A consolidated version of the Treaty will be published once it enters into force.”
Well, the quest for 19 more consolidated language versions of the amended Treaty on European Union (TEU) and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) must continue outside the institutional framework.
I sincerely hope that there are civic-minded organisations out there, ready to serve the citizens of the European Union.
By the way, the existing consolidations in English, French, Spanish and Swedish have to be brushed up, since minor corrections have been posted on the Council web site. It should not take too long before the corrections are inserted into the final text and published in the Official Journal.
Ralf Grahn
Source: New EU web site dedicated to the Treaty of Lisbon;
http://www.europa.eu/lisbon_treaty/index_en.htm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Subscribe To Grahnlaw
Posts
All Comments
