The UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office has published a consolidated version of the Treaty of Lisbon. The ratification debate in the House of Commons started this week and is expected to continue for four more weeks.
The FCO web pages on Britain in the EU contain both general information on the Reform Treaty and answers on specific questions in addition to the consolidation I just mentioned. For the consolidated version of the Lisbon Treaty, go to:
http://www.fco.gov.uk/Files/kfile/FCO_PDF_CM7310_ConsolidatedTreaties.pdf
***
There are other consolidated English language versions of the Lisbon Treaty. Here is a reminder:
IIEA
Peadar ó Broin at the Institute of International and European Affairs (Dublin, Ireland) has produced a complete consolidation of the amended treaties, including the protocols and annexes, in a format easy to read
Treaty on European Union
Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
Annexes to the EU and FEU Treaties
Protocols to the EU and FEU Treaties and, where appropriate, to the EAEC Treaty
Go to http://www.iiea.com/
Statewatch
Professor Steve Peers has painstakingly compiled a version consisting of several files for the Statewatch Observatory on the EU Constitution and the Reform Treaty, where likenesses and differences between the different reform stages are highlighted
Go to http://www.statewatch.org/
Markus Walther
Markus Walther, a German student who produced and published a German consolidated version of the EU Treaty of Lisbon on his web site, has posted an English readable consolidated version as well (a preliminary document without protocols and charter).
Go to http://www.mwalther.net/europa/eulaw-lisbon-mwalther.pdf
Open Europe
Open Europe has produced a consolidated version with the Treaty of Lisbon and the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe presented side by side for convenient comparison.
Open Europe: The Lisbon Treaty and the European Constitution: A side-by-side comparison; January 2008;
Go to http://www.openeurope.org.uk/research/comparative.pdf
***
I refer those who look for other language versions to my earlier posts.
Ralf Grahn
P.S The FCO has also published Command Paper 7311 A comparative table of the current EC and EU Treaties as amended by the treaty of Lisbon, which briefly sets out the similarities and differences between the Lisbon Treaty and the other relevant Treaties. Available through the Official Documents web page (as is Cm 7310 mentioned above):
http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/
Wednesday, 23 January 2008
Malta backs Lisbon Treaty
The parliamentary debate on ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon has started in Malta. It seems to be plain sailing, according to the Times of Malta:
“The European and Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Representatives yesterday debated and unanimously expressed itself in favour of the EU's Lisbon Treaty after a motion calling for the ratification of the treaty was moved by Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi.”
Ralf Grahn
Times of Malta: Lisbon Treaty finds unanimous House backing; 22nd January 2008;
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20080122/local/lisbon-treaty-finds-unanimous-house-backing
“The European and Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Representatives yesterday debated and unanimously expressed itself in favour of the EU's Lisbon Treaty after a motion calling for the ratification of the treaty was moved by Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi.”
Ralf Grahn
Times of Malta: Lisbon Treaty finds unanimous House backing; 22nd January 2008;
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20080122/local/lisbon-treaty-finds-unanimous-house-backing
EU Treaty of Lisbon: International agreements
International agreements are important instruments to further the objectives of the European Union in its external relations. This time we look at the basic provision in the Treaty of Lisbon relating to international agreements in the area of the common foreign and security policy (CFSP), in comparison with the corresponding provisions in the existing Treaty on European Union (TEU), the draft Constitution and the Constitutional Treaty. We briefly refer to the relevant procedural articles in the new Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).
The CFSP provisions, including those on international agreements, belong to the sphere of intergovernmental cooperation, as opposed to certain supranational ‘Community’ powers.
***
The intergovernmental conference (IGC 2007) concluded the following in the Treaty of Lisbon (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/30):
41) The text of Article 22 shall become Article 15a; it shall be amended as set out above in point 33.
42) The text of Article 23 shall become Article 15b; it shall be amended as set out above in point 34.
43) Article 24 shall be replaced by the following:
Article 24 TEU
The Union may conclude agreements with one or more States or international organisations in areas covered by this Chapter.
***
In the existing consolidated Treaty on European Union (TEU; latest consolidation OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/20 and 21) Article 24 contains both the principles and the procedures relating to international agreements under Title V, the common foreign and security policy (CFSP), and Title VI, Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters.
Article 24
1. When it is necessary to conclude an agreement with one or more States or international
organisations in implementation of this title, the Council may authorise the Presidency, assisted by the Commission as appropriate, to open negotiations to that effect. Such agreements shall be
concluded by the Council on a recommendation from the Presidency.
2. The Council shall act unanimously when the agreement covers an issue for which unanimity
is required for the adoption of internal decisions.
3. When the agreement is envisaged in order to implement a joint action or common position,
the Council shall act by a qualified majority in accordance with Article 23(2).
4. The provisions of this Article shall also apply to matters falling under Title VI. When the
agreement covers an issue for which a qualified majority is required for the adoption of internal
decisions or measures, the Council shall act by a qualified majority in accordance with Article 34
(3).
5. No agreement shall be binding on a Member State whose representative in the Council states
that it has to comply with the requirements of its own constitutional procedure; the other
members of the Council may agree that the agreement shall nevertheless apply provisionally.
6. Agreements concluded under the conditions set out by this Article shall be binding on the
institutions of the Union.
***
In addition, we take note of the existing Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) Article 300, which concerns the conclusion of international agreements by the European Community (EC).
***
The Convention proposed the following Article III-2004 in the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (OJ 18.7.2003 C169/67):
Article III-204
The Union may conclude agreements with one or more States or international organisations pursuant to this Chapter, in accordance with the procedure described in Article III-227.
***
In the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe actually signed by the member states, the corresponding Article was III-303 (OJ 16.12.2004 C 310/137):
Article III-303
The Union may conclude agreements with one or more States or international organisations in areas covered by this Chapter.
***
We see that the Lisbon Treaty Article 24 TEU has the same wording as the Constitutional Treaty Article III-303. While the likeness of the Reform Treaty and the Constitutional Treaty is evident in many instances, the essential continuity between many of the provisions existing Treaties and the Lisbon Treaty should not be forgotten.
The scope of the proposed Article 24 TEU is narrower, since it refers only to areas covered in Chapter 2, i.e. the common foreign and security policy (CFSP), which remains in the intergovernmental domain.
In the new Article 24 TEU, there are no procedural rules and no reference to those provisions. We find them in the new Treaty on the functioning of the European Union (TFEU), Part V External action by the Union, Title V International agreements, especially Article 188n TFEU, with provisions on the opening of negotiations, the issuing of directives to the negotiator and the conclusion of the agreement.
Since the European Community (EC), which has legal personality, is merged into the European Union (EU), on which legal personality is conferred, there is no need for separate provisions on the account of different entities. But the competences of the intergovernmental Council and the ‘communitarian’ Commission remain distinct.
When the agreements relate exclusively to the CFSP, the Council adopts the decision concluding the agreement. In other cases the European Parliament is only consulted, if the consent of the EP is not expressly provided for, Article 188n(6) TFEU.
***
Next time we look at the Political and Security Committee (PSC).
Ralf Grahn
The CFSP provisions, including those on international agreements, belong to the sphere of intergovernmental cooperation, as opposed to certain supranational ‘Community’ powers.
***
The intergovernmental conference (IGC 2007) concluded the following in the Treaty of Lisbon (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/30):
41) The text of Article 22 shall become Article 15a; it shall be amended as set out above in point 33.
42) The text of Article 23 shall become Article 15b; it shall be amended as set out above in point 34.
43) Article 24 shall be replaced by the following:
Article 24 TEU
The Union may conclude agreements with one or more States or international organisations in areas covered by this Chapter.
***
In the existing consolidated Treaty on European Union (TEU; latest consolidation OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/20 and 21) Article 24 contains both the principles and the procedures relating to international agreements under Title V, the common foreign and security policy (CFSP), and Title VI, Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters.
Article 24
1. When it is necessary to conclude an agreement with one or more States or international
organisations in implementation of this title, the Council may authorise the Presidency, assisted by the Commission as appropriate, to open negotiations to that effect. Such agreements shall be
concluded by the Council on a recommendation from the Presidency.
2. The Council shall act unanimously when the agreement covers an issue for which unanimity
is required for the adoption of internal decisions.
3. When the agreement is envisaged in order to implement a joint action or common position,
the Council shall act by a qualified majority in accordance with Article 23(2).
4. The provisions of this Article shall also apply to matters falling under Title VI. When the
agreement covers an issue for which a qualified majority is required for the adoption of internal
decisions or measures, the Council shall act by a qualified majority in accordance with Article 34
(3).
5. No agreement shall be binding on a Member State whose representative in the Council states
that it has to comply with the requirements of its own constitutional procedure; the other
members of the Council may agree that the agreement shall nevertheless apply provisionally.
6. Agreements concluded under the conditions set out by this Article shall be binding on the
institutions of the Union.
***
In addition, we take note of the existing Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) Article 300, which concerns the conclusion of international agreements by the European Community (EC).
***
The Convention proposed the following Article III-2004 in the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (OJ 18.7.2003 C169/67):
Article III-204
The Union may conclude agreements with one or more States or international organisations pursuant to this Chapter, in accordance with the procedure described in Article III-227.
***
In the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe actually signed by the member states, the corresponding Article was III-303 (OJ 16.12.2004 C 310/137):
Article III-303
The Union may conclude agreements with one or more States or international organisations in areas covered by this Chapter.
***
We see that the Lisbon Treaty Article 24 TEU has the same wording as the Constitutional Treaty Article III-303. While the likeness of the Reform Treaty and the Constitutional Treaty is evident in many instances, the essential continuity between many of the provisions existing Treaties and the Lisbon Treaty should not be forgotten.
The scope of the proposed Article 24 TEU is narrower, since it refers only to areas covered in Chapter 2, i.e. the common foreign and security policy (CFSP), which remains in the intergovernmental domain.
In the new Article 24 TEU, there are no procedural rules and no reference to those provisions. We find them in the new Treaty on the functioning of the European Union (TFEU), Part V External action by the Union, Title V International agreements, especially Article 188n TFEU, with provisions on the opening of negotiations, the issuing of directives to the negotiator and the conclusion of the agreement.
Since the European Community (EC), which has legal personality, is merged into the European Union (EU), on which legal personality is conferred, there is no need for separate provisions on the account of different entities. But the competences of the intergovernmental Council and the ‘communitarian’ Commission remain distinct.
When the agreements relate exclusively to the CFSP, the Council adopts the decision concluding the agreement. In other cases the European Parliament is only consulted, if the consent of the EP is not expressly provided for, Article 188n(6) TFEU.
***
Next time we look at the Political and Security Committee (PSC).
Ralf Grahn
Tuesday, 22 January 2008
Lisbon referendum dilemma
The constitutional setting and the political forces vary between the different EU member states, but at the level of principles, governments, legislators and citizens have cause for thought. Even if one’s own country would be on a clear path to parliamentary ratification of the Lisbon treaty, what happens in the other countries is a common concern.
Just as a majority of all car drivers think that they are better than the majority, it is nearly self-evident that citizens are ready to relieve their elected representatives of the burden to decide, if anyone arranges an opinion poll to find out ‘what the people think’. Thus, there is always some mileage to be got out of demanding a referendum for a politician out of government, especially if he is unlikely to be voted into office in the near future.
The Treaty of Lisbon is no different in this respect from purely domestic issues, but it highlights the discrepancy between a domestic debate and consequences for the rest of the European Union.
The conflicting pressures are most acutely felt in countries where the political leaders promised a referendum on the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe.
The similarities between the Constitutional Treaty and the watered down Lisbon Treaty are obvious, but they have been in the public domain since the June IGC 2007 mandate. No surprise there.
Referendum is a stickier matter, in my opinion. It was not prudent for governments to get carried away by promising referendums in the first place. Despite its name, the ‘Constitution’ was, despite its pompous name, first and foremost an exercise in improved internal decision making in an enlarged Union. As a by-product, the different layers of previous treaty reform would have been tidied up and presented in an overly long, but fairly readable form.
But after promising, the weaknesses of the EU's treaty basis, which should have been evident, have been more widely understood: Unanimity between governments and then separate majorities (often qualified) in national parliaments (perhaps different chambers) is hard enough in a Union with 27 members, given the vagaries of politics. If national referendums were the norm, separate majorities in all 27 of them would be an additional hurdle, almost guaranteed to wreck any attempt.
Thus, there is an ethical and a practical dilemma. What should a national leader do, given the outcome for the EU as a whole:
Honour stupid promises and accept permanent deadlock?
Ram through an 'elitist' Constitutional Treaty minus?
Found a new Union (perhaps for a smaller number of members) based on the EU citizens, with a real democratic Constitution?
Ralf Grahn
Just as a majority of all car drivers think that they are better than the majority, it is nearly self-evident that citizens are ready to relieve their elected representatives of the burden to decide, if anyone arranges an opinion poll to find out ‘what the people think’. Thus, there is always some mileage to be got out of demanding a referendum for a politician out of government, especially if he is unlikely to be voted into office in the near future.
The Treaty of Lisbon is no different in this respect from purely domestic issues, but it highlights the discrepancy between a domestic debate and consequences for the rest of the European Union.
The conflicting pressures are most acutely felt in countries where the political leaders promised a referendum on the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe.
The similarities between the Constitutional Treaty and the watered down Lisbon Treaty are obvious, but they have been in the public domain since the June IGC 2007 mandate. No surprise there.
Referendum is a stickier matter, in my opinion. It was not prudent for governments to get carried away by promising referendums in the first place. Despite its name, the ‘Constitution’ was, despite its pompous name, first and foremost an exercise in improved internal decision making in an enlarged Union. As a by-product, the different layers of previous treaty reform would have been tidied up and presented in an overly long, but fairly readable form.
But after promising, the weaknesses of the EU's treaty basis, which should have been evident, have been more widely understood: Unanimity between governments and then separate majorities (often qualified) in national parliaments (perhaps different chambers) is hard enough in a Union with 27 members, given the vagaries of politics. If national referendums were the norm, separate majorities in all 27 of them would be an additional hurdle, almost guaranteed to wreck any attempt.
Thus, there is an ethical and a practical dilemma. What should a national leader do, given the outcome for the EU as a whole:
Honour stupid promises and accept permanent deadlock?
Ram through an 'elitist' Constitutional Treaty minus?
Found a new Union (perhaps for a smaller number of members) based on the EU citizens, with a real democratic Constitution?
Ralf Grahn
EU Treaty of Lisbon: Democratic scrutiny of CFSP
Long after the European states became democracies, their foreign, security and defence policies retained an aura of an era of royal prerogatives. Add the difficulty that each country should actually contribute something if the the member states of the European Union want to shape a real common foreign and security policy (CFSP) and a working common security and defence policy (CSDP) and profit from them.
The governments’ progress towards effective common policies has been hesitant, their enthusiasm for openness and transparency tepid and their guard against democratic accountability and scrutiny jealous.
The Treaty of Lisbon goes some way towards a more effective CFSP and CSDP, but democratic accountability and democratic scrutiny advance only nominally. In these areas the European Union continues to be far from its founding values.
The CFSP and the CSDP are like a throwback to pre-democratic or proto-democratic times, which remind us more of the 19th than of the 21st century.
***
In the Treaty of Lisbon the intergovernmental conference (IGC 2007) amended Article 21 TEU (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/30):
40) Article 21 shall be amended as follows:
(a) the first paragraph shall be replaced by the following:
"The High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy shall regularly consult the European Parliament on the main aspects and the basic choices of the common foreign and security policy and the common security and defence policy and inform it of how those policies evolve. He shall ensure that the views of the European Parliament are duly taken into consideration. Special representatives may be involved in briefing the European Parliament.";
(b) in the second paragraph, first sentence, the words "and to the High Representative" shall be inserted at the end; in the second sentence, the words "It shall hold an annual debate" shall be replaced by "Twice a year it shall hold a debate" and the words ", including the common security and defence policy" shall be inserted at the end.
***
In the existing Treaty on European Union (TEU) Article 21 looks like this (latest consolidated versions of the Treaty on European Union and of the Treaty establishing the European Community OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/19):
Article 21
The Presidency shall consult the European Parliament on the main aspects and the basic choices of the common foreign and security policy and shall ensure that the views of the European Parliament are duly taken into consideration. The European Parliament shall be kept regularly informed by the Presidency and the Commission of the development of the Union's foreign and security policy.
The European Parliament may ask questions of the Council or make recommendations to it. It shall hold an annual debate on progress in implementing the common foreign and security policy.
***
The updated and consolidated version of Article 21 TEU would look like this:
The High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy shall regularly consult the European Parliament on the main aspects and the basic choices of the common foreign and security policy and the common security and defence policy and inform it of how those policies evolve. He shall ensure that the views of the European Parliament are duly taken into consideration. Special representatives may be involved in briefing the European Parliament.
The European Parliament may ask questions of the Council or make recommendations to it and to the High Representative. Twice a year it shall hold a debate on progress in implementing the common foreign and security policy, including the common security and defence policy.
***
The Convention draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (OJ 18.7.2003 C 169/68) proposed an Article III-205:
Article III-205
1. The Union Minister for Foreign Affairs shall consult the European Parliament on the main aspects and the basic choices of the common foreign and security policy, including the common security and defence policy, and shall ensure that the views of the European Parliament are duly taken into consideration. The European Parliament shall be kept regularly informed by the Union Minister for Foreign Affairs of the development of the common foreign and security policy, including the common security and defence policy. Special representatives may be involved in briefing the European Parliament.
2. The European Parliament may ask questions of the Council of Ministers and of the Union Minister for Foreign Affairs or make recommendations to them. Twice a year it shall hold a debate on progress in implementing the common foreign and security policy, including the common security and defence policy.
***
The corresponding provision in the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe was Article III-304 (OJ 16.12.2004 C 310/137):
Article III-304
1. The Union Minister for Foreign Affairs shall consult and inform the European Parliament in
accordance with Article I-40(8) and Article I-41(8). He or she shall ensure that the views of the
European Parliament are duly taken into consideration. Special representatives may be involved in briefing the European Parliament.
2. The European Parliament may ask questions of the Council and of the Union Minister for
Foreign Affairs or make recommendations to them. Twice a year it shall hold a debate on progress in implementing the common foreign and security policy, including the common security and defence policy.
***
There are changes when the High Representative takes the place of the rotating Presidency. But otherwise there is not much between the different versions, from the present Article 21 TEU, through the draft Constitution which added a second annual debate, to the Constitution and the Lisbon Treaty Article 21 TEU which retained the modest advances.
CFSP and CSDP is like a throwback to pre-democratic or proto-democratic times, which remind us more of the 19th than of the 21st century.
The scale of foreign policy challenges has increasingly overgrown the effective capacity of the individual member states. Basically, they can choose between solo impotence and shared power. Since only the EU level offers promises of effective action, democratic governance should follow upstairs.
The need for institutional reform is far from over.
***
International agreements will follow.
Ralf Grahn
The governments’ progress towards effective common policies has been hesitant, their enthusiasm for openness and transparency tepid and their guard against democratic accountability and scrutiny jealous.
The Treaty of Lisbon goes some way towards a more effective CFSP and CSDP, but democratic accountability and democratic scrutiny advance only nominally. In these areas the European Union continues to be far from its founding values.
The CFSP and the CSDP are like a throwback to pre-democratic or proto-democratic times, which remind us more of the 19th than of the 21st century.
***
In the Treaty of Lisbon the intergovernmental conference (IGC 2007) amended Article 21 TEU (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/30):
40) Article 21 shall be amended as follows:
(a) the first paragraph shall be replaced by the following:
"The High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy shall regularly consult the European Parliament on the main aspects and the basic choices of the common foreign and security policy and the common security and defence policy and inform it of how those policies evolve. He shall ensure that the views of the European Parliament are duly taken into consideration. Special representatives may be involved in briefing the European Parliament.";
(b) in the second paragraph, first sentence, the words "and to the High Representative" shall be inserted at the end; in the second sentence, the words "It shall hold an annual debate" shall be replaced by "Twice a year it shall hold a debate" and the words ", including the common security and defence policy" shall be inserted at the end.
***
In the existing Treaty on European Union (TEU) Article 21 looks like this (latest consolidated versions of the Treaty on European Union and of the Treaty establishing the European Community OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/19):
Article 21
The Presidency shall consult the European Parliament on the main aspects and the basic choices of the common foreign and security policy and shall ensure that the views of the European Parliament are duly taken into consideration. The European Parliament shall be kept regularly informed by the Presidency and the Commission of the development of the Union's foreign and security policy.
The European Parliament may ask questions of the Council or make recommendations to it. It shall hold an annual debate on progress in implementing the common foreign and security policy.
***
The updated and consolidated version of Article 21 TEU would look like this:
The High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy shall regularly consult the European Parliament on the main aspects and the basic choices of the common foreign and security policy and the common security and defence policy and inform it of how those policies evolve. He shall ensure that the views of the European Parliament are duly taken into consideration. Special representatives may be involved in briefing the European Parliament.
The European Parliament may ask questions of the Council or make recommendations to it and to the High Representative. Twice a year it shall hold a debate on progress in implementing the common foreign and security policy, including the common security and defence policy.
***
The Convention draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (OJ 18.7.2003 C 169/68) proposed an Article III-205:
Article III-205
1. The Union Minister for Foreign Affairs shall consult the European Parliament on the main aspects and the basic choices of the common foreign and security policy, including the common security and defence policy, and shall ensure that the views of the European Parliament are duly taken into consideration. The European Parliament shall be kept regularly informed by the Union Minister for Foreign Affairs of the development of the common foreign and security policy, including the common security and defence policy. Special representatives may be involved in briefing the European Parliament.
2. The European Parliament may ask questions of the Council of Ministers and of the Union Minister for Foreign Affairs or make recommendations to them. Twice a year it shall hold a debate on progress in implementing the common foreign and security policy, including the common security and defence policy.
***
The corresponding provision in the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe was Article III-304 (OJ 16.12.2004 C 310/137):
Article III-304
1. The Union Minister for Foreign Affairs shall consult and inform the European Parliament in
accordance with Article I-40(8) and Article I-41(8). He or she shall ensure that the views of the
European Parliament are duly taken into consideration. Special representatives may be involved in briefing the European Parliament.
2. The European Parliament may ask questions of the Council and of the Union Minister for
Foreign Affairs or make recommendations to them. Twice a year it shall hold a debate on progress in implementing the common foreign and security policy, including the common security and defence policy.
***
There are changes when the High Representative takes the place of the rotating Presidency. But otherwise there is not much between the different versions, from the present Article 21 TEU, through the draft Constitution which added a second annual debate, to the Constitution and the Lisbon Treaty Article 21 TEU which retained the modest advances.
CFSP and CSDP is like a throwback to pre-democratic or proto-democratic times, which remind us more of the 19th than of the 21st century.
The scale of foreign policy challenges has increasingly overgrown the effective capacity of the individual member states. Basically, they can choose between solo impotence and shared power. Since only the EU level offers promises of effective action, democratic governance should follow upstairs.
The need for institutional reform is far from over.
***
International agreements will follow.
Ralf Grahn
Monday, 21 January 2008
Lisbon and Constitution side by side
The anti-EU lobbying group Open Europe has published an updated version of their comparison of the EU Lisbon Treaty and the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe. The treaty texts are presented side by side, with the differences easy to spot.
The numbering of the articles follows the plan for a coming officially unofficial consolidated version of the Lisbon Treaty to be published by the European Union, when all the ratification processes are over and the Reform Treaty in force.
(My blog has looked at the the Treaty of Lisbon according to the numbering given by the intergovernmental conference and will continue to do so, on the assumption that the reader of the treaty searches for answers to an article with the specific number mentioned in the amending treaty as presented.)
***
Open Europe’s press summary 21 January 2008 included the following:
“Saturday’s Times reported that EU Communications Commissioner Margot Wallstrom has said that the European Council is refusing her request to publish a readable version of the Lisbon Treaty. Such a text will only be made public after ratification in the member states.”
(I refer to my numerous posts on the matter of consolidated versions of the Lisbon Treaty for the citizens of the European Union.)
Ralf Grahn
Source:
Open Europe: The Lisbon Treaty and the European Constitution: A side-by-side comparison; January 2008;
http://www.openeurope.org.uk/research/comparative.pdf
Open Europe: Press summary archive; 21 January 2008;
http://www.openeurope.org.uk/media-centre/summary.aspx?id=511
The numbering of the articles follows the plan for a coming officially unofficial consolidated version of the Lisbon Treaty to be published by the European Union, when all the ratification processes are over and the Reform Treaty in force.
(My blog has looked at the the Treaty of Lisbon according to the numbering given by the intergovernmental conference and will continue to do so, on the assumption that the reader of the treaty searches for answers to an article with the specific number mentioned in the amending treaty as presented.)
***
Open Europe’s press summary 21 January 2008 included the following:
“Saturday’s Times reported that EU Communications Commissioner Margot Wallstrom has said that the European Council is refusing her request to publish a readable version of the Lisbon Treaty. Such a text will only be made public after ratification in the member states.”
(I refer to my numerous posts on the matter of consolidated versions of the Lisbon Treaty for the citizens of the European Union.)
Ralf Grahn
Source:
Open Europe: The Lisbon Treaty and the European Constitution: A side-by-side comparison; January 2008;
http://www.openeurope.org.uk/research/comparative.pdf
Open Europe: Press summary archive; 21 January 2008;
http://www.openeurope.org.uk/media-centre/summary.aspx?id=511
Product plugging by Christopher Booker
In The Telegraph, Christopher Booker made a lot of noise about contempt for Parliament and the like. According to Booker, the Government asks MPs to approve the EU treaty even before they have a proper chance to examine what it is they are voting on.
Booker then goes on to plug the consolidated Lisbon Treaty being prepared by the end of the week by a private firm: “a 331-page text of the treaty with invaluable analysis” (cost £27.50).
I am not going into the interesting questions of journalistic ethics concerning product placement or downright marketing, but I sincerely hope that others will.
***
The Council’s refusal to publish consolidated versions of the Treaty of Lisbon, “putting all those amendments in context, in such a way that their significance can be understood” as Booker says, is a serious drawback for democratic debate in Europe.
Therefore, the readers of this blog have been kept aware of the different consolidated language versions that have been published, as far as I have been able to find out.
English speakers are, relatively speaking, in the enviable position to have three different consolidations of the Reform Treaty available, for free. Perhaps there is cause to mention the consolidated Lisbon Treaties in English again:
IIEA
Peadar ó Broin at the Institute of International and European Affairs (Dublin, Ireland) has produced a complete consolidation of the amended treaties, including the protocols and annexes, in a format easy to read
Treaty on European Union
Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
Annexes to the EU and FEU Treaties
Protocols to the EU and FEU Treaties and, where appropriate, to the EAEC Treaty
Go to http://www.iiea.com
Statewatch
Professor Steve Peers has painstakingly compiled a version consisting of several files for the Statewatch Observatory on the EU Constitution and the Reform Treaty, where likenesses and differences between the different reform stages are highlighted
Go to http://www.statewatch.org
Markus Walther
Markus Walther, who produced and published a German consolidated version of the EU Treaty of Lisbon on his web site, has posted an English readable consolidated version as well (a preliminary document without protocols and charter).
Go to http://www.mwalther.net/europa/eulaw-lisbon-mwalther.pdf
Other resources
Other resources on the Lisbon Treaty have been mentioned here frequently, with the latest posting dated yesterday, on some of the UK Parliamentary documents.
***
If Booker wants to scandalise the British government and market valuable books, they are his choices.
But the information already exists for those who are interested in the facts.
Ralf Grahn
Source:
Christopher Booker’s Notebook: MPs required to ratify Lisbon treaty without reading it; The Telegraph 19/01/2008;
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml%3Bjsessionid%3D2V4OJ542O2YSDQFIQMFCFGGAVCBQYIV0?xml=/news/2008/01/20/nbooker120.xml
Booker then goes on to plug the consolidated Lisbon Treaty being prepared by the end of the week by a private firm: “a 331-page text of the treaty with invaluable analysis” (cost £27.50).
I am not going into the interesting questions of journalistic ethics concerning product placement or downright marketing, but I sincerely hope that others will.
***
The Council’s refusal to publish consolidated versions of the Treaty of Lisbon, “putting all those amendments in context, in such a way that their significance can be understood” as Booker says, is a serious drawback for democratic debate in Europe.
Therefore, the readers of this blog have been kept aware of the different consolidated language versions that have been published, as far as I have been able to find out.
English speakers are, relatively speaking, in the enviable position to have three different consolidations of the Reform Treaty available, for free. Perhaps there is cause to mention the consolidated Lisbon Treaties in English again:
IIEA
Peadar ó Broin at the Institute of International and European Affairs (Dublin, Ireland) has produced a complete consolidation of the amended treaties, including the protocols and annexes, in a format easy to read
Treaty on European Union
Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
Annexes to the EU and FEU Treaties
Protocols to the EU and FEU Treaties and, where appropriate, to the EAEC Treaty
Go to http://www.iiea.com
Statewatch
Professor Steve Peers has painstakingly compiled a version consisting of several files for the Statewatch Observatory on the EU Constitution and the Reform Treaty, where likenesses and differences between the different reform stages are highlighted
Go to http://www.statewatch.org
Markus Walther
Markus Walther, who produced and published a German consolidated version of the EU Treaty of Lisbon on his web site, has posted an English readable consolidated version as well (a preliminary document without protocols and charter).
Go to http://www.mwalther.net/europa/eulaw-lisbon-mwalther.pdf
Other resources
Other resources on the Lisbon Treaty have been mentioned here frequently, with the latest posting dated yesterday, on some of the UK Parliamentary documents.
***
If Booker wants to scandalise the British government and market valuable books, they are his choices.
But the information already exists for those who are interested in the facts.
Ralf Grahn
Source:
Christopher Booker’s Notebook: MPs required to ratify Lisbon treaty without reading it; The Telegraph 19/01/2008;
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml%3Bjsessionid%3D2V4OJ542O2YSDQFIQMFCFGGAVCBQYIV0?xml=/news/2008/01/20/nbooker120.xml
EU Treaty of Lisbon: Cooperation between diplomatic missions
The diplomatic and consular missions of the EU member states and the present Commission delegations (future Union delegations forming part of the European External Action Service) are precious resources for the member states and the European Union.
Cooperation between them offers possibilities to represent the interests of the EU and the member states effectively in third countries and international conferences and organisations.
Together they can improve the assessments and policy recommendations flowing back to the Council and the member states.
The citizenship of the European Union, established by the Maastricht Treaty, carries with it rights, including a subsidiary right to diplomatic and consular protection in third countries, where the citizen’s state is unrepresented.
For expats in trouble or stranded tourists, especially in remote parts of the world, this protection can be valuable. Citizens of smaller member states, with fewer diplomatic or consular missions, are more likely to profit from this practical example of growing EU solidarity, but even the bigger member states are thinly represented on the ground in many regions of the world.
***
The intergovernmental conference (IGC 2007) agreed on the following amendments to Article 20 TEU (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/30):
39) Article 20 shall be amended as follows:
(a) in the first paragraph, the words "Commission delegations" shall be replaced by "Union delegations" and the words "the common positions and joint actions adopted by the Council" shall be replaced by "decisions defining Union positions and actions adopted pursuant to this Chapter";
(b) in the second paragraph, the words "information, carrying out joint assessments" shall be replaced by "information and carrying out joint assessments" and the words "and contributing to the implementation of the provisions referred to in Article 20 of the Treaty establishing the European Community" shall be deleted;
(c) the following new paragraph shall be added:
"They shall contribute to the implementation of the right of citizens of the Union to protection in the territory of third countries as referred to in Article 17(2)(c) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and of the measures adopted pursuant to Article 20 of that Treaty.".
***
The existing Article 20 TEU looks like this (latest consolidated version OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/18):
Article 20
The diplomatic and consular missions of the Member States and the Commission delegations in
third countries and international conferences, and their representations to international organisations, shall cooperate in ensuring that the common positions and joint actions adopted by the Council are complied with and implemented.
They shall step up cooperation by exchanging information, carrying out joint assessments and
contributing to the implementation of the provisions referred to in Article 20 of the Treaty
establishing the European Community.
***
Article 20 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) referred to above builds on the citizenship of the Union and the rights of Union citizens mentioned in Article 17 TEC.
Article 20 TEC
Every citizen of the Union shall, in the territory of a third country in which the Member State of
which he is a national is not represented, be entitled to protection by the diplomatic or consular
authorities of any Member State, on the same conditions as the nationals of that State. Member
States shall establish the necessary rules among themselves and start the international negotiations required to secure this protection.
***
Consolidation, i.e. merging the amendments and the existing text leads to the consolidated and updated Article 20 TEU:
Article 20
The diplomatic and consular missions of the Member States and the Union delegations in
third countries and international conferences, and their representations to international organisations, shall cooperate in ensuring that decisions defining Union positions and actions adopted pursuant to this Chapter are complied with and implemented.
They shall step up cooperation by exchanging information and carrying out joint assessments.
They shall contribute to the implementation of the right of citizens of the Union to protection in the territory of third countries as referred to in Article 17(2)(c) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and of the measures adopted pursuant to Article 20 of that Treaty.
***
Article III-207 proposed by the European Convention in the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (OJ 18.7.2003 C 169/68) looked like this:
Article III-207
The diplomatic and consular missions of the Member States and the Union delegations in third countries and international conferences, and their representations to international organisations,
shall cooperate in ensuring that the European decisions relating to Union positions and actions adopted by the Council of Ministers are complied with and implemented. They shall step up cooperation by exchanging information and carrying out joint assessments.
They shall contribute to the implementation of the provisions referred to in Article I-8(2) on the rights of European citizens to protection in the territory of a third country and the measures
adopted pursuant to Article III-11.
***
In the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (OJ 16.12.2004 C 310/137 and 138) the corresponding Article was III-306:
Article III-306
The diplomatic and consular missions of the Member States and the Union delegations in
third countries and international conferences, and their representations to international organisations, shall cooperate in ensuring that the European decisions defining Union positions and actions adopted pursuant to this Chapter are complied with and implemented. They shall step up cooperation by exchanging information and carrying out joint assessments.
They shall contribute to the implementation of the right of European citizens to protection in the
territory of third countries as referred to in Article I-10(2)(c) and the measures adopted pursuant to Article III-127.
***
There are only minor differences between the existing Article 20 TEU, by the way of the draft Constitutional Treaty Article III-207 and the Constitutional Treaty Article III-306, and the amended Article 20 TEU, including the references to Article 17(2)(c) and Article 20 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).
The protection of EU citizens by diplomatic and consular authorities of any member state in the territory of third countries deserves a few comments.
First, this right to protection is subsidiary, i.e. it applies where the Union citizen’s own country is unrepresented.
Second, the principle of equal treatment applies: Protection is given on the same conditions as to the nationals of the state giving protection.
Third, the measures giving the citizens of the European Union diplomatic and consular protection are seen as intimately linked to the common foreign and security policy (CFSP) of the European Union. They belong to the sphere of intergovernmental cooperation, and the Council adopts the necessary directives in accordance with a special legislative procedure. The European Parliament is only consulted (Article 20 TFEU).
Fourth, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union Article 46 (OJ 14.12.2007 C 303/12) contains the right to protection by diplomatic or consular authorities, with wording almost identical to Article 17(2)(c) TFEU.
***
Next time we turn to the modest role of the elected representatives of the citizens in the European Parliament in questions pertaining to the common foreign and security policy (CFSP).
Ralf Grahn
P.S. Did the drafting technique used for the Lisbon Treaty lead to a shorter text, given that both the text to be substituted and the amendment itself had to be mentioned in the Reform Treaty?
Cooperation between them offers possibilities to represent the interests of the EU and the member states effectively in third countries and international conferences and organisations.
Together they can improve the assessments and policy recommendations flowing back to the Council and the member states.
The citizenship of the European Union, established by the Maastricht Treaty, carries with it rights, including a subsidiary right to diplomatic and consular protection in third countries, where the citizen’s state is unrepresented.
For expats in trouble or stranded tourists, especially in remote parts of the world, this protection can be valuable. Citizens of smaller member states, with fewer diplomatic or consular missions, are more likely to profit from this practical example of growing EU solidarity, but even the bigger member states are thinly represented on the ground in many regions of the world.
***
The intergovernmental conference (IGC 2007) agreed on the following amendments to Article 20 TEU (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/30):
39) Article 20 shall be amended as follows:
(a) in the first paragraph, the words "Commission delegations" shall be replaced by "Union delegations" and the words "the common positions and joint actions adopted by the Council" shall be replaced by "decisions defining Union positions and actions adopted pursuant to this Chapter";
(b) in the second paragraph, the words "information, carrying out joint assessments" shall be replaced by "information and carrying out joint assessments" and the words "and contributing to the implementation of the provisions referred to in Article 20 of the Treaty establishing the European Community" shall be deleted;
(c) the following new paragraph shall be added:
"They shall contribute to the implementation of the right of citizens of the Union to protection in the territory of third countries as referred to in Article 17(2)(c) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and of the measures adopted pursuant to Article 20 of that Treaty.".
***
The existing Article 20 TEU looks like this (latest consolidated version OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/18):
Article 20
The diplomatic and consular missions of the Member States and the Commission delegations in
third countries and international conferences, and their representations to international organisations, shall cooperate in ensuring that the common positions and joint actions adopted by the Council are complied with and implemented.
They shall step up cooperation by exchanging information, carrying out joint assessments and
contributing to the implementation of the provisions referred to in Article 20 of the Treaty
establishing the European Community.
***
Article 20 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) referred to above builds on the citizenship of the Union and the rights of Union citizens mentioned in Article 17 TEC.
Article 20 TEC
Every citizen of the Union shall, in the territory of a third country in which the Member State of
which he is a national is not represented, be entitled to protection by the diplomatic or consular
authorities of any Member State, on the same conditions as the nationals of that State. Member
States shall establish the necessary rules among themselves and start the international negotiations required to secure this protection.
***
Consolidation, i.e. merging the amendments and the existing text leads to the consolidated and updated Article 20 TEU:
Article 20
The diplomatic and consular missions of the Member States and the Union delegations in
third countries and international conferences, and their representations to international organisations, shall cooperate in ensuring that decisions defining Union positions and actions adopted pursuant to this Chapter are complied with and implemented.
They shall step up cooperation by exchanging information and carrying out joint assessments.
They shall contribute to the implementation of the right of citizens of the Union to protection in the territory of third countries as referred to in Article 17(2)(c) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and of the measures adopted pursuant to Article 20 of that Treaty.
***
Article III-207 proposed by the European Convention in the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (OJ 18.7.2003 C 169/68) looked like this:
Article III-207
The diplomatic and consular missions of the Member States and the Union delegations in third countries and international conferences, and their representations to international organisations,
shall cooperate in ensuring that the European decisions relating to Union positions and actions adopted by the Council of Ministers are complied with and implemented. They shall step up cooperation by exchanging information and carrying out joint assessments.
They shall contribute to the implementation of the provisions referred to in Article I-8(2) on the rights of European citizens to protection in the territory of a third country and the measures
adopted pursuant to Article III-11.
***
In the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (OJ 16.12.2004 C 310/137 and 138) the corresponding Article was III-306:
Article III-306
The diplomatic and consular missions of the Member States and the Union delegations in
third countries and international conferences, and their representations to international organisations, shall cooperate in ensuring that the European decisions defining Union positions and actions adopted pursuant to this Chapter are complied with and implemented. They shall step up cooperation by exchanging information and carrying out joint assessments.
They shall contribute to the implementation of the right of European citizens to protection in the
territory of third countries as referred to in Article I-10(2)(c) and the measures adopted pursuant to Article III-127.
***
There are only minor differences between the existing Article 20 TEU, by the way of the draft Constitutional Treaty Article III-207 and the Constitutional Treaty Article III-306, and the amended Article 20 TEU, including the references to Article 17(2)(c) and Article 20 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).
The protection of EU citizens by diplomatic and consular authorities of any member state in the territory of third countries deserves a few comments.
First, this right to protection is subsidiary, i.e. it applies where the Union citizen’s own country is unrepresented.
Second, the principle of equal treatment applies: Protection is given on the same conditions as to the nationals of the state giving protection.
Third, the measures giving the citizens of the European Union diplomatic and consular protection are seen as intimately linked to the common foreign and security policy (CFSP) of the European Union. They belong to the sphere of intergovernmental cooperation, and the Council adopts the necessary directives in accordance with a special legislative procedure. The European Parliament is only consulted (Article 20 TFEU).
Fourth, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union Article 46 (OJ 14.12.2007 C 303/12) contains the right to protection by diplomatic or consular authorities, with wording almost identical to Article 17(2)(c) TFEU.
***
Next time we turn to the modest role of the elected representatives of the citizens in the European Parliament in questions pertaining to the common foreign and security policy (CFSP).
Ralf Grahn
P.S. Did the drafting technique used for the Lisbon Treaty lead to a shorter text, given that both the text to be substituted and the amendment itself had to be mentioned in the Reform Treaty?
Sunday, 20 January 2008
British resources on EU Lisbon Treaty
The debate on the ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon starts in earnest in the UK House of Commons tomorrow, Monday. Here is a list of some resources on the EU Reform Treaty from a British perspective:
European Union (Amendment) Bill, 17 December 2007, Bill 48
Explanatory notes to the European Union (Amendment) Bill
House of Commons Library, Research paper 07/80, 22 November 2007: The EU Reform Treaty: amendments to the Treaty on European Union
House of Commons Library, Research paper 07/86, 6 December 2007: The Treaty of Lisbon: amendments to the Treaty establishing the European Community
House of Commons Library, Research paper 08/03, 15 January 2008: European Union (Amendment) Bill, Bill 48 of 2007-08
House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee: Foreign Policy Aspects of the Lisbon Treaty, Third Report of Session 2007-08
***
The report of the Foreign Affairs Committee was published today. The first media reactions have focused on the essential similarities between the Constitutional Treaty and the Lisbon Treaty.
This is true, especially concerning the foreign policy parts of the Treaty of Lisbon, and a foregone conclusion for anyone who has read the June 2007 mandate for the intergovernmental conference.
Naturally, the Treaty of Lisbon itself, and the consolidated versions offered by Statewatch, the IIEA and Markus Walther are important materials.
Should I have mentioned other documents or comments?
Ralf Grahn
European Union (Amendment) Bill, 17 December 2007, Bill 48
Explanatory notes to the European Union (Amendment) Bill
House of Commons Library, Research paper 07/80, 22 November 2007: The EU Reform Treaty: amendments to the Treaty on European Union
House of Commons Library, Research paper 07/86, 6 December 2007: The Treaty of Lisbon: amendments to the Treaty establishing the European Community
House of Commons Library, Research paper 08/03, 15 January 2008: European Union (Amendment) Bill, Bill 48 of 2007-08
House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee: Foreign Policy Aspects of the Lisbon Treaty, Third Report of Session 2007-08
***
The report of the Foreign Affairs Committee was published today. The first media reactions have focused on the essential similarities between the Constitutional Treaty and the Lisbon Treaty.
This is true, especially concerning the foreign policy parts of the Treaty of Lisbon, and a foregone conclusion for anyone who has read the June 2007 mandate for the intergovernmental conference.
Naturally, the Treaty of Lisbon itself, and the consolidated versions offered by Statewatch, the IIEA and Markus Walther are important materials.
Should I have mentioned other documents or comments?
Ralf Grahn
EU Treaty of Lisbon: International organisations and conferences
If the member states of the European Union (EU) want to shape world events effectively, they have to coordinate their actions in international organisations and at international conferences. This coordination encompasses both questions of substance and candidates for international posts.
The Security Council of the United Nations, where France and the United Kingdom – the only EU states with nuclear weapons – are permanent members, is a special case. Neither has shown any interest to give up its seat, its veto powers or its status as a (former) great power in favour of representation for the European Union, but at a practical level both have an interest to keep the other EU members on board in most questions.
Action in international organisations and at international conferences is one aspect of the common foreign and security policy (CFSP) of the EU in order to safeguard its values and promote its objectives.
***
The intergovernmental conference (IGC 2007) regaled us with this exquisite sample of stirring penmanship. See the Treaty of Lisbon (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/29):
”38) Article 19 shall be amended as follows:
(a) in paragraph 1, the words "the common positions" shall be replaced by "the Union's positions" in the first and second subparagraphs and the following sentence shall be added at the end of the first subparagraph: "The High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy shall organise this coordination.";
(b) paragraph 2 shall be amended as follows:
(i) in the first subparagraph, the words "Without prejudice to paragraph 1 and Article 14(3)," shall be replaced by "In accordance with Article 11(3)," and the words "the latter" shall be replaced by "the other Member States and the High Representative";
(ii) in the second subparagraph, first sentence, the words "and the High Representative" shall be inserted after "the other Member States"; in the second sentence, the word "permanent" shall be deleted and the words "ensure the defence of the positions" shall be replaced by "defend the positions";
(iii) the following new third subparagraph shall be added:
"When the Union has defined a position on a subject which is on the United Nations Security Council agenda, those Member States which sit on the Security Council shall request that the High Representative be invited to present the Union's position."
***
In the existing Treaty on European Union (TEU) Article 19 looks like this (latest consolidated version OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/18):
“Article 19
1. Member States shall coordinate their action in international organisations and at international
conferences. They shall uphold the common positions in such forums.
In international organisations and at international conferences where not all the Member States
participate, those which do take part shall uphold the common positions.
2. Without prejudice to paragraph 1 and Article 14(3), Member States represented in international organisations or international conferences where not all the Member States participate shall keep the latter informed of any matter of common interest.
Member States which are also members of the United Nations Security Council will concert and
keep the other Member States fully informed. Member States which are permanent members of the Security Council will, in the execution of their functions, ensure the defence of the positions and the interests of the Union, without prejudice to their responsibilities under the provisions of the United Nations Charter.”
***
We now proceed towards a consolidated version of Article 19 TEU, by making the amendments according to the ’construction manual’. Here is the amended and consolidated Article:
Article 19
1. Member States shall coordinate their action in international organisations and at international
conferences. They shall uphold the Union’s positions in such forums. The High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy shall organise this coordination.
In international organisations and at international conferences where not all the Member States
participate, those which do take part shall uphold the Union’s positions.
2. In accordance with Article 11(3), Member States represented in international
organisations or international conferences where not all the Member States participate shall
keep the other Member States and the High Representative informed of any matter of common interest.
Member States which are also members of the United Nations Security Council will concert and
keep the other Member States and the High Representative fully informed. Member States which are members of the Security Council will, in the execution of their functions, defend the positions and the interests of the Union, without prejudice to their responsibilities under the provisions of the United Nations Charter.
When the Union has defined a position on a subject which is on the United Nations Security Council agenda, those Member States which sit on the Security Council shall request that the High Representative be invited to present the Union's position.
***
The European Convention proposed the following Article III-206 in the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (OJ 18.7.2003 C 169/68):
Article III-206
1. Member States shall coordinate their action in international organisations and at international conferences. They shall uphold the Union's positions in such fora. The Union Minister for Foreign Affairs shall organise this coordination.
In international organisations and at international conferences where not all the Member States participate, those which do take part shall uphold the Union's positions.
2. Without prejudice to paragraph 1 and Article III-198(3), Member States represented in international organisations or international conferences where not all the Member States participate shall keep the latter, as well as the Union Minister for Foreign Affairs, informed of any matter of common interest.
Member States which are also members of the United Nations Security Council shall concert and keep the other Member States and the Union Minister for Foreign Affairs fully informed. Member States which are members of the Security Council will, in the execution of their functions, defend the positions and the interests of the Union, without prejudice to their responsibilities under the provisions of the United Nations Charter.
When the Union has defined a position on a subject which is on the United Nations Security Council agenda, those Member States which sit on the Security Council shall request that the
Union Minister for Foreign Affairs be asked to present the Union's position.
***
The Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe actually signed by the member states had the following Article III-305 (OJ 16.12.2004 C 310/137):
Article III-305
1. Member States shall coordinate their action in international organisations and at international
conferences. They shall uphold the Union's positions in such fora. The Union Minister for
Foreign Affairs shall organise this coordination.
In international organisations and at international conferences where not all the Member States
participate, those which do take part shall uphold the Union's positions.
2. In accordance with Article I-16(2), Member States represented in international organisations or international conferences where not all the Member States participate shall keep the latter, as well as the Union Minister for Foreign Affairs, informed of any matter of common interest.
Member States which are also members of the United Nations Security Council shall concert and
keep the other Member States and the Union Minister for Foreign Affairs fully informed.
Member States which are members of the Security Council will, in the execution of their functions, defend the positions and the interests of the Union, without prejudice to their responsibilities under the United Nations Charter.
When the Union has defined a position on a subject which is on the United Nations Security Council agenda, those Member States which sit on the Security Council shall request that the Union Minister for Foreign Affairs be asked to present the Union's position.
***
As we see, the basic idea remains the same from the existing TEU, via the Convention and the Constitutional Treaty to the Lisbon Treaty, when Article 19 TEU is presented in a readable, consolidated form.
The role of the High Representative is highlighted, both as a recipient of information and as an organiser of the needed coordination between member states.
The real addition, since the Convention, is Article 19(2) TEU, the new third subparagraph, on the invitation to the High Representative to present the Union’s position (provided there is one).
The loser here, as in the common foreign and security policy in general, is the rotating presidency of the Council. No more memorable appearances in the name of ‘Europe’ on the world stage for the leader(s) of a member state, every fourteenth year or so. The enhanced role of the High Representative should contribute to more coordinated, coherent and consistent action by the EU at international forums.
Since the EU’s agreed CFSP values and objectives are praiseworthy, institutional innovations leading to improved delivery are welcome from a citizen’s standpoint.
***
Let it be said that the Treaty of Lisbon does not deprive the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council of their seats, or change the composition of the Security Council, which can not be done unilaterally by the European Union.
On the other hand, from an EU citizen’s point of view and in order to strengthen global governance, a permanent Security Council seat for the European Union would be an improvement.
The UN Security Council remains special, in that the members, the permanent ones constantly, are supposed to ‘concert’ first, and then to inform the rest. How much the practices evolve towards advance ‘concert’ within the Council remains to be seen.
***
Diplomatic cooperation will be next in turn.
Ralf Grahn
The Security Council of the United Nations, where France and the United Kingdom – the only EU states with nuclear weapons – are permanent members, is a special case. Neither has shown any interest to give up its seat, its veto powers or its status as a (former) great power in favour of representation for the European Union, but at a practical level both have an interest to keep the other EU members on board in most questions.
Action in international organisations and at international conferences is one aspect of the common foreign and security policy (CFSP) of the EU in order to safeguard its values and promote its objectives.
***
The intergovernmental conference (IGC 2007) regaled us with this exquisite sample of stirring penmanship. See the Treaty of Lisbon (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/29):
”38) Article 19 shall be amended as follows:
(a) in paragraph 1, the words "the common positions" shall be replaced by "the Union's positions" in the first and second subparagraphs and the following sentence shall be added at the end of the first subparagraph: "The High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy shall organise this coordination.";
(b) paragraph 2 shall be amended as follows:
(i) in the first subparagraph, the words "Without prejudice to paragraph 1 and Article 14(3)," shall be replaced by "In accordance with Article 11(3)," and the words "the latter" shall be replaced by "the other Member States and the High Representative";
(ii) in the second subparagraph, first sentence, the words "and the High Representative" shall be inserted after "the other Member States"; in the second sentence, the word "permanent" shall be deleted and the words "ensure the defence of the positions" shall be replaced by "defend the positions";
(iii) the following new third subparagraph shall be added:
"When the Union has defined a position on a subject which is on the United Nations Security Council agenda, those Member States which sit on the Security Council shall request that the High Representative be invited to present the Union's position."
***
In the existing Treaty on European Union (TEU) Article 19 looks like this (latest consolidated version OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/18):
“Article 19
1. Member States shall coordinate their action in international organisations and at international
conferences. They shall uphold the common positions in such forums.
In international organisations and at international conferences where not all the Member States
participate, those which do take part shall uphold the common positions.
2. Without prejudice to paragraph 1 and Article 14(3), Member States represented in international organisations or international conferences where not all the Member States participate shall keep the latter informed of any matter of common interest.
Member States which are also members of the United Nations Security Council will concert and
keep the other Member States fully informed. Member States which are permanent members of the Security Council will, in the execution of their functions, ensure the defence of the positions and the interests of the Union, without prejudice to their responsibilities under the provisions of the United Nations Charter.”
***
We now proceed towards a consolidated version of Article 19 TEU, by making the amendments according to the ’construction manual’. Here is the amended and consolidated Article:
Article 19
1. Member States shall coordinate their action in international organisations and at international
conferences. They shall uphold the Union’s positions in such forums. The High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy shall organise this coordination.
In international organisations and at international conferences where not all the Member States
participate, those which do take part shall uphold the Union’s positions.
2. In accordance with Article 11(3), Member States represented in international
organisations or international conferences where not all the Member States participate shall
keep the other Member States and the High Representative informed of any matter of common interest.
Member States which are also members of the United Nations Security Council will concert and
keep the other Member States and the High Representative fully informed. Member States which are members of the Security Council will, in the execution of their functions, defend the positions and the interests of the Union, without prejudice to their responsibilities under the provisions of the United Nations Charter.
When the Union has defined a position on a subject which is on the United Nations Security Council agenda, those Member States which sit on the Security Council shall request that the High Representative be invited to present the Union's position.
***
The European Convention proposed the following Article III-206 in the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (OJ 18.7.2003 C 169/68):
Article III-206
1. Member States shall coordinate their action in international organisations and at international conferences. They shall uphold the Union's positions in such fora. The Union Minister for Foreign Affairs shall organise this coordination.
In international organisations and at international conferences where not all the Member States participate, those which do take part shall uphold the Union's positions.
2. Without prejudice to paragraph 1 and Article III-198(3), Member States represented in international organisations or international conferences where not all the Member States participate shall keep the latter, as well as the Union Minister for Foreign Affairs, informed of any matter of common interest.
Member States which are also members of the United Nations Security Council shall concert and keep the other Member States and the Union Minister for Foreign Affairs fully informed. Member States which are members of the Security Council will, in the execution of their functions, defend the positions and the interests of the Union, without prejudice to their responsibilities under the provisions of the United Nations Charter.
When the Union has defined a position on a subject which is on the United Nations Security Council agenda, those Member States which sit on the Security Council shall request that the
Union Minister for Foreign Affairs be asked to present the Union's position.
***
The Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe actually signed by the member states had the following Article III-305 (OJ 16.12.2004 C 310/137):
Article III-305
1. Member States shall coordinate their action in international organisations and at international
conferences. They shall uphold the Union's positions in such fora. The Union Minister for
Foreign Affairs shall organise this coordination.
In international organisations and at international conferences where not all the Member States
participate, those which do take part shall uphold the Union's positions.
2. In accordance with Article I-16(2), Member States represented in international organisations or international conferences where not all the Member States participate shall keep the latter, as well as the Union Minister for Foreign Affairs, informed of any matter of common interest.
Member States which are also members of the United Nations Security Council shall concert and
keep the other Member States and the Union Minister for Foreign Affairs fully informed.
Member States which are members of the Security Council will, in the execution of their functions, defend the positions and the interests of the Union, without prejudice to their responsibilities under the United Nations Charter.
When the Union has defined a position on a subject which is on the United Nations Security Council agenda, those Member States which sit on the Security Council shall request that the Union Minister for Foreign Affairs be asked to present the Union's position.
***
As we see, the basic idea remains the same from the existing TEU, via the Convention and the Constitutional Treaty to the Lisbon Treaty, when Article 19 TEU is presented in a readable, consolidated form.
The role of the High Representative is highlighted, both as a recipient of information and as an organiser of the needed coordination between member states.
The real addition, since the Convention, is Article 19(2) TEU, the new third subparagraph, on the invitation to the High Representative to present the Union’s position (provided there is one).
The loser here, as in the common foreign and security policy in general, is the rotating presidency of the Council. No more memorable appearances in the name of ‘Europe’ on the world stage for the leader(s) of a member state, every fourteenth year or so. The enhanced role of the High Representative should contribute to more coordinated, coherent and consistent action by the EU at international forums.
Since the EU’s agreed CFSP values and objectives are praiseworthy, institutional innovations leading to improved delivery are welcome from a citizen’s standpoint.
***
Let it be said that the Treaty of Lisbon does not deprive the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council of their seats, or change the composition of the Security Council, which can not be done unilaterally by the European Union.
On the other hand, from an EU citizen’s point of view and in order to strengthen global governance, a permanent Security Council seat for the European Union would be an improvement.
The UN Security Council remains special, in that the members, the permanent ones constantly, are supposed to ‘concert’ first, and then to inform the rest. How much the practices evolve towards advance ‘concert’ within the Council remains to be seen.
***
Diplomatic cooperation will be next in turn.
Ralf Grahn
Saturday, 19 January 2008
EU Lisbon Treaty ratification: Estonia
Prime minister Andrus Ansip has told a press conference that government of Estonia is going to consider the Treaty of Lisbon next Thursday, 31 January 2008, and that he expects the Riigikogu, the Estonian Parliament, to ratify the Reform Treaty during the first half of this year.
According to the European Policy Centre (EPC) parliamentary ratification needs a simple majority, thought to be easily achieved, since all parties have declared their support for the Treaty.
Ralf Grahn
Sources:
Valitsuse briifinguruum: Valitsuse pressikonverentsi stenogramm, 17. jaanuar 2008;
http://www.valitsus.ee
EPC: Treaty ratification: state of play (as at 15 January 2008);
http://www.epc.eu
According to the European Policy Centre (EPC) parliamentary ratification needs a simple majority, thought to be easily achieved, since all parties have declared their support for the Treaty.
Ralf Grahn
Sources:
Valitsuse briifinguruum: Valitsuse pressikonverentsi stenogramm, 17. jaanuar 2008;
http://www.valitsus.ee
EPC: Treaty ratification: state of play (as at 15 January 2008);
http://www.epc.eu
EU Lisbon Treaty ratification: Denmark
The Danish Parliament, Folketinget, has started its work on the ratification of the EU Treaty of Lisbon. The government bill can be downloaded freely:
Forslag til lov om aendring af lov om Danmarks tiltraedelse af De Europaeiske Faelleskaber og Den Europaeiske Union (Danmarks ratifikation af Lissabon-traktaten)
Lovforslag nr. L 53; 9. januar 2008
http://www.ft.dk/doc.aspx?/Samling/20072/lovforslag/L53/index.htm
***
After the signing of the Treaty of Lisbon, the Danish consolidated version of the Lisbon Treaty, mentioned in an earlier post, has been updated. For a free download, go to:
Folketinget: Sammenskrevet udgave af Lissabontraktaten, som undertegnet af EU’s stats- og regeringsledare den 13. december 2007, og det gaeldende traktatgrundlag;
http://www.euo.dk/upload/application/pdf/acc3e206/Lissabontraktaten.pdf
***
Folketingets EU-Oplysning, the Parliament’s EU Information Centre, offers information on the European Union in Danish, but some information is available in English, too:
http://www.eu-oplysningen.dk
***
The Reform Treaty is to be ratified by the Parliament of Denmark, but the government led by Anders Fogh Rasmussen is planning a referendum on the possible abolition of the Danish opt-outs from the EU Treaties.
Here is a part of the information on offer concerning Denmark’s opt-outs:
“Denmark has four so-called opt-outs from participation in EU policies.
As a result of the Danish no-vote to the Maastrich Treaty in 1992 the European Council adopted a declaration in Edinburg in December 1992 granting Denmark special status regarding EU cooperation. In order to meet the Danish concerns about the Maastricht Treaty Denmark was given four opt-outs from participation in EU policies:
Economic and Monetary Union: Denmark does not participate in the third phase of Economic and Monetary Union.
Common defence: Denmark does not participate in the elaboration and implementation of decisions and actions which have defence implications.
Justice and home affairs: Denmark only participates in EU judicial cooperation at an intergovernmental level.
Union citizenship: The Danish Opt-out on citizenship has been embodied in the Amsterdam Treaty, where it is stated, that union citizenship is a supplement to national citizenship and not a replacement.”
Ralf Grahn
Forslag til lov om aendring af lov om Danmarks tiltraedelse af De Europaeiske Faelleskaber og Den Europaeiske Union (Danmarks ratifikation af Lissabon-traktaten)
Lovforslag nr. L 53; 9. januar 2008
http://www.ft.dk/doc.aspx?/Samling/20072/lovforslag/L53/index.htm
***
After the signing of the Treaty of Lisbon, the Danish consolidated version of the Lisbon Treaty, mentioned in an earlier post, has been updated. For a free download, go to:
Folketinget: Sammenskrevet udgave af Lissabontraktaten, som undertegnet af EU’s stats- og regeringsledare den 13. december 2007, og det gaeldende traktatgrundlag;
http://www.euo.dk/upload/application/pdf/acc3e206/Lissabontraktaten.pdf
***
Folketingets EU-Oplysning, the Parliament’s EU Information Centre, offers information on the European Union in Danish, but some information is available in English, too:
http://www.eu-oplysningen.dk
***
The Reform Treaty is to be ratified by the Parliament of Denmark, but the government led by Anders Fogh Rasmussen is planning a referendum on the possible abolition of the Danish opt-outs from the EU Treaties.
Here is a part of the information on offer concerning Denmark’s opt-outs:
“Denmark has four so-called opt-outs from participation in EU policies.
As a result of the Danish no-vote to the Maastrich Treaty in 1992 the European Council adopted a declaration in Edinburg in December 1992 granting Denmark special status regarding EU cooperation. In order to meet the Danish concerns about the Maastricht Treaty Denmark was given four opt-outs from participation in EU policies:
Economic and Monetary Union: Denmark does not participate in the third phase of Economic and Monetary Union.
Common defence: Denmark does not participate in the elaboration and implementation of decisions and actions which have defence implications.
Justice and home affairs: Denmark only participates in EU judicial cooperation at an intergovernmental level.
Union citizenship: The Danish Opt-out on citizenship has been embodied in the Amsterdam Treaty, where it is stated, that union citizenship is a supplement to national citizenship and not a replacement.”
Ralf Grahn
EU Treaty of Lisbon: CFSP special representative
The Treaty of Amsterdam gave the European Union an important common foreign and security policy tool: the special representative. The EU has been able to appoint special representatives with a mandate to act on behalf of the Union ‘on the ground’. The special representatives have been appointed by the Council, especially to trouble spots where the EU strives to achieve peace and stability.
***
In the Treaty of Lisbon (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/29) the intergovernmental conference (IGC 2007) decided to amend the Treaty on European Union (TEU) in the following manner:
36) The text of Article 17 shall become Article 28 A, it shall be amended as set out below in point 49.
37) Article 18 shall be amended as follows:
(a) paragraphs 1 to 4 shall be deleted;
(b) in paragraph 5, which shall not be numbered, the words "whenever it deems it necessary," shall be replaced by "on a proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy" and the following sentence shall be added at the end: "The special representative shall carry out his mandate under the authority of the High Representative.".
***
In the existing Article 18 TEU (latest consolidated version OJ 29.12.2006/17 and 18) the first four paragraphs, which concern the rotating Presidency to be abolished by the High Representative as chair of the Foreign Affairs Council, are deleted, so there is no need to set them out here. Article 18(5) reads as follows:
“5. The Council may, whenever it deems it necessary, appoint a special representative with a mandate in relation to particular policy issues.”
***
As a consequence, the new consolidated Article 18 TEU should look like this:
Article 18
The Council may, on a proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, appoint a special representative with a mandate in relation to particular policy issues. The special representative shall carry out his mandate under the authority of the High Representative.
***
The Convention, led by Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, proposed in the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe Article III-203 (OJ 18.7.2003 C 169/67) that the appointment should take place on the initiative of the Union Minister for Foreign Affairs and carry out his or her mandate under the authority of the same Minister.
In essence, this provision was taken over in the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, as Article III-302.
The Reform Treaty retains the substance of the Constitutional Treaty, but the ‘Union Minister for Foreign Affairs’ has been renamed the ‘High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy’, as elsewhere in the Lisbon Treaty.
***
Here are a few fresh examples of Council decisions concerning EU special representatives. As we see, the mandates have been in the form of joint actions:
Council Joint Action 2007/809/CFSP of 6 December 2007 amending Joint Action 2007/108/CFSP extending the mandate of the European Union Special Representative for Sudan
Council Joint Action 2007/805/CFSP of 6 December 2007 appointing a European Union Special Representative to the African Union
Council Joint Action 2007/748/CFSP of 19 November 2007 amending Joint Action 2007/87/CFSP amending and extending the mandate of the European Union Special Representative in Bosnia and Herzegovina
Council Joint Action 2007/744/CFSP of 19 November 2007 amending and extending Joint Action 2006/623/CFSP on the establishment of an EU team to contribute to the preparations of the establishment of a possible International Civilian Office in Kosovo, including a European Union Special Representative component (ICO/EUSR Preparation Team)
Council Joint Action 2007/732/CFSP of 13 November 2007 amending Joint Action 2007/106/CFSP extending the mandate of the Special Representative of the European Union for Afghanistan
***
Coordination in international organisations and at international conferences will be next.
Ralf Grahn
P.S. Do you understand why the amended Article 18 TEU was not written clearly by the IGC 2007?
***
In the Treaty of Lisbon (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/29) the intergovernmental conference (IGC 2007) decided to amend the Treaty on European Union (TEU) in the following manner:
36) The text of Article 17 shall become Article 28 A, it shall be amended as set out below in point 49.
37) Article 18 shall be amended as follows:
(a) paragraphs 1 to 4 shall be deleted;
(b) in paragraph 5, which shall not be numbered, the words "whenever it deems it necessary," shall be replaced by "on a proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy" and the following sentence shall be added at the end: "The special representative shall carry out his mandate under the authority of the High Representative.".
***
In the existing Article 18 TEU (latest consolidated version OJ 29.12.2006/17 and 18) the first four paragraphs, which concern the rotating Presidency to be abolished by the High Representative as chair of the Foreign Affairs Council, are deleted, so there is no need to set them out here. Article 18(5) reads as follows:
“5. The Council may, whenever it deems it necessary, appoint a special representative with a mandate in relation to particular policy issues.”
***
As a consequence, the new consolidated Article 18 TEU should look like this:
Article 18
The Council may, on a proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, appoint a special representative with a mandate in relation to particular policy issues. The special representative shall carry out his mandate under the authority of the High Representative.
***
The Convention, led by Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, proposed in the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe Article III-203 (OJ 18.7.2003 C 169/67) that the appointment should take place on the initiative of the Union Minister for Foreign Affairs and carry out his or her mandate under the authority of the same Minister.
In essence, this provision was taken over in the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, as Article III-302.
The Reform Treaty retains the substance of the Constitutional Treaty, but the ‘Union Minister for Foreign Affairs’ has been renamed the ‘High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy’, as elsewhere in the Lisbon Treaty.
***
Here are a few fresh examples of Council decisions concerning EU special representatives. As we see, the mandates have been in the form of joint actions:
Council Joint Action 2007/809/CFSP of 6 December 2007 amending Joint Action 2007/108/CFSP extending the mandate of the European Union Special Representative for Sudan
Council Joint Action 2007/805/CFSP of 6 December 2007 appointing a European Union Special Representative to the African Union
Council Joint Action 2007/748/CFSP of 19 November 2007 amending Joint Action 2007/87/CFSP amending and extending the mandate of the European Union Special Representative in Bosnia and Herzegovina
Council Joint Action 2007/744/CFSP of 19 November 2007 amending and extending Joint Action 2006/623/CFSP on the establishment of an EU team to contribute to the preparations of the establishment of a possible International Civilian Office in Kosovo, including a European Union Special Representative component (ICO/EUSR Preparation Team)
Council Joint Action 2007/732/CFSP of 13 November 2007 amending Joint Action 2007/106/CFSP extending the mandate of the Special Representative of the European Union for Afghanistan
***
Coordination in international organisations and at international conferences will be next.
Ralf Grahn
P.S. Do you understand why the amended Article 18 TEU was not written clearly by the IGC 2007?
Friday, 18 January 2008
Complete consolidated Lisbon Treaty in English
Yesterday I mentioned the updated and consolidated English language version of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) by Peadar ó Broin, of the Institute of International and European Affairs (Dublin, Ireland).
Now Peadar ó Broin has informed me that the Annexes to the Treaties as well as the Protocols have been added to the Institute’s web site:
http://www.iiea.com/
The Treaties, Annexes and Protocols can be downloaded freely.
I thank Peadar ó Broin for his work and the IIEA for making it possible. They have made life easier for a lot of people.
***
We know that there is going to be a referendum in Ireland on the Treaty of Lisbon. The consolidations serve important domestic needs as a factual basis for public debate. But, at the same time the published consolidated versions offer needed reliable information to all European citizens and others who are able to use texts in English, especially those who have no consolidated version in their own language.
Dear Reader,
I look forward to further information from you on the Treaty of Lisbon: consolidated versions, official documents from the member states, popular presentations and scholarly literature, as well as information on the ratification processes.
Ralf Grahn
P.S. My oxymoron of the day is addressed to the European Council: Informed debate, without information?
Now Peadar ó Broin has informed me that the Annexes to the Treaties as well as the Protocols have been added to the Institute’s web site:
http://www.iiea.com/
The Treaties, Annexes and Protocols can be downloaded freely.
I thank Peadar ó Broin for his work and the IIEA for making it possible. They have made life easier for a lot of people.
***
We know that there is going to be a referendum in Ireland on the Treaty of Lisbon. The consolidations serve important domestic needs as a factual basis for public debate. But, at the same time the published consolidated versions offer needed reliable information to all European citizens and others who are able to use texts in English, especially those who have no consolidated version in their own language.
Dear Reader,
I look forward to further information from you on the Treaty of Lisbon: consolidated versions, official documents from the member states, popular presentations and scholarly literature, as well as information on the ratification processes.
Ralf Grahn
P.S. My oxymoron of the day is addressed to the European Council: Informed debate, without information?
EU Treaty of Lisbon: CFSP common approach
I would like to see European leaders who make me proud.
***
The EU member states consult, they reach a common approach, and then they coordinate their action. That is the purpose of the European Union, isn’t it? Then, why communicate like it was a state secret?
In my dictionary ‘fair play’ is described as ‘respect for the rules or equal treatment of all concerned’.
It was a serious miscalculation by the intergovernmental conference (the European Council) to decide that no consolidated versions of the Lisbon Treaty are to be published by any EU institution before the amending Treaties are ratified in every member state and have entered into force. It was and is depressing that the other EU institutions acquiesce in this conspiracy of silence, and that individual ministers and MEPs, as well as European political parties are keener to show solidarity to their peers than to the public. (If anybody is in doubt as to the essential correctness of my assertions, I refer to the lightly sanitized postings on my blogs since the middle of October. If push came to shove, I would have to present my documented evidence, if not able to claim journalistic anonymity for my sources.)
Has anybody presented a recorded decision? Has anybody stepped forward to take responsibility, or to present the reasons openly? Not to my knowledge. Having asked around, I have found that most of the people ‘in the know’ prefer not to answer. It seems to be a more convenient option than lying or telling the truth, but it goes against the grain of democratic interplay.
The end result of the intergovernmental conference is that we have an unreadable Reform Treaty, which makes a mockery of open communication and the notion of democratic fair play. The damage caused is deeper and more long-lasting than the inconvenience caused by foaming fanatics claiming that 50 year old treaty provisions are novelties smashing state sovereignty (as in Britain) or social protection (as in France) or whatever.
The lack of a readable text has done nothing to dampen the spirits on the fringes, where conscientious analysis is less than highly regarded and balanced presentation unknown, but it has meant serious inconvenience for those, who would like to base their opinion on facts (without pre-programmed filtering or spin by office holders and institutions).
The citizens who want to know the end result conveniently can go to one of the available consolidated language versions of the Treaty of Lisbon, like the updated TEU and TFEU published in English by the Institute of International and European Affairs (Dublin, Ireland):
http://www.iiea.com
They are of great service to the public.
***
My own quest is a little bit different. I try to wade through the Lisbon Treaty, one Article at a time, taking note of the similarities and differences between the existing Treaties, the draft Constitution, the signed Constitution and the amending Treaties. This I do as objectively as I can. In addition, I offer my personal comments on the (proposed) ‘state of the Union’, from an EU citizen’s point of view.
I imagine that my work could be of assistance to students of European affairs (politcs, law, economics) and to generalist teachers as well as to interested citizens who would want to take a deeper look at the background or consider subjective but independent views untrammelled by inbred hostility or self-congratulatory institutional loyalty.
As long as the EU institutions fail to publish consolidated, readable versions of the Treaty of Lisbon in every official language of the Union, I find it meaningful to decipher the Reform Treaty, as far as I am able, given the practical constraints. And it offers me an opportunity to repeat (ad nauseam) how our leaders have failed to live up to expectations formed by their professed ideals and principles. The mixture of ingredients like fact, irony, sarcasm and humour may vary from time to time, but the theme is constant: Publish or perish. (It goes for all sides.)
I welcome reasoned debate and I prefer real persons who use their own names.
***
I would like to see European leaders who make me proud, and who take care of our common interests, while playing by the rules of fair play.
***
What does the intergovernmental conference (IGC 2007) have in store for us today? We go to the following exercise in public relations by our governments, the Treaty of Lisbon (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/28-29) amending the Treaty on European Union (TEU).
"35) Article 16 shall be amended as follows:
(a) the words "inform and" shall be deleted, the words "within the Council" shall be replaced by "within the European Council and the Council" and the words "in order to ensure that the Union's influence is exerted as effectively as possible by means of concerted and convergent action" shall be replaced by "in order to determine a common approach";
(b) the following sentences shall be added after the first sentence: "Before undertaking any action on the international scene or entering into any commitment which could affect the Union's interests, each Member State shall consult the others within the European Council or the Council. Member States shall ensure, through the convergence of their actions, that the Union is able to assert its interests and values on the international scene. Member States shall show mutual solidarity.";
(c) the following two paragraphs shall be added:
"When the European Council or the Council has defined a common approach of the Union within the meaning of the first paragraph, the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and the Ministers for Foreign Affairs of the Member States shall coordinate their activities within the Council.
The diplomatic missions of the Member States and the Union delegations in third countries and at international organisations shall cooperate and shall contribute to formulating and implementing the common approach.”
***
Today’s exercise seems fairly straightforward. First, we turn to the existing Treaty on European Union, Article 16 TEU (latest consolidated version OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/6):
“Article 16
Member States shall inform and consult one another within the Council on any matter of foreign and security policy of general interest in order to ensure that the Union’s influence is exerted as effectively as possible by means of concerted and convergent action.”
***
Then, starts the fun part: reconstructing the democratic intention of our leaders:
Article 16
Member States shall consult one another within the European Council and the Council on any matter of foreign and security policy of general interest in order to determine a common approach. Before undertaking any action on the international scene or entering into any commitment which could affect the Union’s interests, each Member State shall consult the others within the European Council or the Council. Member States shall ensure, through the convergence of their actions, that the Union is able to assert its interests and values on the international scene. Member States shall show mutual solidarity.
When the European Council or the Council has defined a common approach of the Union within the meaning of the first paragraph, the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and the Ministers for Foreign Affairs of the Member States shall coordinate their activities within their activities within the Council.
The diplomatic missions of the Member States and the Union delegations in third countries and at international organisations shall cooperate and shall contribute to formulating and implementing the common approach.
***
The member states consult, they reach a common approach and then they coordinate their action. That is the purpose of the European Union, isn’t it? Then, why communicate like it was a state secret?
***
What does this consolidated Article remind us of? We turn to the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (OJ 18.7.2003 C 169/17) Article I-39 Specific provisions for implementing common foreign and security policy, or more exactly Article I-39(5):
“5. Member States shall consult one another within the European Council and the Council of Ministers on any foreign and security policy issue which is of general interest in order to determine a common approach. Before undertaking any action on the international scene or any commitment which could affect the Union’s interests, each Member State shall consult the others within the European Council or the Council of Ministers. Member States shall ensure, through the convergence of their actions, that the Union is able to assert its interests and values on the international scene. Member States shall show mutual solidarity.”
We then proceed to Article III-202 as proposed by the Convention:
“1. When the Union has defined a common approach within the meaning of Article I-39(5), the Union Minister for Foreign Affairs and the Ministers for Foreign Affairs of the Member States shall coordinate their activities within the Council of Ministers.
2. The diplomatic missions of the Member States and the delegations of the Union shall cooperate in third countries and in international organisations and shall contribute to formulating and implementing a common approach.”
***
In the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (OJ 16.12.2004 C 310) the first corresponding Article I-40 had a new, slightly altered headline: Specific provisions relating to the common foreign and security policy, and the ‘Council of Ministers’ had become the ‘Council’. Otherwise Article I-40(5) in the signed Treaty was the same as the corresponding provision drafted by the Convention.
Article III-301 of the Constitutional Treaty gave the wording a few touches, but in essence it took over the text proposed by the Convention in its Article III-202.
The Treaty of Lisbon, Article 16 TEU, merges the two corresponding Articles of the draft Constitution and the signed Constitutional Treaty without altering the substance.
***
This was today’s deciphering exercise. Slowly but surely we cover the ground the IGC 2007 would have us see only ‘through a glass, darkly’. (Thank you, Donna Leon.)
Ralf Grahn
***
The EU member states consult, they reach a common approach, and then they coordinate their action. That is the purpose of the European Union, isn’t it? Then, why communicate like it was a state secret?
In my dictionary ‘fair play’ is described as ‘respect for the rules or equal treatment of all concerned’.
It was a serious miscalculation by the intergovernmental conference (the European Council) to decide that no consolidated versions of the Lisbon Treaty are to be published by any EU institution before the amending Treaties are ratified in every member state and have entered into force. It was and is depressing that the other EU institutions acquiesce in this conspiracy of silence, and that individual ministers and MEPs, as well as European political parties are keener to show solidarity to their peers than to the public. (If anybody is in doubt as to the essential correctness of my assertions, I refer to the lightly sanitized postings on my blogs since the middle of October. If push came to shove, I would have to present my documented evidence, if not able to claim journalistic anonymity for my sources.)
Has anybody presented a recorded decision? Has anybody stepped forward to take responsibility, or to present the reasons openly? Not to my knowledge. Having asked around, I have found that most of the people ‘in the know’ prefer not to answer. It seems to be a more convenient option than lying or telling the truth, but it goes against the grain of democratic interplay.
The end result of the intergovernmental conference is that we have an unreadable Reform Treaty, which makes a mockery of open communication and the notion of democratic fair play. The damage caused is deeper and more long-lasting than the inconvenience caused by foaming fanatics claiming that 50 year old treaty provisions are novelties smashing state sovereignty (as in Britain) or social protection (as in France) or whatever.
The lack of a readable text has done nothing to dampen the spirits on the fringes, where conscientious analysis is less than highly regarded and balanced presentation unknown, but it has meant serious inconvenience for those, who would like to base their opinion on facts (without pre-programmed filtering or spin by office holders and institutions).
The citizens who want to know the end result conveniently can go to one of the available consolidated language versions of the Treaty of Lisbon, like the updated TEU and TFEU published in English by the Institute of International and European Affairs (Dublin, Ireland):
http://www.iiea.com
They are of great service to the public.
***
My own quest is a little bit different. I try to wade through the Lisbon Treaty, one Article at a time, taking note of the similarities and differences between the existing Treaties, the draft Constitution, the signed Constitution and the amending Treaties. This I do as objectively as I can. In addition, I offer my personal comments on the (proposed) ‘state of the Union’, from an EU citizen’s point of view.
I imagine that my work could be of assistance to students of European affairs (politcs, law, economics) and to generalist teachers as well as to interested citizens who would want to take a deeper look at the background or consider subjective but independent views untrammelled by inbred hostility or self-congratulatory institutional loyalty.
As long as the EU institutions fail to publish consolidated, readable versions of the Treaty of Lisbon in every official language of the Union, I find it meaningful to decipher the Reform Treaty, as far as I am able, given the practical constraints. And it offers me an opportunity to repeat (ad nauseam) how our leaders have failed to live up to expectations formed by their professed ideals and principles. The mixture of ingredients like fact, irony, sarcasm and humour may vary from time to time, but the theme is constant: Publish or perish. (It goes for all sides.)
I welcome reasoned debate and I prefer real persons who use their own names.
***
I would like to see European leaders who make me proud, and who take care of our common interests, while playing by the rules of fair play.
***
What does the intergovernmental conference (IGC 2007) have in store for us today? We go to the following exercise in public relations by our governments, the Treaty of Lisbon (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/28-29) amending the Treaty on European Union (TEU).
"35) Article 16 shall be amended as follows:
(a) the words "inform and" shall be deleted, the words "within the Council" shall be replaced by "within the European Council and the Council" and the words "in order to ensure that the Union's influence is exerted as effectively as possible by means of concerted and convergent action" shall be replaced by "in order to determine a common approach";
(b) the following sentences shall be added after the first sentence: "Before undertaking any action on the international scene or entering into any commitment which could affect the Union's interests, each Member State shall consult the others within the European Council or the Council. Member States shall ensure, through the convergence of their actions, that the Union is able to assert its interests and values on the international scene. Member States shall show mutual solidarity.";
(c) the following two paragraphs shall be added:
"When the European Council or the Council has defined a common approach of the Union within the meaning of the first paragraph, the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and the Ministers for Foreign Affairs of the Member States shall coordinate their activities within the Council.
The diplomatic missions of the Member States and the Union delegations in third countries and at international organisations shall cooperate and shall contribute to formulating and implementing the common approach.”
***
Today’s exercise seems fairly straightforward. First, we turn to the existing Treaty on European Union, Article 16 TEU (latest consolidated version OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/6):
“Article 16
Member States shall inform and consult one another within the Council on any matter of foreign and security policy of general interest in order to ensure that the Union’s influence is exerted as effectively as possible by means of concerted and convergent action.”
***
Then, starts the fun part: reconstructing the democratic intention of our leaders:
Article 16
Member States shall consult one another within the European Council and the Council on any matter of foreign and security policy of general interest in order to determine a common approach. Before undertaking any action on the international scene or entering into any commitment which could affect the Union’s interests, each Member State shall consult the others within the European Council or the Council. Member States shall ensure, through the convergence of their actions, that the Union is able to assert its interests and values on the international scene. Member States shall show mutual solidarity.
When the European Council or the Council has defined a common approach of the Union within the meaning of the first paragraph, the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and the Ministers for Foreign Affairs of the Member States shall coordinate their activities within their activities within the Council.
The diplomatic missions of the Member States and the Union delegations in third countries and at international organisations shall cooperate and shall contribute to formulating and implementing the common approach.
***
The member states consult, they reach a common approach and then they coordinate their action. That is the purpose of the European Union, isn’t it? Then, why communicate like it was a state secret?
***
What does this consolidated Article remind us of? We turn to the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (OJ 18.7.2003 C 169/17) Article I-39 Specific provisions for implementing common foreign and security policy, or more exactly Article I-39(5):
“5. Member States shall consult one another within the European Council and the Council of Ministers on any foreign and security policy issue which is of general interest in order to determine a common approach. Before undertaking any action on the international scene or any commitment which could affect the Union’s interests, each Member State shall consult the others within the European Council or the Council of Ministers. Member States shall ensure, through the convergence of their actions, that the Union is able to assert its interests and values on the international scene. Member States shall show mutual solidarity.”
We then proceed to Article III-202 as proposed by the Convention:
“1. When the Union has defined a common approach within the meaning of Article I-39(5), the Union Minister for Foreign Affairs and the Ministers for Foreign Affairs of the Member States shall coordinate their activities within the Council of Ministers.
2. The diplomatic missions of the Member States and the delegations of the Union shall cooperate in third countries and in international organisations and shall contribute to formulating and implementing a common approach.”
***
In the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (OJ 16.12.2004 C 310) the first corresponding Article I-40 had a new, slightly altered headline: Specific provisions relating to the common foreign and security policy, and the ‘Council of Ministers’ had become the ‘Council’. Otherwise Article I-40(5) in the signed Treaty was the same as the corresponding provision drafted by the Convention.
Article III-301 of the Constitutional Treaty gave the wording a few touches, but in essence it took over the text proposed by the Convention in its Article III-202.
The Treaty of Lisbon, Article 16 TEU, merges the two corresponding Articles of the draft Constitution and the signed Constitutional Treaty without altering the substance.
***
This was today’s deciphering exercise. Slowly but surely we cover the ground the IGC 2007 would have us see only ‘through a glass, darkly’. (Thank you, Donna Leon.)
Ralf Grahn
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Subscribe To Grahnlaw
Posts
All Comments
