Ukraine Now Producing 10 Self-Propelled ... Fri Apr 19, 2024 06:15 | Anti-Empire
Russian Firms Rush to Buy Anti-Drone Def... Wed Apr 17, 2024 08:58 | Bloomberg
Ukraine Buys Huge Amounts of Russian Fue... Fri Jan 20, 2023 08:34 | Antonia Kotseva
Turkey Has Sent Ukraine Cluster Munition... Thu Jan 12, 2023 00:26 | Jack Detsch
New Israeli Government Promises to Talk ... Tue Jan 10, 2023 21:13 | Al Majadeen Anti-Empire >>
A Blog About Human Rights
UN human rights chief calls for priority action ahead of climate summit Sat Oct 30, 2021 17:18 | Human Rights
5 Year Anniversary Of Kem Ley?s Death Sun Jul 11, 2021 12:34 | Human Rights
Poor Living Conditions for Migrants in Southern Italy Mon Jan 18, 2021 10:14 | Human Rights
Right to Water Mon Aug 03, 2020 19:13 | Human Rights
Human Rights Fri Mar 20, 2020 16:33 | Human Rights Human Rights in Ireland >>
Fifty Ways to Leave the European Convention on Human Rights Fri Apr 19, 2024 17:28 | Dr David McGrogan Rishi Sunak has once again been dropping hints about leaving the European Convention on Human Rights. This is not credible, says Dr David McGrogan: such a feat would require a Government far more serious than this one.
The post Fifty Ways to Leave the European Convention on Human Rights appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.
Pupil Suspensions Reach Record High as Experts Blame Effect of Lockdowns on Behaviour Fri Apr 19, 2024 15:30 | Will Jones The number of pupils suspended from school has reached a record high as experts warn that bad behaviour has increased as a result of lockdown school closures.
The post Pupil Suspensions Reach Record High as Experts Blame Effect of Lockdowns on Behaviour appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.
Up to Half of Excess Deaths in U.S. Nursing Homes Were Due to Lockdowns and Mitigation Measures Fri Apr 19, 2024 13:19 | Will Jones Up to half of excess deaths in American nursing homes were due to the impact of lockdowns and mitigation measures on frail residents rather than the virus, according to new analysis.
The post Up to Half of Excess Deaths in U.S. Nursing Homes Were Due to Lockdowns and Mitigation Measures appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.
Woke Activists Need to Read Their David Hume Fri Apr 19, 2024 11:16 | Dr James Allan The great Scottish Enlightenment philosopher David Hume would have some things to teach today's woke activists, says Prof James Allan: about a mind-independent reality that has no truck with claims of 'my truth'.
The post Woke Activists Need to Read Their David Hume appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.
Farmers? Biggest Problems are Green Ideologues, not Climate Change Fri Apr 19, 2024 09:00 | Ben Pile It's been a wet winter and this is bad news for farmers, says Ben Pile. But with agricultural yields increasing sharply over recent decades, there's no reason to link it to climate change or start catostrophising about it.
The post Farmers? Biggest Problems are Green Ideologues, not Climate Change appeared first on The Daily Sceptic. Lockdown Skeptics >>
Voltaire, international edition
The cost of war, by Manlio Dinucci Wed Apr 17, 2024 04:12 | en
Angela Merkel and François Hollande's crime against peace, by Thierry Meyssan Tue Apr 16, 2024 06:58 | en
Iranian response to attack on its consulate in Damascus could lead to wider warf... Fri Apr 12, 2024 13:36 | en
Is the possibility of a World War real?, by Serge Marchand , Thierry Meyssan Tue Apr 09, 2024 08:06 | en
Netanyahu's Masada syndrome and the UN report by Francesca Albanese, by Alfredo ... Sun Apr 07, 2024 07:53 | en Voltaire Network >>
|
Spoofing the Irish media and public with Lisbon “guarantees” that guarantee nothing
national |
eu |
feature
Tuesday June 23, 2009 23:48 by O. O'C. - National Platform EU Research & Information Centre info at nationalplatform dot org
24 Crawford Ave. Dublin 9 01-8305792
The central point to grasp about the current EU Summit proceedings on the Lisbon Treaty: so-called “legally binding guarantees” do not change a jot or tittle of that Treaty.
Did you not hear us the first time?
EU politicians cannot change the treaties, or their effects, just by signing a new agreement: the Court of Justice will always say that the provisions of a fully ratified European Treaty trump any attempt to modify the operation of the Treaty through an unratified agreement.
Other Anti-Lisbon Groups:
Say NO |
Vote NO |
Lisbon Vote |
No 2 Lisbon |
Vote No to Lisbon |
People.ie |
National Platform |
Peace and Neutrality Alliance - pana |
People before Profit |
Republica Sinn Féin - RSF |
Communist Party of Ireland |
Socialist Workers' Party - SWP |
Workers' Party Ireland |
32 County Sovereignty Committee - 32CSM |
Ógra Shinn Féin - OSF |
Éirígi |
Le Chéile Saor |
Get YOUR Group Added
If you'd like to add your group to the list above, please send us an email
Letting the Politicians know how YOU feel - closing the democratic deficit
Contact.ie - Contact ALLTDs, Senators, and MEPs and let them know YOUR feelings about being asked to vote for a second time on the Lisbon Treaty.
The central point to grasp about the current EU Summit proceedings on the Lisbon Treaty is that Messrs Brian Cowen’s and Micheál Martin’s “legally binding guarantees” to meet Irish voters’ concerns do not change a jot or tittle of that Treaty.
If they changed even a comma, the Lisbon Treaty would become a different Treaty and would have to be ratified again from scratch by the National Parliaments of the 27 EU Member States.
EU politicians cannot change the treaties, or their effects, just by signing a new agreement: the Court of Justice will always say that the provisions of a fully ratified European Treaty trump any attempt to modify the operation of the Treaty through an unratified agreement.
EU treaties cannot be amended in any way unless the document embodying the amendments has been both signed by EU leaders, and then ratified by all EU Member States “in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements”. That is not happening here.
Thus the Lisbon Treaty which the Irish people will be voting on in the autumn will be exactly the same Treaty as the one which the majority of voters rejected in last year’s referendum by 53% to 47% on a 53% turnout.
If the Lisbon Treaty comes into force, it would be the EU Court of Justice which would interpret it, as the EU Court is the only body authorised under the European Treaties to interpret them and decide how they should be applied.
The “decision” or agreement of the European Council that certain provisions of the Lisbon Treaty mean such and such is just that - an agreement between the 27 Prime Ministers and Presidents. It is legally binding on them as individuals, but it is not an international Treaty between States which would require ratification by the 27 EU States putting it before their National Parliaments for approval, as is the normal mode of ratification of treaties.
The text of the introduction to the Summit “decision” states that it is made by the Heads of State or Government “desiring to address those (Irish) concerns in conformity with that Treaty”, viz the Lisbon Treaty.
Being in conformity with the Lisbon Treaty, the “decision” or agreement cannot add to or substract from Lisbon in the slightest, and it would be for the EU Court, and the Court alone, to decide what Lisbon and its manifold provisions would mean if Lisbon should come into force.
So far as one can ascertain, the Summit “decision” or “agreement” is not actually being signed by the 27 Prime Ministers and Presidents who agree it, as would be normal with an international Treaty pending its formal ratification. Note that it is not being called a Treaty, but rather a “decision” or “agreement”.
Formally registering this decision at the United Nations as a political agreement between the Prime Ministers and Presidents concerned, is intended to make it look more significant to the Irish public. This would confer on it a minor status in international law, but not in EU law. It would not and could not override EU law.
Some future meeting of the European Council of EU Prime Ministers and Presidents could make some other decision or agreement, possibly even in contradiction to this agreement, and that would be equally valuable or valueless, for it would not add to or take away from the Treaties one iota.
The whole process is meant to give the Irish media and public the impression that some real change is being made to the Lisbon Treaty, when nothing like that is happening.
Nor is the Summit “decision” or “agreement” a legally binding Protocol attached to Lisbon, which would form part of that Treaty and which would be binding in European law and on the EU Court of Justice in interpreting and applying European law. For that would require opening the Lisbon Treaty and ratifiying the new Protocol anew as part of it.
Promise of a special Irish Protocol or “clarificatory declaration” to be attached to some future EU Treaty, possibly years away, would be just that - a promise. It would not affect the Lisbon Treaty coming into force, with all its legal obligations. It would not prevent the constitutionally new European Union which Lisbon would create being established.
In no way could a promised Protocol to some future EU Treaty resile or pull back from the obligations entailed by the provisions of the Lisbon Treaty once Lisbon had come into force.
What could such a promised future Protocol do in any case, for Ireland is not seeking any opt-outs from the provisions of the Lisbon Treaty?
In 1992 when the Danish people voted No to the Maastricht Treaty, its Government sought and secured legally binding opt-outs from the central provisions of Maastricht - the euro-currency, EU military and security commitments, and Maastricht’s provisions on EU citizenship. These provisions of Maastricht were never applied to Denmark and that position was formally recognised by a Protocol in the EU Treaties at the time of the 1998 Amsterdam Treaty, and these Danish opt-outs still apply.
Nothing like that is being sought by Ireland, whose Government has signed up to and accepted the provisions of the Lisbon Treaty and the EU Constitution which it embodies in their entirety.
That is just as true now as it was last year.
(Signed)
- Anthony Coughlan
|
View Full Comment Text
save preference
Comments (23 of 23)