⚠ Spoofing the Irish media and public with Lisbon “guarantees” that guarantee nothing
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
(Contact for further information: 01-8305792 )
![[Valid RSS]](http://www.nationalplatform.org/images/valid-rss-rogers.png "Validate my RSS feed")
*NB* IMPORTANT *NB*
The no people will vote no so appeal to people who are thinking of voting yes or who are undecided. Ask them to please hear your argument whether or not they personally like you or others on the no side. Sympathise with how the voters have been ‘badgered’ and ask them to keep an open mind.
Emphasize the following if possible in one go:
(1) The Lisbon Treaty (a.k.a. European Constitution) is not about how the EU has been good for Ireland. The EU has been good for Ireland in many ways and that is beyond dispute.
(2) What is in dispute is what the EU is going to be like for Ireland and other member states in the future.
(3) If we vote no we cannot be kicked out of or otherwise excluded from the EU; rather it will mean that the proponents of Lisbon will have to give up their EU federation plans and will have to respect the will of the people through out Europe.
(4) Opposing Lisbon is not Ireland being difficult or uncooperative. The only people who voting might annoy are the political elite of Europe. The people of Europe would love to be allowed to vote on Lisbon and if they were they would vote no. The fact is that it is not the people of the Europe who want Ireland to pass Lisbon, it’s their leaders.
(5) Why are we being asked to vote yes?
• The answer is because in a democracy the ultimate power is with the people who then elect politicians to govern them. Currently we, the people have some power which EU leaders are asking us to give over to them.
• The nature of democracy versus non-democracy: Democracy is a wonderful thing but it is also a pain in the neck if you’re a leader and you want to get things done. Imagine yourself the difference between being able to make everyone on your street do what you wanted them to do on the one hand, and on the other hand having to go to each of those people on your street individually and explain and negotiate with them to find a compromise.
• As mentioned the EU has been good for Ireland up until now in particular with its focus on the common market. However, in the last few years it has become clear that the EU elite want to develop the EU into something that people did not know it would become. What they want is to become a macro state like the U.S. government with member states like Ireland being states like a state in the U.S. In this way The EU elite have an ‘empire ambition’; perhaps they feel that history has cheated them out of their rightful place as powerful world leaders. Anyone who doesn’t believe this should read what the EU itself says about its place on the world stage in relation to other powers like the U.S. and China.
(6) Accountability is at the heart of the matter. The individuals in the British government who allowed the affects of the famine to ravish Ireland were more accountable to the Irish people via the British parliament than EU bureaucrats now are. We need to have accountability in the EU and the Lisbon Treaty doesn’t bring accountability. A lot of people are angered and disillusioned with their domestic politicians who are directly elected and directly accountable to the people but in the EU the decision makers are more removed from the people so just imagine how their behaviour and decisions would differ from what the people want.
(7) Don’t be pressurised and bullied with threats about jobs and the economy. The big business interests urging a yes vote are motivated to do so by the power of the EU Commission which has the power to make life difficult for those businesses. What are the consequences if we vote no? They can’t kick us out and they can’t sanction us. If we vote no then the EU elite will be forced to listen to the peoples’ demand for the EU to continue but with democracy and accountability taken seriously and not just give lip service.