German Verdict – Lisbon Treaty Battles On Against The Odds

Civitas, 1 July 2009

There was a sigh of relief in Brussels yesterday as the German Federal Constitutional Court ruled that the Lisbon Treaty does not contravene the country’s constitution, writes Nicola Di Luzio, though prior to its implementation, the German Parliament’s right to approve or reject matters decided in the Council of the European Union under Qualified Majority Voting (QMV) will have to be enshrined in law. However, relief in Brussels will have been matched by consternation in many quarters. The treaty may be legal, but that does not make it liked, and this remains one of the main problems facing the EU.

Almost as soon as the verdict was published, a poll claimed that 77% of Germans want to be given a say on the Lisbon Treaty in a national referendum.

Germany is not an anomaly. No-one can forget the tempest created by Ireland’s ‘No’ vote last year at a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. Whilst the Irish will have another chance to ‘make the right choice’ at a second Lisbon Treaty referendum, likely to be held on 2nd October of this year, the same Gael poll which last year successfully predicted the outcome of the vote is this year predicting another ‘No’. Furthermore, according to EU Internal Markets Commissioner Charlie McCreevy, “[..] all of the [political leaders] know quite well that if the similar question was put to their electorate by a referendum the answer in 95% of the countries would probably have been No as well”.

Yet the ship has already left the port and leaders like Germany’s Angela Merkel are determined to see it reach its destination. Part of the problem is that once the Lisbon Treaty is ratified by some member states, making changes becomes harder, since these in turn have to be ratified too – leading to the ‘solution’ found by the June EU Council Summit of tacking protocols (additions to a previous treaty which are not binding for all signatories) on to a future treaty, to provide guarantees for Ireland in terms of concerns regarding ethical issues, neutrality, and EU taxation competence.

No wonder the entire process has been called a “ludicrous charade” by former Green MEP Patricia McKenna – not far from the truth, if we look around Europe at the ‘avoidance tactics’ used by Polish President Lech Kaczynski’s, not to mention Vaclav Klaus, the Czech President. In Poland, the Lisbon Treaty has been ratified by the Parliament and only ever required the President’s signature in the first place, but Kaczynski is nonetheless refusing to sign it with the excuse that Poland is not “key” to the Treaty – though of course he will, once Ireland, and Germany have signed it … won’t he? Meanwhile, Klaus claims he has not yet made up his mind – something which he will do – after the ratification of decisions in Germany, Poland and Ireland, as well as further constitutional probes into the Treaty (he is apparently unsatisfied with the first probe, carried out early this year alongside the vote in the Czech Parliament which ended in ratification). Rather than charade, this is an exercise in verbose circumvention.

Of course, referenda are not always appropriate in a representative democracy. Voters are often uninformed about European issues, and one could argue that such a complicated decision should be left up to those chosen to govern on their behalf …  But can we really call it democratic for France and Holland who – unlike Ireland, were not constitutionally required to hold referenda – to deny their electorates a say after they both voted ‘No’ to the Lisbon Treaty’s arguably almost identical predecessor (the EU Constitution) in 2005?

The difference is that in the case of a treaty entailing a transfer of power, what is being changed is not what the government is doing or how, but who the government is. Such a change must have the consent of the people, otherwise the people are no longer sovereign.

So, if further European integration threatens both the sovereignty of the people and the sovereignty of the nation, why are certain governments so keen to ignore the will of the people? Perhaps Europe provides a chance for them to have more power on an international stage, with less responsibility – a chance to take the praise for the good and lay blame for the bad…?

Or perhaps there is another, more worrying reason (worrying because it is a vicious cycle, as the deeper in to the EU a states gets, the harder it is to get out). In July last year, 53% of Czechs were against ratification of the Lisbon Treaty. By January this year, there had been a total reversal: a STEM poll found that 64% of Czechs wanted their parliament to ratify the Lisbon treaty. According to the polling agency, the swing was caused by fears that the country would lose “prestige”. Nor is Ireland immune to a similar mentality; Irish voters have been encourage to vote in favour of the Lisbon Treaty in the upcoming second referendum for fear of falling foul of EU retribution at a time when Ireland faces a crippling recession.

This, unfortunately, is often a driving force in European politics. Governments are afraid to oppose the EU for fear of being opposed by the EU in future. Once again they seem faced with an all-or-nothing choice, and many politicians fear being left behind.