The Never-Ending Saga of the Lisbon Treaty’s Ratification

Civitas, 19 August 2009

Yesterday, the latest development – or should I say hitch –  on the rocky road to the Lisbon Treaty’s ratification occurred in Germany, one of four EU member states that have yet to ratify the treaty, writes Ariane Poulain. The Treaty aims to ‘streamline’ the EU by changing its decision-making processes, eradicating EU symbolisms, and creating new posts such as a High Representative of Foreign Affairs and a new president of the European Council. The Lisbon Treaty is the result of nearly a decade of difficult negotiations and it continues to be a logistical nightmare.

So, what has happened now in the Lisbon Saga?

Well, the Lisbon Treaty was signed by the Bundestag (German parliament) and Bundesrat (German council) in Spring 2008. However, formal ratification also required the signature of Germany’ president, Horst Kohler, and he refused to sign it until the Constitutional Court (Germany’s highest court) decided whether or not the Lisbon Treaty was in accordance with the country’s constitution (Basic Law).

Peter Gauweiler, a member of Bavaria’s Christian Social Union (CSU) brought this case forward arguing that the Lisbon Treaty posed a direct challenge to national sovereignty. Gauweiler’s case was that the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty could effectively render the Bundestag powerless in EU decision-making at the domestic level, which would go against the country’s constitution.  Despite this defending Kohler’s decision to withhold his signature (which is often just a formality in the German legislative process) Germany’s Constitutional Court ruled that the Lisbon Treaty was compatible with the country’s Basic Law on June 30th 2009.
However, the Court did delay ratification of the Lisbon Treaty until legislators enacted reform to ensure that the German parliament has a sufficient role in EU-level decision-making. This decision will cause further delay to Germany’s ratification of the Lisbon Treaty; then again, I doubt setbacks to the Lisbon Treaty come as much of a surprise nowadays.
The CSU used this opportunity at yesterday’s negotiations to put forward fourteen guidelines intended to strengthen the German Parliament’s decisions. However, the outcome was not as fruitful as the CSU had hoped; OpenEurope described the CSU’s agreement yesterday as being far ‘softer’ than planned because, although the German government must now listen to the voices of the Bundestag and Bundesrat on EU legislation matters, their opinions are not binding. Nonetheless, if the German government does not act in accordance to the parliament on EU legislation, it will now be required to provide sufficient justification, as well as informing them about any EU developments on trade policy.

Despite the compromises made in Germany yesterday, the suspension on Germany’s ratification of the Lisbon Treaty will not be lifted until the Court evaluates whether the changes agreed upon are sufficient enough to comply with their demands. Thomas Oppermann, a Social Democrat whip, said yesterday that ‘the federal government remains unrestricted at the European level. At the same time [parliament] has strengthened its participation rights’ which on one hand appears to fulfil the Court’s demand that the parliament is not disregarded on EU lawmaking but on the other hand appears to suggest that the federal government retain the same regional power as before.

Of course, the Irish referendum on 2nd October is currently the main forthcoming event in the Lisbon ratification calendar because it is seen as the ‘last major hurdle delaying its entry into force’. A ‘yes’ vote would not only lead to ratification in Ireland but also in Poland and the Czech Republic who are currently refusing to sign the treaty until Ireland have made a decision. As the Czech Republic’s President, Vaclav Klaus, said ‘without Ireland, the treaty was not viable and that he had no reason to put his own signature to it until it had a realistic chance of being adopted ’.
Considering Klaus’ staunchly Eurosceptic stance, Ireland has provided an ideal opportunity to further stall the Lisbon Treaty. However, hardline Eurosceptic or not, Klaus has a point and with Germany now waiting for yesterday’s agreement to be approved, the adoption of the Lisbon Treaty remains ever illusive. As Lisbeth Kirk on EUobserver.com stated, ‘the big question remains whether the judges will be satisfied by the deal agreed among the politicians’ because if not, then a new agreement will have to be sought amongst Germany’s ruling parties and courts.

Dare I mention that if Germany or (and!) Ireland fail to jump their Lisbon Treaty hurdles over the next couple of months, Lisbon Treaty hopefuls could face a new problem. If the UK Conservatives win the up-coming British general election, they have promised to halt on the Lisbon Treaty by holding a referendum in Britain. With Gifford arguing that Euroscepticism is a facet of Britain’s collective identity, the Lisbon Saga might be far from over.  Lucky for the Czech Republic’s president, he will not have to wait very long to for a new excuse to withold his signature.