The Lisbon Treaty Lives

The Lisbon Treaty Lives

It turns out that all is not lost for the Lisbon Treaty (aka the EU Reform Treaty).  It had all the markings of an unperfected treaty after Ireland gave it a “no” vote this past summer via a referendum. (Interestingly, Ireland was the only state to hold one, since negotiators had designed the Reform Treaty to avoid such reviews given what they did to the EU Constitution.)  Brussels, however, was undeterred by Irish resistance, despite the fact that all 27 EU Member States must approve the Lisbon Treaty for it to enter into force.  It pressed on and has had success in getting other EU Member States to move forward with their own ratifications.  Sweden said yes last month, leaving the Czech Republic, Poland, and Ireland as the only states yet to ratify.  A few weeks ago, the Lisbon Treaty survived the scrutiny of the Czech Constitutional Court, clearing the way for an upper house vote there.  In Poland all steps are complete but for the President’s signature on the instrument of ratification, which supposedly will come when/if the Irish problem is resolved.  But the most promising sign of the Lisbon Treaty’s revival came with last week’s news that Ireland will hold a second referendum on that treaty in 2009: 

Ireland is to be offered concessions on the EU reform treaty in the hope its voters will reverse their “No” verdict in a second referendum, diplomats said on Thursday. Exact details of the deal still had to be thrashed out by EU leaders at a summit in Brussels. But envoys from Ireland’s EU partners said they had reached agreement in principle giving Dublin assurances on the issues which prompted Irish voters to reject the treaty in June. . . . Ireland’s constitution requires approval in a referendum for ratification of the treaty. A draft document obtained earlier by Reuters suggested Ireland could hold a second referendum by the end of October 2009 if Dublin’s concerns could be addressed, notably on the retention of a permanent Irish seat in the European Commission. Other concerns which led to the Irish “No” vote are also addressed in provisional accord. They include respecting Ireland’s military neutrality and additional assurances on taxation policy and workers’ rights. “(Irish Prime Minister Brian) Cowen said he is ready to hold another referendum next year. He said there need to be 27 commissioners,” another diplomat said. The treaty would have reduced the number to 18.

The draft document presented to EU leaders said: “In the light of the above commitments by the European Council, and conditional on the satisfactory completion of the detailed follow-on work by mid-2009 and on presumption of their satisfactory implementation, the Irish Government is committed to seeking ratification of the Lisbon Treaty by the end of the term of the current Commission.
Putting aside the obvious political wrangling that still needs to occur, I’m interested to see how the legal mechanics of this solution actually work out.  I assume the goal is for Ireland to have a second referendum on the same treaty, since any changes would presumably require other states to revisit their own ratifications, triggering a whole new round of approvals.  On the other hand, the “big” concession of giving every member state a permanent seat on the Commission seems to fly in the face of one of the Lisbon Treaty’s central goals of streamlining the EU governance process.  Still, I think there’s wiggle room to keep the current treaty and give Ireland what it wants.  Article 9D appears to provide the relevant membership rules for the new European Commission:
4. The Commission appointed between the date of entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon and 31 October 2014 shall consist of one national of each Member State, including its President and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy who shall be one of its Vice-Presidents.
5.  As from 1 November 2014, the Commission shall consist of a number of members including its President and the High Representatives of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, corresponding to two thirds of the number of Member States, unless the European Council, acting unanimously, decides to alter this number. (emphasis added).
So the new 18 Member European Commission could be expanded by a unanimous vote of the European Council, and I presume, that’s the fix everyone has in mind for Ireland.  It’ll be interesting, however, to see what form this fix takes.  Will the EU Council itself issue some sort of unilateral declaration on Commission membership?  Will it be a political commitment by other EU Member States to Ireland to vote a certain way on the Council once Article 9D and the rest of the Reform Treaty enters into force?  Or, will the EU Member States actually produce a legally binding instrument to record their agreement on the concessions required by Ireland (i.e., another treaty)?  And, if it’s another treaty, do the Irish get to vote on it too?  There’s already references to a separate “provisional accord” in the press, but I’m not clear on what that will be exactly.  In any event, it looks like the Lisbon Treaty might be the biggest new treaty of 2009 if all goes according to plan. (Of course, in Europe, nothing ever goes according to plan, so who knows what 2009 will bring for EU Reform.)    
Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Topics
Europe, Featured, Organizations
Notify of
Benjamin Davis
Benjamin Davis

The European construction is a complex process creating something that has been coming into being for 50 years.  It is extraordinary to watch.  Having worked with the first legal counsel of the EEC for many years – Michel Gaudet – who passed in 2001, I have a certain warm feeling for how it evolves.
Best,
Ben

Jan Kratochvil
Jan Kratochvil

“I assume the goal is for Ireland to have a second referendum on the same treaty, since any changes would presumably require other states to revisit their own ratifications, triggering a whole new round of approvals.”

I think it all depends on what changes will be made. A similar situation actually happened before with Denmark holding two referendums on the Maastricht treaty. The amendments (concessions) to Denmark were made by the so called Edinburgh Agreement (http://www.euo.dk/emner_en/forbehold/edinburgh/). Yet, it was not required for the other countries to ratify the Maastricht treaty again. For them it is valid in its entirety.

So I think if the concessions will concern only Ireland there is no need for a new ratification by other states. Yet of course as you point out the number of Commissioners will be a tricky one.

FdL

Of course, Ireland also voted twice on the Nice Treaty so this is not completely unprecedented. Also, the commissioners will be taken care of in the next treaty, we’re told–probably in 2010 or thereabouts.

M. Gross
M. Gross

I can see European democracy is big on the whole “we’ll make you vote until you give us the answer we want” thing.

FdL

Actually it’s not European democracy, to be fair, it’s Irish democracy. We’ve always been very good at rerunning referenda (abortion, divorce, Nice, and now Lisbon).

M. Gross
M. Gross

Given how many other countries have actually let their citizens vote on the Lisbon Treaty, I would hold that Irish democracy is about as much European democracy as you’re going to see.

Apologies if I seem overly snide on this subject, but the whole thing’s been a debacle from start to finish. At least Ireland put it to the vote, Britain has been waffling over it for ages.

M. Gross
M. Gross

Response…