15 Nov Lisbon Treaty Legal Personality
Article 47 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) explicitly recognises the legal personality of the European Union, making it a separate entity. Among the main changes were the shift from unanimity to qualified majority voting in at least 45 policy areas in the Council of Ministers, a change in the calculation of this majority to a new double majority, a more powerful European Parliament forming a bicameral legislature alongside the Council of Ministers under the ordinary legislative procedure, a consolidated legal personality for the EU and the creation of a President of the European Council and a High Representative. the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. The Treaty also made the Charter of Rights of the Union, the Charter of Fundamental Rights, legally binding. For the first time, the Treaty gave member states the explicit right to leave the EU and established a procedure for doing so. In 2007, Germany took over the rotating presidency of the Council of the European Union and declared the end of the period of reflection. In March, on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the Treaty of Rome, the Berlin Declaration was adopted by all Member States. This declaration expressed the intention of all Member States to agree on a new treaty in time for the 2009 parliamentary elections, i.e. to have ratified a treaty by mid-2009. [13] The fifty-five articles of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union enshrine in Union law certain political, social and economic rights for both citizens and residents of the European Union. It was drawn up by the European Convention and solemnly proclaimed by the European Parliament, the Council of Ministers and the European Commission on 7 December 2000. However, its legal status at the time was uncertain and only took full effect with the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon on 1 December 2009[40].
As a Reform Treaty, the Treaty of Lisbon should not be understood as a stand-alone text. It consists of a number of amendments to the Treaty on European Union (“Maastricht Treaty”) and the Treaty establishing the European Community (“Treaty of Rome”), the latter being renamed the “Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union”. As amended by the Treaty of Lisbon, the Treaty on European Union contains a reference to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which makes this document legally binding. The Treaty on European Union, the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and the Charter of Fundamental Rights are therefore legally equivalent and together constitute the legal basis of the European Union. The stated objective of the Treaty was `to complete the process launched by the Treaty of Amsterdam [1997] and the Treaty of Nice [2001] in order to increase the effectiveness and democratic legitimacy of the Union and to improve the coherence of its action`. [4] Opponents of the Lisbon Treaty, such as former Danish MEP Jens-Peter Bonde, have argued that it would centralise the EU,[5] weaken democracy by “displacement” of national voters. [6] Proponents argue that it introduces more oversight mechanisms into the EU system, with increased powers for the European Parliament and a new role for national parliaments. The Charter of Fundamental Rights is not incorporated directly into the Treaty of Lisbon, but becomes legally binding by Article 6(1) TEU, which gives the Charter the same legal value as the Treaties (4.1.2).
50 For a good illustration of the scope of EU policy in this area and the problems arising from the lack of a legal basis, see COM(2000) 726 final, Commission Report on the implementation of measures to promote respect for human rights and democratic principles in external relations 1996-99. For a critical analysis of the situation before Lisbon, see I Govaere and A Van Bossuyt, “Trade with an increasingly human face? Human rights in the common commercial policy” and Hoffmeister, F, “Development cooperation and economic, technical and financial assistance policies and human rights” in Soriano, M Candela (ed), Human rights in European Union policies (Brussels, De Boeck/Larcier, 2006) 225–54 and 255–68Google Scholar respectively. Comment: This is not relevant. To the extent that the EU becomes a federal state, this is due to the powers conferred on the EU institutions and not because it acquires legal personality. However, one of the problems with the EU is that it is not federal enough, because if it were, it could be more democratic. The transfer of legal personality to the EU means that it is able to do so: the previous rules on decision-making in qualified assemblies, laid down in the Treaty of Nice and valid until 2014, required a majority of countries (50%/67%), weighting of votes (74%) and a population (62%). Between 2014 and 2017, there will be a transitional period during which the new rules on qualified majority voting will apply, but during which the old weightings of votes in the Treaty of Nice can be applied if a Member State formally requests it. In addition, a new version of the 1994 “Ioannina compromise” will allow small minorities of EU states to demand a review of EU decisions from 2014. [44] 79 Declaration No. 17 on primacy is expected to have only limited impact. It should be noted that this declaration merely recognises the primacy of the EU Treaty under the conditions laid down in the case-law, which does not extend to the CFSP. For a discussion of this statement, see Wouters, J, Coppens, D, De Meester, B, “The European Union`s External Relations after the Lisbon Treaty”, in Griler, S.
and Ziller, J (eds.), The Lisbon Treaty: EU Constitutionalism without a Constitutional Treaty? (Vienna/New York, Springer, 2008) pp. 143, 190–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar. 84 In Case C-91/05, ECOWAS, paragraph C-91/05 above. 57, the Court of Justice preferred the CFSP to the sole legal basis of the EC Treaty, development cooperation, to the CFSP, even though it was a measure relating to small arms and light weapons. For an analysis, see, for example, P. Van Elsuwege, “On the Boundaries between the European Union`s First Pillar and Second Pillar: A Comment on the Ecowas Judgment of the European Court of Justice” (2009), Columbia Journal of European Law 531. The Treaty introduces a withdrawal clause for members wishing to leave the Union. It formalises the procedure by stipulating that a Member State must inform the European Council before it can terminate its membership and that a withdrawal agreement is then negotiated between the Union and that State, the Treaties having ceased to apply to that State from the date of the agreement or, failing that, within two years of notification; unless both the State and the Council agree to extend that time limit. There have been several cases where a territory is no longer part of the Community, for example Greenland in 1985, although no Member State ever withdrew when ratifying the Treaty of Lisbon. Before the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, it was not clear whether a Member State had the legal right to leave the Union.
On 30 March 2017, the United Kingdom announced its intention to leave the European Union. [55]. Following negotiations on a Brexit withdrawal agreement, the United Kingdom left the Union on 31 January 2020. 87 Alan Rosas points out the following paradox: “The absence of real legal control may make these considerations somewhat academic; Nevertheless, it remains paradoxical that, in the less supranational field of the CFSP, EU agreements (which often concern military and civilian missions in third countries) are in practice concluded by the Union alone, whereas . many non-CFSP agreements are concluded jointly by the European Union and the Member States (mixed agreements)`, Rosas and Armati, paragraphs 28, 208 above. In the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, which was rejected, the Charter was included in the Treaty itself. However, in the Treaty of Lisbon, the Charter is incorporated by reference and acquires legal status without being part of the Treaties. The EU must act and legislate in accordance with the Charter, and EU courts will remove EU legislation that violates it. The Charter only applies to EU Member States when they are implementing EU law and does not extend the EU`s competences beyond its competences as defined in the Treaties.