|
|
Blog Feeds
Public InquiryInterested in maladministration. Estd. 2005
Human Rights in IrelandPromoting Human Rights in Ireland
Lockdown Skeptics
Voltaire NetworkVoltaire, international edition
|
Ireland, a vital fact proven: the Lisbon Treaty is a constitution international |
eu |
opinion/analysis
 Tuesday April 15, 2008 10:34 by Howard Holby
 - Proof on objective basis - The purpose of this article (see below the video) is to provide further support to the statement upheld by politicians, academic and legal experts that the Lisbon Treaty is a constitution. Ireland, a vital fact proven: the Lisbon Treaty is a constitution *** Everyone - any individual or organisation - is encouraged to forward this document and the references to other individuals, campaigns and organisations, distribute, publish in whole or parts of the article, adapted or unchanged, with or without reference to or acknowledgement of its source. The Lisbon Treaty is a constitution laying down the foundations of a new political state under the name of “European Union”. This new political state founded by the Lisbon Treaty is a federal union, in which the member states would become non-sovereign political units. A nation’s constitution stipulates the rights and obligations pertaining to the status of being a citizen of the respective nation. When national sovereignty is surrendered to a higher authority than the one representing the nation, this implies the direct and indirect loss of rights and privileges attached to a particular citizenship of a formerly sovereign state. Therefore, in order to meet the minimal requirement of a lawful and democratic process of the establishment of a new federal union, i.e. in order to respect the rights of the citizens as per the current social contracts (national constitutions) between them and their nation, and whose voting rights and other citizen rights would be attached to and enforced by the new Union under the Lisbon Treaty, should be asked by a referendum on their approval of giving up their nation’s sovereignty. Fact 1: The definition of the word “constitution”: Set of doctrines and practices that form the fundamental organizing principle of a political state. It may be written (e.g., the Constitution of the U.S.) or partly written and uncodified (e.g., Britain's constitution). Its provisions usually specify how the government is to be organized, what rights it shall have, and what rights shall be retained by the people. A constitution is also referred to as a social contract between a state and its citizens. Fact 2: The definition of a political “state”: Political organization of society, or the body politic, or, more narrowly, the institutions of government. The state is distinguished from other social groups by its purpose (establishment of order and security), methods (its laws and their enforcement), territory (its area of jurisdiction), and sovereignty. In some countries (e.g., the U.S.), the term also refers to non-sovereign political units subject to the authority of the larger state, or federal union. Fact 3: The definition of a political “federal” and “union”: Federal: 1) of or relating to a compact or treaty, 2 a): formed by a compact between political units that surrender their individual sovereignty to a central authority but retain limited residuary powers of government b): of or constituting a form of government in which power is distributed between a central authority and a number of constituent territorial units c): of or relating to the central government of a federation as distinguished from the governments of the constituent units. Union: the formation of a single political unit from two or more separate and independent units; a political unit constituting an organic whole formed usu. from previously independent units, which have surrendered their principal powers to the government of the whole or to a newly created government (as the U.S. in 1789). Fact 4: The definition of “state's rights” within a federal union All government rights or powers held by the individual states of a federal union under the provisions of a federal constitution. In some federally organized countries, these powers are those that remain after the powers of the central government are enumerated in the constitution. In others, the powers of both levels of government are defined in their respective constitutions. The federal government can influence state policy even in areas that are constitutionally the purview of the states (e.g., education, local road construction) through withholding funds from states that fail to comply with its wishes. (All definitions are from the Encyclopædia Britannica.) After matching the Lisbon Treaty to the definitions above – one by one – the result is the following: Fact 1 : The Lisbon Treaty is a constitution, because it is a written set of doctrines and practices that form the fundamental organizing principle of a political state. The Lisbon Treaty is a constitution because its provisions specify how the EU-state as a federal government is to be organized, what rights it shall have, and what voting and other rights shall be retained by the people. The Lisbon Treaty lays down the provisions for the political organization of the society of the current member states, the body politic of, or, more narrowly, the institutions of a new government. The Lisbon Treaty is a social contract between the EU as state and its citizens, the citizens of the Union. Fact 2 : As per the constitution called Lisbon Treaty, the European Union is to become a state because it is distinguished from other social groups by its purpose: by its establishment of order and security; its methods, by its own laws and their enforcement; by its own territory or area of jurisdiction: the borders specified as per the schengen agreements, and its sovereignty. The European Union will be a sovereign state in terms of its physical borders, its sovereign foreign policy representation in international matters by the “high representative”, its own domestic market regulated by the Union, its own currency and central bank, its own monetary policy regulating the Union’s economy as a whole, its own citizens with obligations to the EU as a central authority, by its own representation of the Union citizens: the European Parliament, by its own security policy, its own defense strategies based on its own perception of “international threats and security”, etc. “This treaty gives the EU the constitutional form of a state. These are the ten most important things the Lisbon Treaty does: 1. It establishes a legally new European Union in the constitutional form of a supranational European State. 2. It empowers this new European Union to act as a State vis-a-vis other States and its own citizens. 3. It makes us all citizens of this new European Union. 4. To hide the enormity of the change, the same name – European Union – will be kept while the Lisbon Treaty changes fundamentally the legal and constitutional nature of the Union. 5. It creates a Union Parliament for the Union's new citizens. 6. It creates a Cabinet Government of the new Union. 7. It creates a new Union political President. 8. It creates a civil rights code for the new Union's citizens. 9. It makes national Parliaments subordinate to the new Union. 10. It gives the new Union self-empowerment powers. ("These Boots Are Gonna Walk All Over You" - An analysis by the Irish Professor, Anthony Coughlan”, source: http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/2773 ) Fact 3 : The Lisbon Treaty is a federal constitution establishing a new political organization in the form of a union and on the basis of an international agreement, incorporating 27 currently sovereign nations. As per the provisions of the federal constitution called Lisbon Treaty, the new state to be established is a federal union (=superstate) by a compact between political units that surrender their individual sovereignty to a central authority but retain limited residuary powers of government. The EU constitutes a form of government in which power is distributed between a central authority (the EU institutions) and a number of constituent territorial units (the member states). The central government of the federation is called “federal” as distinguished from the governments of the constituent units (“states”). Fact 4 : In accordance with the above, if the Lisbon Treaty would be ratified, the member states would lose their national sovereignty, and accordingly the citizens would lose their current citizen rights and would be subject to obligations to a new authority. In such context the term "state", whenever used for the EU member states, would refer to non-sovereign political units (e.g., similarly to the states of the U.S.) subject to the authority of the larger state, the federal European Union. The Lisbon Treaty, as a federal constitution, stipulates all government rights and powers held by the individual states of the European Union. Typically of the federally organized countries, these powers are those that remain after the powers of the central government are enumerated in the constitution. (In others, the powers of both levels of government are defined in their respective constitutions.) The federal government of the EU can influence state policy even in areas that are constitutionally the purview of the states (e.g., education, local road construction) through withholding funds from states that fail to comply with its wishes. Main reference: "Lisbon Treaty explained by political science: an equivalent of coup d’état" - Call to the nations to restore democracy and constitutional status in Europe - Call to Ireland to Vote NO to Lisbon Treaty http://www.indymedia.ie/article/86544#comment225605 (also see references after the referred document) |
printable version
Digg this
del.icio.us
Furl
Reddit
Technorati
Facebook
Gab
Twitter
|
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (12 of 12)
Jump To Comment: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12to be in agreement with someone from UKIP... but he's 100% right on this point.
Except he's not right, anymore than the other old tosh that UKIP speaks.
Whether the Lisbon Treaty is a constitution in and of itself or a treaty with constitutional implications (or whether the distinction matters at all) is a matter that no-one'll ever agree upon. What is an established fact is that whatever the constitutional status of the Lisbon Treaty, each member state has the absolute right to determine for itself how that treaty will be ratified.
No UKIP xenophobe, or anyone else for that matter, can impose a common procedure for how each member state ratifies the Lisbon Treaty. For people who whinge so much about directives from Brussels, I'm surprised that they want their own little Brussels diktat.
The only vote possible is a YES vote !
A europe united pulling in the same direction, which will eventually (I hope) lead to a world government.
Voting YES is the only way towards unity and positivity.
The Daily Telegraph has spilled the beans on a "secret plan" to keep Irish voters "sweet" on the Lisobon Treaty vote -
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/20...0.xml
world government? what are you like? can we go pick flowers in the raindrop forest at the same time?
The lisbon treaty could be great if it gave equal rights to everyone which it doesn't. I thought we've had learned from the disgrace of the Nice treaty that a "vote" that gives away freedoms you've earned, I say earned as in people died for, is not worth voting for.
I hate these people crossing there fingers and hoping it will all be ok in the end coz we'll all just get along. The EU cares about numbers of people not the people, because we have less people than say Germany for example, should not mean that we should have less than a fair say. Every country should be represented equaly whether there are ten people or ten million in the country. As history has shown, people in different countries think different things.
Don't get me wrong i'd love to see a day when every man and woman could stand together as one. United, fighting for each other not against each other, striving to better themselves not others. But that day will not be achived, even though i'd give my dying breath for it, until we realise that a man in the fields should have as much say as the doctor in the hospital we waste or time dreaming.
Everyone: Many thanks for your comments.
My replies to all the points you have mentioned are also included in the new article on the Lisbon Treaty research:
Voting No for a reason: Lisbon Treaty OR a Europe of democracy
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/87345
Dear friends,
As we all know, the Irish People shall be the only one that will be consulted by a binding referendum about the coming into force of the Reform Treaty on the European Union.
Those people that had their say on the former Constitutional Treaty, have been robbed of their right to do so on this occasion by ruthless political and economical elites that follow their own agendas independently of their peoples will, silencing it actively if necessary.
Those same political and economical elites from across Europe will be ruthlessly campaigning for a YES vote among the Irish voters in the forthcoming referendum, spending enormous amounts of money to move their representants to Ireland to campaign actively and coping almost all the available advertising space.
Though it is without any doubt your referendum, it will also be the only referendum held on the Reform Treaty in the whole of Europe, and we, the European peoples that have been robbed of our sovereign right to decide for ourselves if we want such a treaty or not, feel that the Irish people are PEOPLE, just as we are, and that they should think about what the possible victory of a YES vote would mean not only for the Irish, but also for the rest of us peoples.
Already the sovereign decision of the french and dutch people in 2005 is being ignored and an almost identical text is being proposed to the Irish.
A text that can deny us our sovereign rights in europe, as anyone can see is being done, if voted YES, will have superior powers than the Irish Fundamental Law that still grants you this right as the only people left in Europe. You would be voting away your right to the next referendum!!!
While we can't have our say about it in our own countries anymore, we can still do all what is within our hands as peoples and citizens of Europe to help the Irish cope with the bureaucratic assault on their right to decide by themselves, and help counter the institutional campaigns of those treacherous politicians that sold us out.
All over Europe resistance is rising, but we fear it might be futile if it doesn't focus its efforts towards what is still a crucial battle that can be won, give it some hope that there is still something positive they can do, help the Irish people win their referendum against all odds and repeat what the french and dutch did in 2005.
Manifestations are being organised across Europe, and a grassroots initiative led by Étienne Chouard, plain citizen but well-known for his influence in the french referendum, is recently starting to organize small locally-focussed manifestations in every town on wednesdays at 18h. The idea is to have them very close to the people that are to participate, and repetitive...
I thought that perhaps they could be given a more positive meaning than just protesting against what they can not easily change anymore if their efforts could have some influence on the outcome of a battle that has not yet been lost... the Irish Referendum.
At this moment they are distributing leaflets and identifying themselves through the use of white balloons, and they have also "borrowed" the star-eating citizen of the European Citizen's Initiative as their logo, and I thought that perhaps they could be convinced at this early stage of their movement to redesign their leaflets so that a part of them can be torn off and used as an conventional postcard to be sent to some unknown citizen of Ireland, "Mr. Voter". As the message they want to transmit to their local population is similar as what they might want to say to their irish comrades that have yet to vote, either in english or through appropriate graphical and wordless representations... their leaflets could serve both purposes if they allow likeminded recipients of those leaflets to join in the campaign with their small personal effort by affixing the appropiate post stamp to the postcard and send it off to some unknown Irish citizen. Adresses could be gathered from street maps on the internet, tourist brochures, etc., or if possible provided by interested parties as Sinn Fein on a more rational and strategy-oriented basis.
Just imagine the possible impact... against the mass-media campaign and money-based effort of the professional politicians massively asking for a YES vote, suddenly and almost out of nowhere an unstoppable flood of postcards coming from simple individuals and citizens from across the whole of Europe, adressed to simple and ordinary citizens of Ireland, asks them to consider the way they were sideranged and ignored since the french and dutch referenda of 2005, and how the Irish could be sideranged and ignored after 2008 if they vote into force a treaty that assumes a higher priority than the Irish Constitution and thus ignore the only law that grants them today the right to be the only people in Europe still to be consulted by referendum.
If only a few percent of the 450 million europeans that feel themselves stabbed in the back by their governments can spare the cost of a post stamp to send a postcard to an Irish citizen... our campaign might even reach first page mass-media coverage simply by collapsing the Irish postal office facilities under the avalanche.
These postcards could not only be distributed at the different manifestations throughout Europe, but their design and instructions could be made available for download and selfprinting from any web simpathising with the NO movement.
Only 50 days to go untill the occasion is lost and the less time we waste the more momentum the campagne could build up before the referendum is there.
Nothing is lost as long as we have brains and do not run out of ideas.
Another good idea might be to take some chosen extracts from the film that won the Cannes Film Festival in 2006, Ken Loach's "The wind that shakes the barley", adapt the dialogues to the possibility of loosing the fought-for Constitution or whatever message seems appropiate to stress in the wake of the referendum, and spread them like wildfire through You-Tube, DailyMotion and similar services.
Good chance.
Sincerely,
A pissed off European Citizen with some brains left.
A tip for campagainers based in Limerick city or Cork city or
Dublin city.
If you have any connection with rural Ireland if you grew up there if
your granny lives there who you always spent holidays with
where you lived for a period or where someone close to you presently
reside.
Get a copy of the local provincial paper. Compose a letter to the editor
usually just say two main points in a limited number of sentences
on how you can assertain that voting No is good for the Irish people
or that voting Yes is bad for us.
Check with your contact be it granny in Skibbereen or the person who
now lives where you used to live or where you would like to live in the
future. Having got permission give the rural address in your letter
along with your own name and telephone number.
The papers will almost certainly publish your letter and they have
a massive circulation accross the country.
I certainly endorse cropeye's suggestion that people with rural roots write short letters to the local papers. This referendum is going to be won or lost at the doorstep. The doorsteps are scattered all around the counties outside Dublin, Cork, Limerick and Waterford. This means the No campaigners have got to get into convoys of cars and start doostepping in the small villages and larger towns. FF, FG and Labour are doing this kind of thing methodically in favour of a Yes vote. The opposition have to get equally methodical if they want to sway the undecided voters.
The original article is bolloxology. The EU is already a supranational entity and arguably is a federal state of sorts. Lisbon doesn't change the essential nature of this. The existing treaties, which called this supranational entity into being are a quasi-constitution anyway. There is no need to prove that Lisbon is a constitution - I don't see anybody seriously claiming it is not.
And as for: "Because the Lisbon Treaty a constitution, it is crucial to understand that no constitution ever permits the act of overthrowing it, i.e never allows the act of replacing it with another one without the permission of a country's citizens." This is just not true. Many countries permit changes or amendments to their constitution without a referendum eg from 1923-1937 the Irish Free State Constitution was changed umpteen times by a simple Act of the Oireachtas. Most countries allow constitutions to be changed by parliamentary means, usually specifying some enlarged majorities as the necessary criteria.
The Lisbon treaty specifically provides that it can be further amended by unanimous agreement of all member states, in accordance with the constitutional provisions applicable in that State. In Ireland, that means a referendum. Other countries have their own legal provisions for ratifying such treaties.
Say NO.The mothers of abducted children who were taken to the Netherlands would lose their rights if this one is ratified.
It would mean that the Dutch will be able to place the hefty costs of maintanance for 24/7 care of 250 euros on Irish women.
That is usually more than the women make and on top of that the child benefit is taken off them. If they cannot pay then the Dutch would be able to extradite them to Holland where they face jail untill the child is 18.
The Netherlands refuse to give back abducted children. child protection is a private business in the Netherlands and they can abduct kids themselves and are heavily protected by the state. See the story by F.E.M.
in reply to "Law student"
I do understand that you, as a law student, emphasise the legal aspect of the Lisbon process, however the legal context by itself creates a circular reasoning without any valid premise to rely on. The objective meaning of “constitutional” is not satisfied by the written or unwritten legal provisions allowing ratifying certain treaties. Any political lead may reengineer the constitutional law itself to serve the rulers’ totalitarian purposes. In order to decide if the act of arbitrary overthrowing a constitution took place in a state, the condition of the democratic constitutional requirements of the law should first be investigated.
For more details see the studies on the Lisbon Treaty Blog:
“Summary of the Lisbon Treaty research”
http://howardh.wordpress.com/category/lisbon-treaty-res...arch/
The original article that you labelled as “bolloxology” emphasises and proves that under the Lisbon Treaty the EU attempts to legalise the status quo of the EU as a federal state, which however coincides with your statement: “the EU is already a supranational entity and arguably is a federal state of sorts”.
Your following statement that “Lisbon doesn’t change the essential nature of this”, is however utterly false, because the Lisbon Treaty is a new constitution, which, being a constitution, for the first time would create a new legal entity and a separate political unit of the federal EU with new legal obligations imposed on the citizens of this new federal state. If you wish to debate this fact, you will need to present an original scholarly study to refute the current stance of the scholarly community and to refute fundamental objective concepts of political philosophy, such as “constitution”, “state”, etc.
The reason why I found it crucial to provide a conceptually substantiated proof for the statements of the article, because many of the EU officials are trying to refute the EU’s federalisation under Lisbon, and they deny that the nation states surrender their sovereignty to Brussels by ratifying the Lisbon Treaty. For example, during her recent visit in Ireland, Commissioner M. Wallström included the following statement in her speech addressed to the National Forum on Europe: " No-one nowadays, apart from a small minority of federalists, dreams of a “United States of Europe” – and the Lisbon Treaty certainly does not introduce one.
In contrast with Mrs. Wallström's statement, the Lisbon Treaty is a new constitution of a federal state, equivalent with a “United States of Europe”, and if the ratification of this new constitution would be completed in all EU-states, this would end the independent country status of Ireland .
These two points furthermore imply that Ireland, under Lisbon, would become a dependent state ruled by an international political oligarchy, whose members have revealed their ruthless totalitarian ambitions by actively participating in this giant deceit. Deceit, as a variation of fraud, is however a method of dictatorial forces rather than of democracies.
It is a well-known fact that upon being asked to describe the European Union, Barroso has used the term “empire”, and the methods of the EU’s imperial lead indeed satisfy all criteria of imperial ambitions. Similarly to the political oligarchy of Europe, the rulers of all dictatorial empires ignore and suppress any resistance of the inhabitants against the rulers’ colonising ambitions. In this case the imperial oligarchy circumvents the inhabitants’ permission by using the ancient dictatorial method of deceit. Deceit, misinformation, withholding information and mass media control are also the main weapons in the modern forms of colonisation - in our era, when the ultimate source of all power is the power of knowledge and information.
Following the blueprint of dictatorships, the current political lead is in the process of eliminating the democratic right to free political opinion, under the pressure of Lisbon. Instead, intimidation and blind obedience - clearly characteristics of a dictatorial lead - are prevailing. "Taoiseach Brian Cowen yesterday threatened to expel any Fianna Fail TD who breaks ranks over the Lisbon Treaty" ("Cowen to kick out FF treaty 'rebels'" http://www.independent.ie/national-news/cowen-to-kick-o....html)
If Europe would become one federal legal-political unit under the current European ruling class with utter ambitions to build a modern empire with a political philosophy in which deceit of the voters is a self-evident element, the future of all EU countries would be fatally endangered.
NOTE: The periodical elected status of the political lead will NOT make any difference in this regard, simply because, 1) the voters cannot recall their MEP's and, more importantly, 2) as the example of Cowen's currently threatening the government member demonstrates, under the Lisbon process the genuinely democratic political diversity and pluralism is being abolished.
Experience shows that the large majority of the elected politicians (and organisation-leaders) in all countries of the EU have been and are being forced to perform a U-turn under the EU's pressure. By abolishing their own electorate base and without the independent courts performing effective constitutional checks on the national parliament decisions, the political and legal leadership of Europe simply ignores and overrides the very principles of parliamentary democracy. Under the continuing pressure of the EU, the national political leaders - degraded to regional governors- would simply continue what they are practicing today, and accordingly would contradict their own original political agenda, (on the basis of which they would be elected), just to serve the federalist interests of the Union.
The further sore effects of the loss of political freedom and the harsh consequences of the transfer of all economical powers into the hands of a Machiavellian leadership in Brussels will only be experienced later, after the Lisbon Treaty would be ratified in all member states and would come into effect in 2009.
In the final analysis the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty would cause much more than an essential change in the current political, social and economical state of matters of Europe.
The ratification of the Lisbon Treaty would trigger a unique negative revolutionary turn in world history.