European Union: Treaty of Lisbon - Essay Example

European Union- Treaty of Lisbon Introduction Economic integration has been responsible for the growth and development of the economies of many nations globally. Economic integration enables countries to pull their resources together in the process of helping other to tackle various problems and challenges in their economies. The creation of trading blocs or unions is often a political and legal process that takes into consideration various issues in the two fields for effective functioning. One of the unions that has been successful in the achievement of set goals and objectives according to its founding treaties is the European union. The EU is simply a politico-economic union that comprises of 28 countries, primarily found in the continent of Europe. In its functioning, the union operates via systems that comprise of various supranatural and independent institutions as well as intergovernmental decisions that are negotiated by the member countries. Some of the institutions that facilitate the functioning of the European Union include the union’s parliament, EU council, the Union’s court of justice as well as the union’s central bank among others. It is important to note that the origin of the European can be traced back to the EEC (European Economic Community) and the ECSC (European Coal and Steel Community). These two unions were composed of six countries that were its founding members, between 1951 and 19581. The years that followed saw the union grow and increase in membership; this was also facilitated by the inclusion of several other treaties and policies. The members of the union as at 1993, created the current name of the EU after agreeing to the Maastricht treaty; this treaty was essential in establishment of the concept of European Citizenship2. The union stayed and functioned under the provisions of the Maastricht Treaty until in 2009, when the members states made some major amendments in the legal framework of the treaty. The treaty of Lisbon was signed in order to make amendments to the EU on basis of its constitution. The treaty of Lisbon This treaty is also referred to as the treaty of reform, according to the amendments and reforms in brought to the laws that created the European Union3. The treaty can simply be described as the international agreement that played a key role in the amendment of initial treaties that created the EU, forming the basis of its constitution. It is important to note that the Treaty of Lisbon came into effect after the member states signed into it in 2007, but was officially put into active use in 2009. The Lisbon treaty is said to play a significant role in amending the previous treaties signed in the creation of the union. These treaties include the treaty of Maastricht that was also referred to as the EU treaty. Additionally, it also brought many reforms to the Treaty of Rome, which was ratified in 1958 and was referred to as TEEC (Treaty establishing the European Union). It is in Lisbon that the Treaty of Rome received a different name where it was referred to as TFEU (meaning, Treaty of the Functioning of the European Union). Some of the profound changes that were brought by this treaty included the change from unanimity to the competent majority voting that was to happen in no less than 45 of the policy areas as outlined in the Union’s minister’ council. Additionally, the reforms were also witnessed in the manner in which calculations were made for the particular majorities, bringing into effect the double majority, something that added strength to parliament of the union4. These changes were helpful in creation of the bicameral legislature, which functions alongside the Union’s Minister’s council and function under the procedures outlined in the ordinary legislative process. This is the legal personality that is specially consolidated for the functioning of the EU. Under the treaty of Lisbon, the European Union ushered in a new president that is to serve on quite long term, in the union’s council5. Additionally, the Union is now to have the High Representative that is in charge of the security policy and the foreign affairs. It is also important to realize that the treaty was instrumental in establishing the bill of rights, something that was originally inexistent. It also gave room for development and provision of the fundamental right charter, which is legally binding and applying in the member states. For the first time since creation of the European Union, the treaty gave member states the freedom to exit the union if they had reasonable grounds to do so. In leaving the union, the treaty has a clearly outline procedure to be followed by countries whenever they wish to exit from the union. Main objective of the union The creation of the Treaty of Lisbon was influenced by the need to create important reforms to the functioning of the Union so that member states could enjoy certain rights and responsibilities. One of the major aims stated in the creation of this treaty included completion of the process initially began in 1997 as outlined in the Treaty of Amsterdam as well as the treaty of Nice that was ratified in 2001. The reforms in this treaty were carried out in order to enhance the democratic legitimacy and the Union’s efficiency. Additionally, it was to bring an improvement to the coherence of actions and practices carried out by the Union. In as much as the treaty has brought about various reforms that continue to be celebrated in the member states, it received some descending views from some people that thought that it would bring about some obstacles in the effective functioning of the democratic process of the Union. For instance, one of the members to the parliament of the Union, Peter Bonde asserted that the ratification of the treaty would lead to the centralization of European Union, something that would pose major obstacles to its effective functioning. He noted the treaty would result in a weakened democratic process by shifting power from the national electorates, as it originally was. The proponents of this treaty were vocal in the push for its adoption, in their view, the treaty was essential in strengthening the democratic process in the union as well as functioning in the interest of member states. They argued that according to the way it was crafted, the treaty would bring about many checks as well as balances that were essential in the systems of the European Union. This was to be achieved by having a parliament that was string enough in articulation of issues brought about member states. Additionally, the new roles of the parliament would change, getting a wider perspective in terms of its operations6. The negotiations that were needed in the modification of institutions initially designed to aid the functioning of the union started in 2001. This led to the creation of the treaty that established the constitution for the European Union. This constitution is said to have had the ability to repeal the other treaties, replacing them with “constitution.” However, for this “constitution” to have been effective, it was to be approved by most of the member states. This development was not popular and was thought to have many challenges in its effective functioning. Following its lack of popularity, it was discarded after facing serious rejection by the French votes that reached up to 54.67% in 2005. Additionally, it got majority of the Dutch votes that reached up to 61.64% in the same year. What followed was a lot of reflection the way forward for the “constitution,” something that led to preference of maintenance of the treaties that were in existence. It was agreed that the treaties would be maintained, but would receive amendments to enhance their effectiveness and efficiency. The amendments to be made in these treaties were those that had been previously advocated in the “constitution,” which was discarded on popular vote and unanimous agreement by member states. In 1997, member states crafted the “reform” treaty, which was developed and signed by the member states in Lisbon in 2007. Initially, the treaty was to be approved ad signed by all the European Union members in 20087. The failure of this original idea was prompted by the failure in the timetable primarily because of the preliminary rejection of the particular treaty by the electorate in Ireland, this was in 2008. Later on, this decision was changed during the second referendum that was held in 2009. This came after Ireland managed to secure several concession that were related to the Lisbon Treaty. The extent to which the Treaty of Lisbon moved the EU nearer to the Federal Set up The Treaty of Lisbon can said to have received an important and major breakthrough for the democracy of the EU. It is actually an essential and intermediate approach in the process of shifting from the original economic community to the political union. In addition, the treaty has managed to shifty that face of the European Union from being a Union comprising of citizens to that made up of citizens. In the new phase of the Union, the council president was also sneaked in, moving from the initial approach where the position did not exist. However, this is not to be confused with the particular president leading the European Union; this follows the fact the powers of the new president would be highly reduced and the fact that most EU government are of the opinion that single president should exist. In this understanding, it is obvious that it would be hard for the EU to evolve into the presidential system, in its place; the Lisbon treaty provides a definition for the leadership and management of the Union in accordance to the presidential system8. It is important to note that the approval of the treaty it opened a new chapter in the face of the EU parliament. In this new face, the parliament is to have an equal footing alongside an active and effective council comprising of ministers9. It is estimated that approximately 95% of the European legislations as well as the major decisions in the Ministers’ Council and the European Union parliament will be in active use and rule10. In its new face, it is to have a clearly outlined budgetary procedure as well as equal rights. By the new powers it has been given, the EU would be effective in its examination of budgets spent by the member of the EU, which has to be done in accordance to the best and preference interest of the member states. The person who is to serve as the president to the council will have to be elected by the UE parliament; this is different from the previously thought process that would have included the specific heads for states for the member countries. This gives an important strategy in the transformation of the face of the European Union. It is expected that as time progresses, political parties in the European union will begin to make campaigns for the most preferred and top candidates that will then battle out to get the position of the president to oversee the European Union Commission11. Through participation in these elections, the citizens of the European Union will be better placed to have direct influences on the overall political agenda in the entire European Union. It is important to note that in becoming a federal set up, the EU has undertaken a major step in introducing voting systems that comprise of qualified majorities. This is a general rule regarding the process of decision making in the ministers; council. This is in contrast to most policy areas where particular members states no longer enjoy the chances to do away with various initiatives brought up by the EU commission and the EU parliament. It is important to point out the process of policy making in the EU is going to be very fast, considering the fact that finding a common denominator in the member countries is no longer a priority. This process is bound to be highly ambitious; this will see a huge improvement in the process of problem solving as well as policy delivery. In this understanding, the EU is now in a good position to receive increased legitimacy in the face of its citizens. Bibliography Albi, Anneli. EU enlargement and the constitutions of Central and Eastern Europe. Republished in 2008, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. 2005. Andreatta, Fillipo. Theory and the European Union’s International Relations’. International Relations and the European Union. Oxford University Press; Oxford. 2005. Benedetto, Giacomo and Simon, Hix. “Explaining the European Parliament’s gains in the EU Constitution”. Review of International Organisations. (2007). PL 116. Blavoukos, Spyros., Boruantonis, Dimitris., and Pagoulatos, George. (2007). A President for the European Union: A New Actor in Town? Journal Common Market Studies. (2007). PL 46. Börzel, Tanya and Modeleine Hosli (2003) “Brussels between Bern and Berlin: Comparative federalism meets the European Union”. Governance. (2003). PL 183. Curtin, Deirdre. Executive Power of the European Union Law, Practices and the Living Constitution. Oxford University Press; Oxford. 2009. Dawson, Mark. (2009). “Soft Law and the Rule of Law in the European Union: Revision or Redundancy?” EUI Working Papers, RSCAS 2009/24. Schout, Adriaan and Jordan, Andrew. (2005) ‘Co-ordinating European governance: self-organising or centrally steered?’ Public Administration. (2005). PL 215. Snell, Jukka. "European constitutional settlement", an ever closer union, and the Treaty of Lisbon: democracy or relevance? European Law Review. (2008). PL. 625. Thurner, Paul and Martin, Binder. “European Union transgovernmental networks: The emergence of a new political space beyond the nation-state?” European Journal of Political Research. (2009). PL 86. Wolf Sarah and Schout Adriaan. Accountability and Personalization of the European Council Presidency. Journal 0f European Integration, (2009). PL 687. Read More