L'intégration européenne menace-t-elle la souveraineté anglaise ou du moins sa position exceptionnelle ?

Thèmes abordés

anglais, english, Europe, intégration, européenne, souveraineté, exceptions, opt in/out Angleterre

Résumé du document

L'intégration europénne est, a contrario de la coopération européenne, un mécanisme qui opère un transfert de compétences des Etats membres vers l'Union Européenne, provoquant de vives et hostiles réactions nationalistes. Vu la position particulière de l'Angleterre dans l'organisation internationale, on peut se demander si ce processus n'est pas un danger pour la souveraineté ou du moins à l'encontre de sa position exceptionnelle.

Extraits

[...] UK manages to ensure its positions are respected by the others member states, but there is more and more constraints to play with, and the Court of Justice of the European Union oversees its behaviour. The complete obedience to the European Union law Carl Gardner, a barrister, explained that Parliaments can make or unmake any law. That power only concerns national laws, the european ones can't be abrogated by a member state. If they could, it would mean no common regulation. It would mean the death of the common market because each state would try to favour its own companies. [...]

[...] Is European integration a threat to UK sovereignty or rather to UK's exceptional (political, legal, cultural) position? Since the creation of the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), founded by six european states, Europe always progressed to a more integrated system. At the beginning, the states wanted to maintain great relations between them, to avoid war. UK wasn't forming part of the ECSC. Cooperation was perfectly adapted to that period : leaving the states, weakened and humiliated by the Second World War, ruling their people and their territories. [...]

[...] According to the Bill, the government will have to agree each transfer of power, each change of a treaty or not, depending of the result of the referendum. It's a way to carry the executive weight in front of the Union. The UK government will have to choose which measure has to be voted by the people. To oppose the European Union laws, the Bill wants statute law to give them effect. It's a way to say that in UK, the Parliament only still has the power to legislate. [...]

[...] We also have to mention the primary source of European law, the Treaties. They bind the states which ratify them. If a member state infringes a measure of a treaty, it will be trialed in front of the Court of Justice of the European Union. For instance, UK refuses to offer the right to vote to prisoners. It has been convicted many times and the fines will finish to force the UK government to change its position. Each time European Union tries to gain more control, UK defends its position. [...]

[...] The convictions of the Court of Justice, the fines for instance, are only an indirect way to make the state change its politics. To UK, what is applied must be what the states agree. There is no direct threat to UK while European Union stays an international organisation of states. If UK considers European measures too restricting, UK always can leave the Union, but in fact UK won't because the system is too prolific for its economy. Moreover, UK government can transpose directives in a way that fit better with the national law, their political program . [...]