"The European Union's agenda for constitutional reform, as first set out in the Laeken Declaration, has been and remains an urgent priority." Discuss the above statement

Résumé du document

The European Union is constantly evolving. We are currently in the middle of the ratification process by Member States of the Lisbon Treaty ? or Reform Treaty ? which seems to mark the end of a constitutional agenda that was started by the Laeken Declaration in the aftermath of the Nice Treaty. I will try and address in the essay the extent, to which that constitutional reform of the EU has been an urgent priority and will try and assess its current status. I will start by looking at a broader level at the different EU constitutional issues before examining the constitutional agenda that the Union has been followed through the Laeken Declaration, through the Convention on the Future of Europe and the Draft Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe, and finally through the Lisbon Treaty.

Extraits

[...] But at the same time, the use of the Convention method marked a political turning point. It was not only designed to deal with the broadening of the EU competences, but was also intended to have a global approach of the concept of democracy in the Union with a strong incentive to get closer to the citizens. The Declaration defined 60 questions ordered in four general topics for the Convention to address: 'the division and definition of powers, the simplification of the treaties, the institutional set-up, and moving towards a proper Constitution for European citizens'[11]. [...]

[...] For federations and such bodies like the Union that reassembles in many points federations, a Constitution can be powerful because it offers a contract to the members, and also because 'the supremacy of federal law' is essential to the survival of the federation[4]. I'd like to add here that supremacy goes along the concept of subsidiarity which states that any political action should be taken by the lowest level of governance possible. The EU has no competence for managing the local level for example. These two elements are clear and important constitutional concepts and are today enforced by the EU. [...]

[...] If the EU progresses under the application of the new treaty and have a smooth functioning, it will prove that constitutional reform in itself was not an urgent priority. Constitutional reform was only a goal for liberal institutionalists and federalists but might not have been the only way to bring the Union forward. On the other hand it is possible that institutions do not run well enough, that the democratic deficit problem is not solved, or that resentment toward the EU grows among citizens. [...]

[...] ' European Union's agenda for constitutional reform, as first set out in the Laeken Declaration, has been and remains an urgent priority.” Discuss the above statement The European Union is constantly evolving. We are currently in the middle of the ratification process by Member States of the Lisbon Treaty or Reform Treaty which seems to mark the end of a constitutional agenda that started by the Laeken Declaration in the aftermath of the Nice Treaty. I will try and address in the essay the extent, to which that constitutional reform of the EU has been an urgent priority, and will try and assess its current status. [...]

[...] The Convention had many objectives: first they wanted to give the legal personality to the Union; the pillar structure was to be abandoned and replaced by a unique treaty; the supremacy of EU law should have been reaffirmed; law-making and decision-making instruments were to be reduced and simplified; they wanted to fix the repartition of competences; qualified majority voting was to be generalized and co-decision extended; and last but not least the Convention wanted to grant a binding force to the Charter of Fundamental Rights[14]. They eventually agreed on a final draft Constitutional Treaty on 10 July 2003[15] organized in four parts which address the above issues. However, as explained by Craig and Burca, if the Convention exceeded its prerogatives, the Member States were nonetheless to discuss the draft proposition and make changes[16]. [...]