Madam, – Paul Williams (July 2nd) mentions the primacy of European law which was an issue during the debates on the European Constitution and Lisbon Treaty. It was argued by opponents of the European Constitution that article I-6 on the primacy of European law was a new power and therefore a threat to national constitutions and sovereignty.
Actually it was nothing of the sort as article I-6 simply states what has been a legal principle since Costa v ENEL in 1964.
The logic behind this judgment is that the primacy of European law makes logical sense, because without it every member-state could ignore any laws it didn’t like, and that would be contrary to the principle of membership in a community.
Declaration 17 of the Lisbon Treaty followed by restating that the primacy of European law is well settled case law of the European Court of Justice.
But even if the European Constitution and Lisbon Treaty contained no reference to the primacy of European law, it would not matter because the Irish Constitution already accepts the primacy of European law.
Article 29.4.10 says that no provision of the Irish Constitution shall invalidate any law enacted by the State as required by membership of the EU, or any law enacted by the EU itself.
This sub-section was added to the Irish Constitution by the 11th Amendment in 1992, which also approved the Maastricht Treaty.
The inclusion of the primacy of European law in the Lisbon Treaty does not change anything, grant the EU new powers, or undermine national constitutions and sovereignty.
It merely states what is the reality of membership of an organisation where sovereignty is shared. To argue against the primacy of European law is essentially to argue against membership of the EU. Yours, etc,
J ASON FITZHARRIS,
Rivervalley,
Swords,
Co Dublin.
Madam, – The decision by the German constitutional court (July 2nd) was an exemplary exercise in democracy.
It has done what no referendum can do – reinterpreted the EU Reform Treaty without rejecting it outright.
The judgement has vindicated some arguments of the Irish No campaign, in particular their fear of the EU’s democratic deficit.
But Patricia McKenna should not start celebrating yet, as the Germans have deftly transferred the responsibility for tackling this problem to national parliaments.
The “Treaty of Karlsruhe” as the Sueddeutsche Zeitung has called it, has become an exercise in administrative streamlining which leaves national sovereignty fully intact.
The Bundestag must now pass a law asserting itself as the final arbiter in any and all matters affecting Germany.
Denmark and Sweden already have such laws, confirming the status of their parliaments as ultimate sovereign bodies. Politicians in member states can now no longer shirk responsibility with the “Brussels made us do it” argument. It is a good day for Europe – democracy is coming home.
What we don’t yet know is whether Ireland will now also fix its democratic deficit, and increase the powers of the Oireachteas, our democratically elected national representative body, to take the side of the Irish people and stand guard against the dafter decisions of arrogant ministers and taoisigh. Hopefully, a Yes vote this autumn will underline the need for such measures. – Yours, etc,
Madam, — Paul Kelly (July 1st) will vote against the Lisbon treaty to support others who have rejected it. John Hoare (July 2nd) will vote against the treaty because of the incompetence of the Irish Government.
Is it too much to ask them to vote in accordance with their opinions on the merits of the treaty itself? – Yours, etc,