I am not writing this from a Yes or No perspective, rather just from a point of legal/academic curiosity.
How exactly is the Lisbon Treaty repugnant to the Irish Constitution ?
I was under the impression that EU Treaties needed to be passed by referendum in Ireland because they were in conflict with aspects of the constitution.
I'd just like to have someone offer a legal explanation as to why this was the case, and how the Crotty ruling impacted upon this.
The Crotty judgement said that sovereignty comes from the people and therefore the people must consent for any transfer of sovereignty to Brussels.
What are you on about the repugnancy of the treaty of lisbon in questions at the moment in ireland ?Originally Posted by solair
I mean come on, there is always and options of opt in and out of a clause but rejecting the entire treaty is somewhat cumbersome for me to understand in terms of treaty rather than personal believes in irishness or saying that the european union is too ''bossy'' for the voters to circumvent the referendum.
It wont be too long when you're right or wrong!
The Crotty judgement says no such thing.
It says the cooperation in the area of Foreign Affairs was not forseen in our joining the EU in 1973 and that this question must be put to the people. It also says that extensions of QMV were forseen by our membership and are not repugnant by virtue of Article 29.4.10.
If the OIreachtas had ratified and the decision and it was challenged in the SC, Crotty would have been used by the State to defend the ratification by the Oireachtas.
A demagogue is someone who will preach doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots.
You seem to be well versed in the legal details of all this. Out of interest, how much of the Lisbon Treaty could simply be passed through the Dail without a referendum being required?
The Crotty judgement says no such thing.
It says the cooperation in the area of Foreign Affairs was not forseen in our joining the EU in 1973 and that this question must be put to the people. It also says that extensions of QMV were forseen by our membership and are not repugnant by virtue of Article 29.4.10.
If the OIreachtas had ratified and the decision and it was challenged in the SC, Crotty would have been used by the State to defend the ratification by the Oireachtas.
Most of it I imagine.You seem to be well versed in the legal details of all this. Out of interest, how much of the Lisbon Treaty could simply be passed through the Dail without a referendum being required?
The Crotty judgement says no such thing.
It says the cooperation in the area of Foreign Affairs was not forseen in our joining the EU in 1973 and that this question must be put to the people. It also says that extensions of QMV were forseen by our membership and are not repugnant by virtue of Article 29.4.10.
If the OIreachtas had ratified and the decision and it was challenged in the SC, Crotty would have been used by the State to defend the ratification by the Oireachtas.
However, new legal competences are created, in areas like sport, energy security, disaster response etc, which may require approval from the people. The creation of a Foreign Minister may also have been an issue.
The QMV changes, the Commission changes and the Council changes would all have been fine.
A demagogue is someone who will preach doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots.
If the govt dares to try to do this via the Dail then they will be defying the democratically-expressed will of the Irish people and I will never vote FF again. It would be nothing less than High Treason. If the Greens collude with this then they deserve to be wiped out at the next election. I am also fairly confident that making the Charter of Fundamental Rights legally-binding could well require a referendum.Most of it I imagine.You seem to be well versed in the legal details of all this. Out of interest, how much of the Lisbon Treaty could simply be passed through the Dail without a referendum being required?
The Crotty judgement says no such thing.
It says the cooperation in the area of Foreign Affairs was not forseen in our joining the EU in 1973 and that this question must be put to the people. It also says that extensions of QMV were forseen by our membership and are not repugnant by virtue of Article 29.4.10.
If the OIreachtas had ratified and the decision and it was challenged in the SC, Crotty would have been used by the State to defend the ratification by the Oireachtas.
However, new legal competences are created, in areas like sport, energy security, disaster response etc, which may require approval from the people. The creation of a Foreign Minister may also have been an issue.
The QMV changes, the Commission changes and the Council changes would all have been fine.
Perhaps the fact that the treaty contains an opt out would effectively nullify the sovereignty issues, as we retain the right to leave?
In any case, why have this discussion now ? The people have spoken. The Dail and Government implement policy and pass laws because it is to complex (in terms of having voters learn about the policy) and expensive to have a referendum on every minor issue. It is however, worth it on major issues.
Once the referendum has happened, it is unreasonable to have the Dail overrule it.
The attitude of "Damn it, we should never have asked them" after a referendum is just fundamentally undemocratic (though I guess understandable). The Dail should make decisions based on what the people would decide if they had the time to learn about the issue.
Once the people have spoken, only the people can override their decision ... or at least that is how it should work.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
.....asks the person who's name is "freedomlover".
He seems to be but he is not.You seem to be well versed in the legal details of all this. Out of interest, how much of the Lisbon Treaty could simply be passed through the Dail without a referendum being required?
The Crotty judgement says no such thing.
It says the cooperation in the area of Foreign Affairs was not forseen in our joining the EU in 1973 and that this question must be put to the people. It also says that extensions of QMV were forseen by our membership and are not repugnant by virtue of Article 29.4.10.
If the OIreachtas had ratified and the decision and it was challenged in the SC, Crotty would have been used by the State to defend the ratification by the Oireachtas.
Until he was told otherwise here a couple of days ago, goosebump was full sure that the Lisbon treaty did not give any new competences to the EU. He said so repeatedly until I put him straight. I am glad to see from his next post that he has now caught up with us on this. He has a way to go on the Crotty case though but he will get there in the end
Back to the topic. This is one of the continuing mysteries of Lisbon. The government never told us. Imagine being asked to change our constitution and not being told the effects of the change. Well plenty of people said No for that very reason. Unbelievable.
Somebody said to me today that the FF government relies completely on having the numbers to win any political issue - both inside the Dáil and in the country. It has the numbers and the discipline to overcome any opposition. Side effect of this is that it does not need ever to actually argue its case on anything. It just rolls over the other side. That means they have lost the ability to make an argument when it is needed - like during this referendum.
That has the eerie ring of truth.
'To attempt to rerun a referendum as a means of reversing the democratic decision taken by the people would be rightly regarded as an affront'. Dick Roche TD 21.12.01
Politics.ie is Ireland's leading politics and current affairs website with more than 900,000 visitors a month. Founded in 2003, Politics.ie has one of the most engaged, respected and influential politics and current affairs communities.
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
