Czechs will not ratify Lisbon prior to any 2nd Irish vote: Sunday Times

[myksav]

I'm sick of this moral bullying/posturing by the 'no' crowd.

We, the Irish people, are absolutely entitled to have another referendum on this issue. And we're not going to be bullied by those who say we're "not allowed". (Democracy, how are ye.)

If you want to vote against it, goddamn vote against it then.

There are a lot of sacrifices being asked of the Irish people at this point in time. Going to the poll to vote on a referendum is among the least of our difficulties.

But stop trying to bully us with pious and false speeches about democracy and why we're not allowed to vote again on things. We're a sovereign country -- we can vote again if we want.

But you're ok with the Gov't and EU moral bullying/posturing, and saying "yerrah, we can get them to change their vote, ignore what they said before".

If the Irish people are being asked to make "a lot of sacrifices", why are we going to have the added burden of another referendum on Lisbon?

Yes, we are a soveraign country --we can vote again if we want. And again when there's another no, and another, and another, etc. until we give the right answer. Digitus impudicus to that.

[Al.]

I'm sick of this moral bullying/posturing by the 'no' crowd.

We, the Irish people, are absolutely entitled to have another referendum on this issue. And we're not going to be bullied by those who say we're "not allowed". (Democracy, how are ye.)

If you want to vote against it, goddamn vote against it then.

There are a lot of sacrifices being asked of the Irish people at this point in time. Going to the poll to vote on a referendum is among the least of our difficulties.

But stop trying to bully us with pious and false speeches about democracy and why we're not allowed to vote again on things. We're a sovereign country -- we can vote again if we want.

Sounds great. So when do we get to vote on the Nice Treaty again?

When it comes to the EU, they aren't false speeches. The Brussels government is not democratic. Lisbon makes them even less democratic.

But you're ok with the Gov't and EU moral bullying/posturing, and saying "yerrah, we can get them to change their vote, ignore what they said before".

If the Irish people are being asked to make "a lot of sacrifices", why are we going to have the added burden of another referendum on Lisbon?

Yes, we are a soveraign country --we can vote again if we want. And again when there's another no, and another, and another, etc. until we give the right answer. Digitus impudicus to that.

Kinda poignant that you're using Latin...what with the parallels to the Holy Roman Empire and all

[edifice.]

It only means that the process is legally unblocked. But it could be blocked again by another address to the Court. Right now only the Chamber and Senat are entitled to address the Court in regards of the compatibility of the treaty (excluding of the already answered points), and President and both chambers are entitled to address the Court in regards of the process of approving the treaty (e.g. in regards of referendum).

If I'm reading the article correctly it seems to be implying that the Court is not looking at the Lisbon Treaty per se but rather the specific areas which were objected to in order to test their constitutionality. In this process is it open for other areas to be objected to on the same grounds or has the opportunity for that approach passed?

[hiding behind a poster]

If I'm reading the article correctly it seems to be implying that the Court is not looking at the Lisbon Treaty per se but rather the specific areas which were objected to in order to test their constitutionality. In this process is it open for other areas to be objected to on the same grounds or has the opportunity for that approach passed?

Well presumably the sections of the Treaty chosen by the objector were the ones where at least the strongest case exists - so if that didn't work, its unlikely that other bits will.

[edifice.]

Well presumably the sections of the Treaty chosen by the objector were the ones where at least the strongest case exists - so if that didn't work, its unlikely that other bits will.

I'm not thinking it of it in those terms exactly. Legal processes are quite slow and the prospect of a Conservatie Referendum is a definite mark on the horizon.

[edifice.]

It's an exercise in the deepest kind of cynicism and a massive betrayal of the Irish people, which will undoubtedly backfire in their faces.

It was all predicted by Anthony Coughlan in a widely circulated piece he wrote just four days after the No vote:

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT ...

EU Treaties must be ratified unanimously. Each country ratifies a
Treaty on the assumption that all other countries will do so too. If
one country says that it cannot ratify a Treaty as it stands - in
Ireland's case because the Irish people have rejected it - there is
no point in the other countries proceeding. This is what the French
and Dutch governments did when their voters rejected the EU
Constitution in 2005. They told their EU colleagues they could not
put the same Treaty to their peoples again, so the remaining
ratifications were abandoned.

Is an Irish No less important than a French or Dutch one? We shall
soon see.

Taoiseach Brian Cowen now faces the most important decision of his
political life. Will he align himself with his own people and respect
their referendum vote by telling his EU colleagues that Ireland
cannot ratify Lisbon as it stands, so there is no point in the
remaining States continuing with their ratifications and that the
Lisbon Treaty must be reopened?
Or will be align himself with the other EU States against the Irish
people, and urge the former to proceed with their ratifications on
the assumption that Ireland will re-run the referendum when everyone
else has ratified, as Taoiseach Bertie Ahern did with the Treaty of Nice?

I believe he will do the latter. Today in Luxembourg the Foreign
Minister prepare the political choreography. On Thursday in
Brussels the Taoiseach will tell the European Council of Prime
Ministers and Presidents effectively to take no notice of Ireland's
No to Lisbon, but that the nine Member States still to ratify the
Treaty should go ahead and do that on the assumption that Ireland
will re-run the Lisbon referendum afterwards. They will then go
ahead and do that. Why should they respect the Irish electorate's No
to Lisbon when the Irish Government itself does not do that?
Thus an EU-wide problem will with the Taoiseach's cooperation be
reduced to a local Irish problem: how to ensure that the Irish will
vote Yes when Lisbon comes around a second time.

What is needed is clear enough. The details will emerge at next
October's EU summit. Leading up to it there will be reports of
mighty battles between Taoiseach Cowen and his EU colleagues. At the
summit there will be a "European decision" of the Prime Ministers and
Presidents that when it comes to allocating EU Commissioners in
2014 in the post-Lisbon EU, Ireland and all Member States will be
permitted to retain a Commissioner, although in practice there may be
senior and junior Commissioners. Under both the Nice and Lisbon
Treaties the arrangements for the Commission require unanimity and a
commitment on these lines can be given without opening Lisbon.
Mr Cowen will present this as a triumph for Irish diplomacy, while
his EU colleagues smile quietly to themselves. Then various
Declarations will be given - maybe even Protocols which could be put
in a separate mini-Treaty - to meet Irish concerns on company
taxation, human rights, perhaps the Laval and Rüffert judgements of
the Court of Justice, maybe public services or military commitments.

What threats or implicit threats will be needed to go with these
promises? The most obvious one is that Irish voters will be told, as
they were not told over the past months - that the Lisbon Treaty aims
to establish a constitutionally new Union and that we must decide
whether we want to be members of this or not, or do we want to keep
the present EU as it stands under the Nice Treaty rules.
The other Member States still cannot ratify Lisbon and establish this
new Union without Ireland's agreement. But the hope will be that this
mix of promises and implicit threats will work to give a 60/40
percent majority for a Yes in Lisbon Two.

Can anything stop this scenario developing ?
Later this week there will be brief sympathy across our continent
that Ireland is being bullied and that Taoiseach Cowen's agreement to
the continuance of the ratification process has been forced. The EU
elite will be seen to be ignoring voters and ordinary citizens once
again, in this case Ireland's, as France and Holland's were
previously ignored. The legitimacy of the EU project wll be further
undermined. True democrats everywhere will be outraged.
Solidarity movements with Ireland will spring up. New political
forces will come into being. The story of Europe's peoples against
the EU's elites will enter a new chapter. Domestically, if Brian
Cowen follows the unwise course which I believe he will embark on,
he will be undermining the longterm legitimacy of his own party.
And much else will be set in train as a result of Ireland's historic
No.

Have you a link to this?

[jfk2008]

Wer, I don't know much about the Czech constitution, but I can read a newspaper report easily enough and it tells me that the Constitutional Court found that those parts of the the Treaty of Lisbon which they examined do not 'conflict with the constitutional order' of the Czech Republic and further stated that the 'EU integration process is not taking place in a radical way, which would lead to a "loss" of national sovereignty, but it is an evolutionary process'.

What the court's decision boils down to in practice is that the ratification process is free to continue without the necessity for a referendum and it seems likely that parliament will fulfil its part of the ratification process, leaving Klaus politically isolated (and most likely on thin legal ice) if he refuses to fulfil his part.

Feel free to pick holes in my post and the story, from Czech news site aktualne.centrum.cz, below!

Czech Constitutional Court OKs Lisbon Treaty

Brno - The eagerly anticipated session of the Constitutional Court delivered its verdict just a few minutes after it has started this morning.

It stated that the Lisbon Treaty does not infringe the Czech constitution.


"The Treaty of Lisbon amending the Treaty on European Union and Treaty on establishing the European Community and Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union are not in conflict with the constitutional order," were the first words of Pavel Rychetský, chairman of the Constitutional Court who started to read the verdict.



Thus the treaty does not reduce Czech sovereignty, as warned by its opponents.


"The EU integration process is not taking place in a radical way, which would lead to a "loss" of national sovereingty, but it is an evolutionary process. Besides, it is a reaction to the growing globalization in the world to a certain extent," say the judges in their statement.
More about Lisbon Treaty

• Online: Lisbon Treaty scrutinized by ConCourt
• Schwarzenberg: Ignorance behind Klaus's EU critique

The Constitutional Court judges have scrutinized the EU pact for seven months now, as pointed out by Pavel Rychetský. However, they analyzed only those parts that the Senators found controversial. They did not study the document as a whole.
Parliament to take over

The outcome of the court session means that the Lisbon Treaty would be passed over to the Parliament to vote on its ratification. PM Mirek Topolánek, of the same party that Václav Klaus is a founder of (ODS), has said earlier it would be within the first three months of 2009. Other MPs have been trying to promote the end of this year.

Edit: Some relevant sections of the Czech constitution:

Art. 87 (2) The Constitutional Court shall also decide on the conformity of international agreements under Section 10a and Section 49 with the constitutional order prior to their ratification. Until a ruling of the Constitutional Court is delivered, an agreement cannot be ratified.

The Czech Constitutional Court has ruled that the sections of the Treaty of Lisbon it examined are in conformity with the constitutional order. Therefore the Treaty of Lisbon can be ratified.

The next step is for the parliament (the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate) to give their approval for its ratification:

Art. 10a
(1) An international agreement may provide for a transfer of certain powers of bodies of the Czech Republic to an international organization or institution.
(2) An approval of the Parliament is required to ratify an international agreement stipulated in Subsection 1 unless a constitutional law requires an approval from a referendum.

This approval requires the following majorities:

(4) An approval of a three-fifths majority of all Deputies and of a three-fifths majority of Senators in attendance is required to pass a constitutional Act, as well as to approve the ratification of an international agreement stipulated in Section 10a Subsection 1.

If parliament approves the ratification of the Treaty, the President may ratify it:

Art. 63
(1) President of the Republic shall furthermore
a) represent the State with respect to other countries;
b) negotiate and ratify international treaties; he may delegate the negotiation of international treaties to the Government or, subject to the Government consent, to its individual members

President Klaus may refuse to ratify the Treaty of Lisbon even if the parliament gives its approval to ratify the Treaty.

However, he has indicated that he will ratify the Treaty if Ireland ratifies it.

In addition, there will be major political pressure on him to ratify the Treaty if parliament approves its ratification.

[lostexpectation]

when is the czech pm due to visit here?

[people korps]

Prague Post say Klaus is xenophobic nationalist and should Shut Up
The Prague Post Online: Opinion: Mr. Klaus, do the nation a favor: Shut up!

NB re his comments on Martin "That latter remark — an insult to every true Czech dissident harassed, tortured and imprisoned under communism — is typical of Klaus’s over-inflated view of himself and, more disturbingly, his intellectual dishonesty"

[jman0war]

Last night on the 9oclock news one of the RTE guys was recapping the day's story of the Czech court and he was saying this paves the way for the Czechs to ratify..

"while Ireland is undecided"

My italics.