Germany appoves Lisbon, rejects role of national parliament as insufficient

[David Cochrane]

Summary judgement in English here.

Germany can ratify the Lisbon Treaty, subject to a change in law to improve the role of the national parliament.

Act Approving the Treaty of Lisbon compatible with the Basic Law; accompanying law unconstitutional to the extent that legislative bodies have not been accorded sufficient rights of participation

[Fergalino]

Basically, the German minisiter that sits onthe Council of the European Union will have to seek prior approval of the Bundestag before voting on certain issues.

This is a great idea. It makes the German minister far more accountable. It will increase transparency in the decision making process. I would be delighted if other Member States took a similar view.

[David Cochrane]

When the Germany courts were considering Nice, a complaint they made that the oversight of the German parliament was poor, at this time, laws were put in place to give greater oversight to the parliament, however this never really happened.

A (strong) argument against the treaty in Germany thus was how there was insufficiant oversight - thus the German Government presented a bill along with an act approving Lisbon to give the parliament greater power, this has been ruled as insufficient, which means a better (more powerful/overseeing) law will have to be brought forward. Win win for the Germans I'd have thought.

[Fergalino]

And we could choose to do the same. In sum, we could decide that there is a Dail debate on certain issues BEFORE the Irish minister castes his vote in the Council.

All in all a great idea. A debate where the opposition can set out their views, where the public can really see what position their government is taking. Great.

Of course, the government won't necessairly like it cos it limits THEIR power at the expense of Parliament.

[euroboy]

This is good for national parliaments, but it does mean the argument for lisbon is weakened.

One could argue that the power to involve national parliaments lies already in the hands of member states, we dont need the treaty for it.

Right now, we could change the operation of the dail, so that Parliament(more specfically, the EU committee) could be informed of draft legislation the same time particular departments are informed. The treaty provides for such, but we dont need the treaty to do it.

The Dail could also be required to approve a mandate/spectrum mandate for the Council when it goes to Brussels. But this would have limited influence given we have strong party whips. Too often our Ministers go to Brussels and return with a fait accompli for the Dail, with its only function then to rubber stamp the directive or scruntise the legislation.

the deparliamentisation of national parliaments and the concentration of power in executives throughout the EU in the EU policy process has seen different member states' parliaments fight back, and some very successfully too(Germany, Denmark, UK all have differing interactions between parliament and executive), while other parliaments are very weak(french assembly has no say).

But it must be noted, the fight back of national parliaments is not dependant on the lisbon treaty, although the treaty does provide for greater parliamentary involvement.

one could further argue that the EU should push for stronger national parliaments, since this is where political action is legitmatised for the majority of people, and let the European Parliament whither away.

The EP while it is elected, is a failed experiment of representative politics: it members are not elected on EU positions or platforms.

[He3]

And we could choose to do the same. In sum, we could decide that there is a Dail debate on certain issues BEFORE the Irish minister castes his vote in the Council.

All in all a great idea. A debate where the opposition can set out their views, where the public can really see what position their government is taking. Great.

Of course, the government won't necessairly like it cos it limits THEIR power at the expense of Parliament.

Precisely.

[NewsBot]

Germany's top court has said additional national legislation was needed before the EU's Lisbon Treaty could be ratified.

More from RTE News.

[He3]

I see from the judgment summary in the OP link that the Court is preventing the Government from depositing the instruments of ratification until they fix their law.

This will take time I imagine.

The Federal Republic of Germany’s
instrument of ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon may not be deposited
as long as the constitutionally required legal elaboration of the
parliamentary rights of participation has not entered into force.

[David Cochrane]

I see from the judgment summary in the OP link that the Court is preventing the Government from depositing the instruments of ratification until they fix their law.

This will take time I imagine.

The Federal Republic of Germany’s
instrument of ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon may not be deposited
as long as the constitutionally required legal elaboration of the
parliamentary rights of participation has not entered into force.

Yep, this was a point I'd picked up on, Lisbon is effectively on hold until the Germans address the insufficiant aspects of the parliamentary powers.

Doubt the Germans will be allowed waste much time.

Jesus, what if the Germans ask the court to test the amended act to ensure it's what it needs to be.

UK GE in the meantime anyone?

[ivnryn]

How is this supposed to work? Does their parliament give them "parameters" for negotiation? Are they to be kept secret?

Another option would be for the final version of whatever is being voted on to be "sent home" and voted on by the parliament before the government can cast its council vote.

Maybe there could be a rule that no vote may be taken in council without the final version of their draft being frozen for 24 hours.