A Guide to the Constitutional Treaty of the European Union (EU)

Author: The European Evangelical Alliance Public Policy Authorisation Team

The European Evangelical Alliance (EEA) recognises that debates about the best forms that international political cooperation should take are likely to continue for a very long time. Our understanding is that there has never been a perfect way of “doing politics”, and there never will be in this life.

At the same time, the EEA welcomes any political and economic relationships that lead to reconciliation between divided peoples and nations, and also recognises that, in a globalised world, every nation is interdependent on every other. The EEA's conviction is that every Christian person in a democratic society has a responsibility to be salt and light within the existing political structures.

The EEA, representing an estimated 10 million Christian people of evangelical convictions in 34 countries, includes people who are very positive indeed about the EU and people who are very concerned about its existence even.

So the EEA is clearly not in a position to advise how individual citizens should vote in any national referendum. However, the EEA calls on European Evangelicals to take a full and active part in political process as part of their Christian duty.

Having been asked by many people to help to clarify what the Constitutional Treaty does and does not do, we are pleased to contribute the following to the discussion, in an attempt to help that part of our own constituency faced with choices. May the Living God Himself grant grace to Europe in the early 21 st century!

The Debate

The document claims for itself that it both “tidies up” the existing relationships and structures, and that it clearly defines the boundaries of the things that can and cannot not be decided by the Member States together. In other words, its supporters argue that it clearly defines the limits of the powers of the Union : and that is why the document is so detailed and long.

Something certainly needed to be done about EU structures, to allow it to function effectively after it had grown to its present size (May 2004).

The leaders of all 25 Member States of the Union have unanimously agreed the Treaty (in June 2004 with formal signing in October 2004).

Sections

A lot of the Christian debate about the Union has focussed on the mention of God in the Preamble. The EEA is very disappointed that the preamble does not acknowledge the positive historical influence of the Christian worldview on the shape of Europe : but the EEA believes that the bigger question is now what values the main text contains.

Part One of the Treaty describes and defines the Union 's purpose, and its values, explains how decisions are reached and how EU Institutions work and relate to one another.

Part Two contains the Charter of Fundamental Rights.

Part Three sets out the detail of those areas in which the Union can act, and the extent to which it can do so.

Part Four contains some general and final provisions.

The significant provisions of the document are:

1. Full (and, its supporters would argue) final clarification of the relationship between the Union and its Member States .

•  all the key existing treaties are rationalised into this Constitutional Treaty.

•  the oversight of national Parliaments is underlined. In the protocol on subsidiarity, national Parliaments gain the right to see all draft legislation and to object within 6 weeks if they think it does not follow the subsidiarity principle. The aim is that action is only taken at European level where necessary. However, the EU can ignore the national Parliaments' objection.

•  to the concerns expressed about the primacy of EU law (Article 6), the supporters of the Treaty would argue that this provision has existed since the European Community was first established. Many key aspects of the EU, e.g. the Single Market, do not work when any Member State chooses to overrides rules agreed at European level.

•  The possibility of enhanced cooperation is made clear. Member States that wish to move forward in cooperating together in a policy area can do so without the need for all Member States to join in (Article 44).

2. The Values & Objectives of the Union

Article 2 lays out the values of the Union to be “ respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. These values are common to the Member States in a society in which pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men prevail”.

Articles 3 and 18 together make clear the scope of EU integration. Article 18 says that, if the Council unanimously decide that an action is necessary to attain an objective, then the EU can act. These objectives, laid out in Article 3, include the aim to promote peace, the EU's values and the well-being of the EU's peoples, freedom, security and justice, an internal market, sustainable development in the economy and environment, combating social exclusion and discrimination, promoting social justice and protection, cohesion and solidarity. In the wider world, the EU wishes to contribute to peace, security, sustainable development, solidarity and mutual respect among peoples free and fair trade, eradication of poverty and the protection of human rights.

3. The Policies of the Union

Supporters argue that the Treaty does not make any radical changes to the Union 's powers, but only to its efficiency. The following summarises those rationalisations/changes (depending on ones perception!).

•  the creation of the post of EU Foreign Minister. The Treaty's supporters argue that to combine the existing roles of the External Affairs Commissioner and Javier Solana's role (EU High Representative of the Common, Foreign & Security Policy) make it easier for the rest of the world to hear Europe's united voice: while still retaining clear Foreign Policy mandates for each single Member State. Most Common, Foreign & Security Policy decisions require unanimity. Only where Member States agree a joint policy are decisions under that policy heading made with Qualified Majority Voting. Critics say that the creation of the EU Foreign Minister could undermine the importance of national foreign ministers.

•  new provisions allowing for more collective defence, with operational capacity from Member States, including a mutual defence clause (Article 41).

•  new provisions in the areas of judicial and police cooperation (enhancing Europol), and in the implementation of common policies on asylum, immigration, and external border control (known collectively as provisions on freedom, security, and justice).

•  further economic coordination between the countries that have adopted the Euro.

•  the extension of Qualified Majority Voting in new areas (especially the area of freedom, security, and justice: see above), and the possibility that, under certain conditions, this could be extended further if unanimously agreed by every Member State . Supporters who argue the benefits of Qualified Majority Voting make the point that it forces national governments to engage in the negotiating process and work to achieve a compromise. On areas like taxation, unanimity is still needed.

4. The Charter of Fundamental Rights

The Charter becomes legally binding as part of the Constitution. Lawyers do not agree what impact this will have. The text of the Charter says that it is only relevant when EU laws are being implemented. However, many of the rights mentioned are not covered by EU law.

The rights listed are wide-ranging. Of particular interest to EEA are the mentions of religious liberty, freedom of expression and association, the right to marry and found a family (under national law, i.e. not EU law), and the right for parents to ensure their children's education conforms to their religious convictions. Article 81 states that “any discrimination based on any ground... shall be prohibited.”

The judges of the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg will have great discretion to make decisions on the rights of one individual versus another or versus a group or versus the needs of society as a whole. It seems likely that these judgements will have a significant impact on the future values and priorities of the European Union.

5. The Institutions of the Union

•  the creation of a new post of President of the European Council (the meeting of the Heads of State or government of all the Member States).

•  a change in the revolving Presidency system for all other meetings of the Member States' Ministers of State (the Council), which creates a team of three.

•  a change in the way that Qualified Majority Voting works. Any decision that is not unanimous, on any area where it does not have to be, now has to be both supported by a majority of Member States (55%) and by a majority of the EU's population (65%). This clearly gives the larger nations like Poland , Germany and the UK some significant weight.

•  a reduction in the size of the Commission from 2014.

General remarks

The Treaty is clearly a working compromise between different visions of Europe and the role of Member States. Neither federalists nor nationalists are happy with it, for different reasons.

The wider question of the advantages and disadvantages of the EU, as such, remains very lively in some Member States (perhaps especially in the UK ). The focus for concerns expressed about this Treaty tends to be the Primacy of EU law, and the creation of an EU Foreign Minister. Supporters argue that, in an interconnected world, this Treaty improves the ability of the EU to interface, both internally and externally.

As far as the faith communities are concerned, there are some positive elements to the Treaty. The formal recognition of the Union 's duty to maintain dialogue with Churches (Article 52) is a first in any EU Treaty. And Article 47 has the potential to be very significant. It places a responsibility on the Commission to respond to any approach from any grouping of a million citizens in different Member States: opening a potential place of real influence for Christian people (and others, of course).

The Treaty has to be ratified by all 25 Member States before it can enter into force. This process is expected to take about two years. Some Member States are ratifying with Parliamentary votes; others are organising popular referenda.

Beyond the text?

Many voters will be tempted to make a decision about the Constitution regardless of what is actually contained in the Constitution text.

Some may vote no because they are concerned about the direction that the Union is going in, or at least their perception of the direction. The “Buttiglione Affair”, when Rocco Buttiglione was rejected as a Commissioner for his conservative views on marriage and homosexuality, did not endear the Union to much of the electorate. The gulf of mistrust and misunderstanding between the peoples of Europe and the institutions is huge. There is also a gulf between Member States who have very different visions of what the Union should be. These problems are leading to a rise in perhaps unhelpful forms of nationalism, precisely the problem that European integration was designed to combat. Some wish to shock Europe 's politicians into pausing the integration process for a significant time of review.

On the other hand, others will want to vote for the Constitution simply because they trust that the continuing existence and flourishing of the Union is Europe 's best hope of maintaining stability and security. No one knows what the consequences of voting no will be.

The EEA encourages all Christian people who have the right to vote in a referendum, to do so. It encourages prayer even more. Never have the relationships between the peoples of Europe and indeed the wider world been more obviously important, than in the globalised world of the early 21 st century.

April 2005