A fundamental stage” “

Pierre de Charentenay , chief editor of the French review Etudes, briefly presents the merits and demerits of the European Constitution and spells out the reasons to support a yes vote in the approaching referendum for its approval in France. The European Constitutional Treaty, now in process of ratification by the individual EU member states, is a political text of the Union that, without violating the principle of subsidiarity of European common life, marks an important stage in the progress of EU political and institutional structures. Fifty years after the Schuman declaration, and the first steps in the construction of a common market, this proposed Constitution aims to bring together and reorganize the many existing treaties. EU enlargement has made it indispensable to have a firm constitutional system and fundamental parameters common to the Union as a whole. The referendum in France is due to be held on 29 May. GENESIS. The process that led to the drafting of the Treaty by the Convention, an assembly of members of national governments, European Parliament and Commission, which worked from 28 February 2002 to the end of June 2003, was “really transparent”. The signing of this document by the heads of state and of government took place on 29 October 2004. “This process was not a revolution, but a symbolic and vigorous step ahead in the effort to construct an increasingly integrated Union”. The Constitution is the first great common task of the 28 member states. IDENTITY AND VALUES. With the Treaty, the Union has abandoned the status of “economic organization” and entered into possession of “a legal personality, a real subject of international law”. The features of this identity and its fundamental values are enunciated in one of the first paragraphs in the document, as also are its objectives. Pierre de Charentenay points out that the Treaty places a good deal of emphasis on the “social quality of Europe, repeated in various points”, also in the section that speaks of “a social market economy, which excludes a liberal economy without rules and without controls”. In spite of the positive elements emphasized, “the Convention offered little to dream about for the future of Europe” (in the relation between identity and limitations) and left “without definition some aspects and dimensions, such as the significance of the European states”. ORIGINAL GOVERNANCE. In this Treaty Europe is defined “neither as a powerful and centralized federal system, nor as a confederal system of association of states, but as a federation of nation states (following Jacques Delors) with a political system sui generis“, governed by Council, Parliament and Commission. “The three pillars of the institutional triangle emerge reinforced” from the Constitution. Less precise, on the other hand, is the “division of competences” between Union and member states. CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITATIONS. Though the Convention inserted qualified majority vote, rather than unanimity, in a wider series of questions, the Commission deplores the fact that unanimity remains in place for a large number of sectors. “Seduced by the desire to guarantee national advantages, various countries placed obstacles in the way of the creation of a real common policy”. Another striking feature is the relation between the President of the Commission and the “new” President of the Union: elected for a term of two and a half years (and no longer on a 6-month rotating basis), he does not have a clear role, and “could enter into competition with the President of the Commission”. And yet the new EU President “will finally give a face to Europe”, in international conferences and in various contexts. These elements of weakness – and others pointed out by the author – reflect “a great diffidence of member states towards the Union, whereas the 25 countries ought to have learned a new method of working for the common good of Europe and not just for their own national interest”. THE ROLE OF THE CHURCHES. An enormous step forward vis-à-vis other treaties and also some national legislations, says the author, was accomplished in this constitutional text as far as “the role of the churches and religious associations and communities” (art. 52) is concerned. “This article is an extraordinary recognition of the contribution of the churches and of religion to the collective life” of the EU. “Religion is not limited to private life; it is recognized here as an element of public life”. On the other hand, a compromise was reached as far as the explicit mention of Christianity is concerned: it is excluded from the preamble and substituted by a vague mention of “religious heritage”. In conclusion, De Charentenay says that the “Constitution has limitations in this text”, but has “the merit of existing”. Thanks to it, Europe knows in what direction it needs to move, together “with its members and its diversities”, which are a “formidable richness, but also a source of disagreement difficult to govern”. ———————————————————————————————————– Sir Europa (English) N.ro assoluto : 1385 N.ro relativo : 34 Data pubblicazione : 04/05/05