The European Commission decided on Tuesday that 42 national and regional parliaments in Europe on the ratification of the FTA with Canada (Ceta) should be involved.
Does this mean the end for Ceta?
with its decision, the European Commission Ceta has added to fears of many experts the political death knell, because some of these parliaments have already announced that they intend to vote against Ceta. The involvement of so many parliaments is the consequence of the decision of the EU Commission, Ceta be treated as “mixed agreement” that intervening in Member States’ competences.
What had tempers so excited?
the question of whether only the EU institutions including the European Parliament decide or national parliaments have a say, had for days excite tempers. In it acute conflicts and power struggles of who in Europe when the casting vote has, by way of example. Legal arguments and political considerations are crosswise to each other. “Brussels” is fighting against “Brussels”, because the various European institutions pursue different interests.
What does “mixed agreement”?
EU Commission President Jean -Claude Juncker had initially argued with the legal competence. Trade agreements fall within the competence of the EU, not to the nation states. Representatives of the EU negotiated Ceta made with the Canadians. Representatives of the EU member states do not sit at the negotiating table. You have assigned the responsibility for trade with the EU. If they have concerns or suggestions to the respective trade talks, they turn to the EU, so that it brings to the language.
however, there is a variant in which the national parliaments should be involved – namely, when it is a “mixed agreement”. This is the case when the content engage not only in EU affairs, but also substantially in national competences. Juncker questioned about the EU’s legal service. The was concluded, Ceta was not a mixed agreement, that fall solely within the EU’s competence. This assessment had been publicly disclosed last Wednesday Juncker. The consequence: On the ratification of the EU Commission, the European Council would be involved (representatives of national governments) and the European Parliament, but not the national parliaments of the Member States. Yesterday the EU Commission maintained the view that no legally Ceta mixed agreement was. “In order to accelerate the ratification”, but they wanted to treat it like a mixed.
The critics gradually Ceta as a mixed agreement. Why?
Critics of Juncker decision argue more political than legal. German Economics Minister Sigmar Gabriel said, “to conclude that the national parliaments have nothing to say to this trade agreement, is incredibly foolish”. And he warned, if the EU wants to Ceta “by pressing” without the participation of national parliaments, then promotes the conspiracy theories of free trade opponents and then “TTIP is dead.” About the transatlantic economic agreements TTIP the EU is still negotiating. Whether it is a mixed agreement or one for which only the EU is responsible, no one can say today, because the content of the contract. And that is still under negotiation.
Gabriel called no legal reasons why Ceta should be classified as a mixed agreement. Other critics do not usually. but lawyers could well find clues, for example, in the clauses for investment law. The Left had filed constitutional complaint.
Even before the European Court is a pending procedure.
Why did the Ceta opponents include the parliaments?
The majority, however, the critics argue that it is “a question of democracy” and the democratic legitimacy, that vote and the national parliaments. This is a tricky proposition. Because it implies that has, for example, the CDU deputy Daniel Caspary complained that the European Parliament and the European Council, ie the national governments are not democratically legitimized. Both are involved in each case on the ratification, even if the national parliaments are not involved. In fact, the free-trade opponents in public pressure placed on national parliaments the lever with which they want to bring down FTAs as Ceta and someday TTIP.
What do national governments?
the national governments have in any case have a say, as their representatives together form the European Council. In some countries, there are strong movements against free trade, such as Austria, Luxembourg and Germany. Then take some governments regard. Others, including Italy and Belgium, see no reason for a referral to the national parliaments. As the European Council would have decided if the EU Commission Ceta would not be classified as a mixed agreement, is unclear.
What are the consequences the decision on Ceta ratification?
The EU gets according to the experts one way or problems. The German EU Ambassador Reinhard Silberberg explained the dilemma at an event of the Association of Berlin Merchants and Industrialists (VBKI) on Monday evening in Berlin so: Does it not include the national parliaments, the resistance to Brussels FTA could grow. In contrast, if participation of national parliaments, the EU will hardly find partners who take years of negotiations on such agreements to be. It should be a deterrent if sufficient at the end of the resistance in one of 28 national parliaments plus 14 regional parliaments in order to prevent the ratification and to make the work destroyed.
No comments:
Post a Comment