DOCSLIB.ORG

Consolidated Treaties Charter of Fundamental Rights

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Consolidated Treaties Charter of Fundamental Rights EUROPEAN UNION CONSOLIDATED TREATIES CHARTER OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS MARCH 2010 EN 30.3.2010EN Official Journal of the European Union C 83/1 T E U T CONSOLIDATED VERSIONS F E U OF THE TREATY ON EUROPEAN UNION AND Pr + THE TREATY ON THE FUNCTIONING An OF THE EUROPEAN UNION ********** CHARTER OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF THE EUROPEAN UNION D e c l C h a r t. Note to the reader This brochure contains the consolidated versions of the Treaty on European Union and of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, together with the annexes and protocols thereto, as they result from the amendments introduced by the Treaty of Lisbon, signed on 13 December 2007, which entered into force on 1 December 2009. It also contains the declarations annexed to the Final Act of the Intergovernmental Conference which adopted the Treaty of Lisbon. This publication also contains the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union proclaimed in Strasbourg on 12 December 2007 by the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission. Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 6(1) of the Treaty on European Union, the 2007 Charter has the same legal value as the Treaties. This is a text produced for documentary purposes, for which the institutions of the European Union cannot be held liable. More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://europa.eu). Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2010 ISBN 978-92-824-2577-0 doi:10.2860/58644 © European Union, 2010 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. Printed in Belgium PRINTED ON ELEMENTAL CHLORINE-FREE BLEACHED PAPER (ECF) Table of Contents 3 30.3.2010EN Official Journal of the European Union C 83/3 Table of Contents Page TREATY ON EUROPEAN UNION (CONSOLIDATED VERSION) 13 PREAMBLE . 15 TITLE I COMMON PROVISIONS . ............................. 16 TITLE II PROVISIONS ON DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES . 20 TITLE III PROVISIONS ON THE INSTITUTIONS . 22 TITLE IV PROVISIONS ON ENHANCED COOPERATION . 27 TITLE V GENERAL PROVISIONS ON THE UNION’S EXTERNAL ACTION AND SPECIFIC PROVISIONS ON THE COMMON FOREIGN AND SECURITY POLICY . ............................. 28 Chapter 1 General provisions on the Union’s external action . ...... 28 Chapter 2 Specific provisions on the common foreign and security policy . 30 Section 1 Common provisions . 30 Section 2 Provisions on the common security and defence policy . 38 TITLE VI FINAL PROVISIONS . 41 TREATY ON THE FUNCTIONING OF THE EUROPEAN UNION (CONSOLIDATED VERSION) ............................. 47 PREAMBLE . 49 PART ONE PRINCIPLES . ................................. 50 TITLE I CATEGORIES AND AREAS OF UNION COMPETENCE . 50 TITLE II PROVISIONS HAVING GENERAL APPLICATION . 53 PART TWO NON-DISCRIMINATION AND CITIZENSHIP OF THE UNION . 56 PART THREE UNION POLICIES AND INTERNAL ACTIONS . 59 TITLE I THE INTERNAL MARKET . 59 TITLE II FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS . 59 Chapter 1 The customs union . 60 4 Consolidated Treaties C 83/4EN Official Journal of the European Union 30.3.2010 Page Chapter 2 Customs cooperation . 61 Chapter 3 Prohibition of quantitative restrictions between Member States 61 TITLE III AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES . 62 TITLE IV FREE MOVEMENT OF PERSONS, SERVICES AND CAPITAL . 65 Chapter 1 Workers . 65 Chapter 2 Right of establishment . 67 Chapter 3 Services . 70 Chapter 4 Capital and payments . 71 TITLE V AREA OF FREEDOM, SECURITY AND JUSTICE . 73 Chapter 1 General provisions . 73 Chapter 2 Policies on border checks, asylum and immigration . 75 Chapter 3 Judicial cooperation in civil matters . 78 Chapter 4 Judicial cooperation in criminal matters . 79 Chapter 5 Police cooperation . 83 TITLE VI Transport . ................................ 85 TITLE VII COMMON RULES ON COMPETITION, TAXATION AND APPROXIMATION OF LAWS . 88 Chapter 1 Rules on competition . 88 Section 1 Rules applying to undertakings . .............. 88 Section 2 Aids granted by States . .............. 91 Chapter 2 Tax provisions . 93 Chapter 3 Approximation of laws . 94 TITLE VIII ECONOMIC AND MONETARY POLICY . 96 Chapter 1 Economic policy . 97 Chapter 2 Monetary policy . 102 Chapter 3 Institutional provisions . 105 Table of Contents 5 30.3.2010EN Official Journal of the European Union C 83/5 Page Chapter 4 Provisions specific to Member States whose currency is the euro 106 Chapter 5 Transitional provisions . 107 TITLE IX EMPLOYMENT . ................................ 112 TITLE X SOCIAL POLICY . ................................ 114 TITLE XI THE EUROPEAN SOCIAL FUND . 119 TITLE XII EDUCATION, VOCATIONAL TRAINING, YOUTH AND SPORT 120 TITLE XIII CULTURE . 121 TITLE XIV PUBLIC HEALTH . ................................ 122 TITLE XV CONSUMER PROTECTION . 124 TITLE XVI TRANS-EUROPEAN NETWORKS . 124 TITLE XVII INDUSTRY . 126 TITLE XVIII ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND TERRITORIAL COHESION . 127 TITLE XIX RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT AND SPACE 128 TITLE XX ENVIRONMENT . ................................ 132 TITLE XXI ENERGY . 134 TITLE XXII TOURISM . 135 TITLE XXIII CIVIL PROTECTION . ................................ 135 TITLE XXIV ADMINISTRATIVE COOPERATION . 136 PART FOUR ASSOCIATION OF THE OVERSEAS COUNTRIES AND TERRITORIES 137 PART FIVE EXTERNAL ACTION BY THE UNION . 139 TITLE I GENERAL PROVISIONS ON THE UNION’S EXTERNAL ACTION 139 TITLE II COMMON COMMERCIAL POLICY . 139 TITLE III COOPERATION WITH THIRD COUNTRIES AND HUMANITARIAN AID............................................... 141 Chapter 1 Development cooperation . 141 Chapter 2 Economic, financial and technical cooperation with third countries . 142 Chapter 3 Humanitarian aid . 143 6 Consolidated Treaties C 83/6EN Official Journal of the European Union 30.3.2010 Page TITLE IV RESTRICTIVE MEASURES . 144 TITLE V INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS . 144 TITLE VI THE UNION’S RELATIONS WITH INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATIONS AND THIRD COUNTRIES AND UNION DELEGATIONS . ................................ 147 TITLE VII SOLIDARITY CLAUSE . ................................ 148 PART SIX INSTITUTIONAL AND FINANCIAL PROVISIONS . 149 TITLE I INSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS . 149 Chapter 1 The institutions . 149 Section 1 The European Parliament . .............. 149 Section 2 The European Council . .............. 152 Section 3 The Council . 153 Section 4 The Commission . 155 Section 5 The Court of Justice of the European Union . 157 Section 6 The European Central Bank . .............. 167 Section 7 The Court of Auditors . .............. 169 Chapter 2 Legal acts of the Union, adoption procedures and other provisions . 171 Section 1 The legal acts of the Union . .............. 171 Section 2 Procedures for the adoption of acts and other provisions 173 Chapter 3 The Union’s advisory bodies . 177 Section 1 The Economic and Social Committee .............. 177 Section 2 The Committee of the Regions . 178 Chapter 4 The European Investment Bank . 180 TITLE II FINANCIAL PROVISIONS . 181 Chapter 1 The Union’s own resources . 181 Chapter 2 The multiannual financial framework . 182 Chapter 3 The Union’s annual budget . 183 Chapter 4 Implementation of the budget and discharge . 186 Table of Contents 7 30.3.2010EN Official Journal of the European Union C 83/7 Page Chapter 5 Common provisions . 187 Chapter 6 Combatting fraud . 188 TITLE III ENHANCED COOPERATION . 189 PART SEVEN GENERAL AND FINAL PROVISIONS . 192 PROTOCOLS ..................................................... 201 Protocol (No 1) on the role of National Parliaments in the European Union . 203 Protocol (No 2) on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality . ......... 206 Protocol (No 3) on the statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union 210 Protocol (No 4) on the statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank . ......... 230 Protocol (No 5) on the statute of the European Investment Bank . ......... 251 Protocol (No 6) on the location of the seats of the institutions and of certain bodies, offices, agencies and departments of the European Union 265 Protocol (No 7) on the privileges and immunities of the European Union . 266 Protocol (No 8) relating to Article 6(2) of the Treaty on European Union on the accession of the Union to the European Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms . 273 Protocol (No 9) on the decision of the Council relating to the implementation of Article 16(4) of the Treaty on European Union and Article 238(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union between 1 November 2014 and 31 March 2017 on the one hand, and as from 1 April 2017 on the other 274 Protocol (No 10) on permanent structured cooperation established by Article 42 of the Treaty on European Union . ......... 275 Protocol (No 11) on Article 42 of the Treaty on European Union . ......... 278 Protocol (No 12) on the excessive deficit procedure . ............ 279 Protocol (No 13) on the convergence criteria . 281 Protocol (No 14) on the Euro Group . ......... 283 8 Consolidated Treaties C 83/8EN Official Journal of the European Union 30.3.2010 Page Protocol (No 15) on certain provisions relating to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland . ..
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The European Union in Transition: the Treaty of Nice in Effect; Enlargement in Sight; a Constitution in Doubt
    Fordham International Law Journal Volume 27, Issue 2 2003 Article 1 The European Union in Transition: The Treaty of Nice in Effect; Enlargement in Sight; A Constitution in Doubt Roger J. Goebel∗ ∗ Copyright c 2003 by the authors. Fordham International Law Journal is produced by The Berke- ley Electronic Press (bepress). http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ilj The European Union in Transition: The Treaty of Nice in Effect; Enlargement in Sight; A Constitution in Doubt Roger J. Goebel Abstract This Article is intended to provide an overview of this transitional moment in the history of the European Union. Initially, the Article will briefly review the background of the Treaty of Nice, and the institutional structure modifications for which it provides, which paves the way for enlargement. Next it will describe the final stages of the enlargement process. Finally, the Article will set out the principal institutional innovations and certain other key aspects of the draft Constitution, the most important issues concerning them, and the current impasse. THE EUROPEAN UNION IN TRANSITION: THE TREATY OF NICE IN EFFECT; ENLARGEMENT IN SIGHT; A CONSTITUTION IN DOUBT Rogerj Goebel* INTRODUCTION Once again the European Union' (the "EU" or the "Union") is in a stage of radical evolution. Since the early 1990's, the EU has anticipated an extraordinary increase in its constituent Member States2 through the absorption of a large number of Central European and Mediterranean nations. Since the late 1990's, the Union has been negotiating the precise terms for their entry with a dozen applicant nations and has been providing cooperative assistance to them to prepare for their accession to the Union and in particular, its principal con- stituent part, the European Community.3 As this enlargement of the Union came more clearly in sight, the political leadership and the present Member States, joined by the Commission, con- * Professor and Director of the Center on European Union Law, Fordham Univer- sity School of Law.
    [Show full text]
  • Perspectives for Reform in the European Union Nicolai Von Ondarza
    Introduction Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik German Institute for International and Security Affairs Comments Blocked for Good by the Threat of Treaty Change? WP S Perspectives for Reform in the European Union Nicolai von Ondarza The European Union faces a fundamental dilemma. On the one hand, pressure to reform its structures is growing. The hard negotiations with Greece in summer 2015 have revived the debate on deepening the Eurozone, while at the same time London is pushing to roll back integration, at least for itself. On the other hand, national governments reject any moves that would require a treaty change (such as transfer of powers) as politically impossible. Legal options for evading the dilemma and developing the Union by “covert integration” do exist, but these require unanimous political agreement among all the national governments – and would in the medium term require treaty changes to restore transparency and democratic legitimacy. The traumatic process of negotiating and bought itself some time for reform, the vola- ratifying the EU Constitutional Treaty and tile negotiations with Greece in summer the Treaty of Lisbon has left deep marks. 2015 again spotlighted the persistence of Ever since, national governments have con- grave deficits in its economic and political sistently avoided initiating significant treaty structures. In response, France in summer amendments, including at the height of 2015 proposed strengthening the Eurozone the euro crisis. Even in projects such as the with a finance minister with a budget and banking union, they have instead turned a parliament of its own. Concurrently, in to treaties outside the EU framework. June 2015 the presidents of five European Despite this reservation – or perhaps institutions (Commission, Council, ECB, precisely because of it – pressure to tackle Eurogroup and European Parliament) pub- reform of primary law is growing.
    [Show full text]
  • Implementing the Protocol 36 Opt
    September 2012 Opting out of EU Criminal law: What is actually involved? Alicia Hinarejos, J.R. Spencer and Steve Peers CELS Working Paper, New Series, No.1 http://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk http://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/publications/working_papers.php Centre for European Legal Studies • 10 West Road • Cambridge CB3 9DZ Telephone: 01223 330093 • Fax: 01223 330055 • http://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Protocol 36 to the Lisbon Treaty gives the UK the right to opt out en bloc of all the police and criminal justice measures adopted under the Treaty of Maastricht ahead of the date when the Court of Justice of the EU at Luxembourg will acquire jurisdiction in relation to them. The government is under pressure to use this opt-out in order to “repatriate criminal justice”. It is rumoured that this opt-out might be offered as a less troublesome alternative to those are calling for a referendum on “pulling out of Europe”. Those who advocate the Protocol 36 opt-out appear to assume that it would completely remove the UK from the sphere of EU influence in matters of criminal justice and that the opt-out could be exercised cost-free. In this Report, both of these assumptions are challenged. It concludes that if the opt-out were exercised the UK would still be bound by a range of new police and criminal justice measures which the UK has opted into after Lisbon. And it also concludes that the measures opted out of would include some – notably the European Arrest Warrant – the loss of which could pose a risk to law and order.
    [Show full text]
  • Explaining the Treaty of Amsterdam: Interests, Influence, Institutions*
    Journal of Common Market Studies Vol. 37, No. 1 March 1999 pp. 59–85 Explaining the Treaty of Amsterdam: Interests, Influence, Institutions* ANDREW MORAVCSIK and KALYPSO NICOLAÏDIS Harvard University Abstract This article offers a basic explanation of the process and outcome of negotiat- ing the Treaty of Amsterdam. We pose three questions: What explains the national preferences of the major governments? Given those substantive national preferences, what explains bargaining outcomes among them? Given those substantive bargains, what explains the choice of international institu- tions to implement them? We argue in favour of an explanation based on three elements. Issue-specific interdependence explains national preferences. Inter- state bargaining based on asymmetrical interdependence explains the out- comes of substantive negotiation. The need for credible commitments explains institutional choices to pool and delegate sovereignty. Other oft-cited factors – European ideology, supranational entrepreneurship, technocratic consider- ations, or the random flux and non-rational processes of ‘garbage can’ decision-making – play secondary roles. Remaining areas of ambiguity are flagged for future research. * We would like to thank Simon Bulmer, Noreen Burrows, Stanley Crossick, Richard Corbett, Franklin Dehousse, Youri Devuyst, Geoffrey Edwards, Nigel Evans, Stephen George, Simon Hix, Karl Johansson, Nikos Kotzias, Sonia Mazey, John Peterson, Constantino Papadopoulos, Michel Petite, Eric Philippart, Jeremy Richardson, Brendon Smith, Alexander Stubb, Helen Wallace, William Wallace, Alison Weston and Neil Winn for assistance and conversations. In the current version we have cited only essential sources, for example those underlying direct quotations. An extended version can be found in Moravcsik and Nicolaïdis (forthcoming). © Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1999, 108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 1JF, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA 60 ANDREW MORAVCSIK AND KALYPSO NICOLAÏDIS I.
    [Show full text]
  • 1999 After Amsterdam, ILGA-Europe. English Version
    ILGA-Europe After Amsterdam: SexualOrientation and the EuropeanUnion Supported by the European Commission A Guide and the Austrian Federal Government e u r o p e This guide is published by ILGA-EUROPE , the European Region of the International Lesbian and Gay Association rue du Marché-au-charbon/Kolenmarkt 81 B-1000 Brussels Phone/fax: +32-2-502.24.71 E-mail: [email protected] http://www.steff.suite.dk/ilgaeur.htm ILGA-Europe enjoys consultative status with the Council of Europe and is a member of the Platform of European Social NGOs Project co-ordinator: Kurt Krickler Design: Friedl Nussbaumer The publisher can provide upon request a version of this guide on diskette. This report is also available in French, German and Spanish and can be found in all four languages at ILGA-Europe’s web-site. © Authors/ILGA-Europe, Brussels 1999 Readers are encouraged to copy and disseminate this document widely provided that appropriate reference is made to the source. Printed in Austria by Melzer Druck Ges.m.b.H., Vienna ILGA-Europe After Amsterdam: SexualOrientation and the EuropeanUnion A Guide September 1999 e u r o p e Table of contents Table TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE . 6 Chapter 1: THE ROAD TO AMSTERDAM . 8 1. Before Amsterdam . 8 A. Social policy . 8 B. Fundamental rights, discrimination and citizenship . 10 C. The Intergovernmental Conference . 11 2. The Treaty – towards a social Europe? . 12 A. Discrimination and fundamental rights . 12 B. The Social Chapter . 13 C. Employment . 13 D. Subsidiarity . 14 Chapter 2: THE TREATY OF AMSTERDAM . 15 Introduction .
    [Show full text]
  • Treaty of Nice
    Treaty of Nice Introduction The Treaty of Nice was agreed at the Nice European Council in December 2000. It represented a further attempt by the governments of the member states to find a workable means of moving forward the process of European integration, and to prepare for the coming enlargement of the EU to include ten new members. Negotiations were divided by the re-emergence of old arguments over the benefits of intergovernmental as opposed to supranational models for the running of the EU. Nevertheless, the final document made significant changes to how the EU would be run in the future. History Arguments raged over the future direction of the EU following the Treaty of Amsterdam (1997) as member states tried to reform the Commission andHow European does Council a beforeGeneral enlargement. Election French actuallyPresident Jacques work? Chirac wanted to see more power given to the EuropeanThe UK Council is a liberal and lessdemocracy. power resting This means in the that hands we of democratically the Commission. elect Meanwhile, politicians, who Commission President Romanorepresent Prodi argued our interests. for the opposite It also involves model (givingthat individual more power rights to are the protected. Commission and less to the Council), while a third and altogether more radical proposal came from German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer who set out. a vision for a parliamentaryThe type of European liberal democracy Federation. we have is a constitutional monarchy, where the powers of the monarch are limited by the terms and conditions put down in the constitution. This was the basis upon which an Intergovernmental Conference met throughout much of 2000 to discuss the reform of EU decision-making to prepare for enlargement.
    [Show full text]
  • The Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe: Stalled Ratification and the Difficulty of Theur E Opean Union in Connecting to Its Citizens
    Journal of Political Science Volume 35 Number 1 Article 4 November 2007 The Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe: Stalled Ratification and the Difficulty of theur E opean Union in Connecting to its Citizens Eileen Kirley-Tallon Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.coastal.edu/jops Part of the Political Science Commons Recommended Citation Kirley-Tallon, Eileen (2007) "The Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe: Stalled Ratification and the Difficulty of the European Union in Connecting to its Citizens," Journal of Political Science: Vol. 35 : No. 1 , Article 4. Available at: https://digitalcommons.coastal.edu/jops/vol35/iss1/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Politics at CCU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Political Science by an authorized editor of CCU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe: Stalled Ratification and the Difficulty of the European Union in Connecting to its Citizens Eileen Kirley-Tallon Francis Marion University The process of ratification of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe is now stalled following the de­ feat of the Treat y in referenda in France and the Nether­ lands in 2005. The probable demise of the Treaty has provoked discussion of a "c risis" in the European Union. The crisis the Union faces stems not so much from the failure of the Treaty but what failure indicates : a discon­ nect between the European Union and its citizens. Citi­ zens have had little impact on decision-making in the Union in the past even though they elect representatives to the European Parliament.
    [Show full text]
  • EU TREATIES 2.Pptx
    THE EU TREATIES A USER'S VIEW AUGUSTO GONZÁLEZ DISCLAIMER THE VIEWS EXPRESSED DURING MY PRESENTATION DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE OFFICIAL POSITION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION THE EU TREATIES q The European Union is based on the rule of law. q Every action taken by the EU is founded on treaties that have been approved voluntarily and democratically by all EU countries. q The treaties lay down the objectives of the European Union, the rules for EU institutions, how decisions are made and the relationship between the EU and its Member States. THE EU TREATIES q The Treaty of Paris, establishing the European Coal and Steel Community, was signed in Paris on 18 April 1951 and entered into force in 1952. It expired in 2002. q The Treaties of Rome, establishing the European Economic Community (EEC) and the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom), were signed in Rome on 25 March 1957 and came into force in 1958. q The Single European Act (SEA) was signed in February 1986 and came into force in 1987. It amended the EEC Treaty and paved the way for completing the single market. q The Treaty on European Union (TEU) — the Maastricht Treaty — was signed in Maastricht on 7 February 1992 and came into force in 1993. It established the European Union, gave the Parliament more say in decision-making and added new policy areas of cooperation. q The Treaty of Amsterdam was signed on 2 October 1997 and came into force in 1999. It amended previous treaties. q The Treaty of Nice was signed on 26 February 2001 and entered into force in 2003.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 1 Treaty of Amsterdam
    TREATY OF AMSTERDAM 1 TREATY OF AMSTERDAM 1 Tool Box II: The Instruments »»» CONSOLIDATED VERSION OF THE TREATY ON EUROPEAN UNION TITLE I: COMMON PROVISIONS Article 1 By this Treaty, the HIGH CONTRACTING PARTIES establish among themselves a EUROPEAN UNION, hereinafter called "the Union'. TREATY OFTREATY AMSTERDAM This Treaty marks a new stage in the process of creating an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe, in which decisions are taken as openly as possible and as closely as possible to the citizen. 1 The Union shall be founded on the European Communities, supplemented by the policies and forms of cooperation established by this Treaty. Its task shall be to organise, in a manner demonstrating consistency and solidarity, relations between the Member States and between their peoples. Article 6 1. The Union is founded on the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law, principles which are common to the Member States. 2. The Union shall respect fundamental rights, as guaranteed by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms signed in Rome on 4 November 1950 and as they result from the constitutional traditions common to the Member States, as general principles of Community law. 3. The Union shall respect the national identities of its Member States. 4. The Union shall provide itself with the means necessary to attain its objectives and carry through its policies. Article 7 1. The Council, meeting in the composition of the Heads of State or Government and acting by unanimity on a proposal by one third of the Member States or by the Commission and after obtaining the assent of the European Parliament, may determine the existence of a serious and persistent breach by a Member State of principles mentioned in Article 6(1), after inviting the government of the Member State in question to submit its observations.
    [Show full text]
  • The UK's 2014 Opt-Out Decision
    HOUSE OF LORDS European Union Committee 13th Report of Session 2012–13 EU police and criminal justice measures: The UK’s 2014 opt-out decision HL Paper 159 HOUSE OF LORDS European Union Committee 13th Report of Session 2012–13 EU police and criminal justice measures: The UK’s 2014 opt-out decision Ordered to be printed 16 April 2013 and published 23 April 2013 Published by the Authority of the House of Lords London : The Stationery Office Limited £17.50 HL Paper 159 The European Union Committee The Committee considers EU documents in advance of decisions being taken on them in Brussels, in order to influence the Government’s position and to hold them to account. The Government are required to deposit EU documents in Parliament, and to produce within two weeks an Explanatory Memorandum setting out the implications for the UK. The Committee examines these documents, and ‘holds under scrutiny’ any about which it has concerns, entering into correspondence with the relevant Minister until satisfied. Letters must be answered within two weeks. Under the ‘scrutiny reserve resolution’, the Government may not agree in the EU Council of Ministers to any proposal still held under scrutiny; reasons must be given for any breach. The Committee also conducts inquiries and makes reports. The Government are required to respond in writing to a report’s recommendations within two months of publication. If the report is for debate, then there is a debate in the House of Lords, which a Minister attends and responds to. The Committee has six Sub-Committees,
    [Show full text]
  • Protecting Member State Autonomy in the European Union: Some Cautionary Tales from American Federalism
    PROTECTING MEMBER STATE AUTONOMY IN THE EUROPEAN UNION: SOME CAUTIONARY TALES FROM AMERICAN FEDERALISM ERNEST A. YOUNG* The European Union's ongoing "Convention on the Future of Europe" must tackle a fundamental issue offederalism: the balance between central authority and Mem- ber State autonomy. In this Article, Ernest Young explores two strategiesfor pro- tecting federalism in America-imposing substantive limits on central power and relying on political and procedural safeguards-andconsiders their prospects in Europe. American experience suggests that European attempts to limit central power by enumerating substantive "competences" for Union institutions are un- likely to hold up, and that other substantive strategies such as the concept of "sub- sidiarity" tend to work best as political imperatives rather than judicially enforceable doctrines. Professor Young then examines the "politicalsafeguards" of Member State autonomy in the EU as currently constituted. He argues that the balance between the center and the periphery is likely to be affected by how the EU resolves basic separation-of-powersquestions at the center. Efforts to address per- ceived deficiencies of the Union government in its resource base, lawmaking effi- ciency, and democratic legitimacy likewise will have a fundamental impact on federalism. Finally, Professor Young touches on two broader themes. He first asks whether Europeans, given their cultural distinctiveness, would prefer a stronger form of federalism than America has been able to maintain; if so, the American experience is relevant primarily as a cautionary tale. He then considers how Eu- rope's institutional experience and current debate can inform the American dis- course on federalism by helping Americans break free of ideological and historical preconceptionsand offering insights into emerging issues at the intersection of do- mestic constitutions and supranationalinstitutions.
    [Show full text]
  • Police Cooperation
    POLICE COOPERATION The European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol) is a central plank of the EU’s broader internal security architecture. Cooperation and policies in the field of law enforcement are still developing, with a special focus on countering terrorism, cybercrime and other serious and organised forms of crime. The main goal is to achieve a safer Europe for the benefit of all the EU citizens, in compliance with fundamental rights and data protection rules, as requested several times by the European Parliament. LEGAL BASIS Articles 33 (customs cooperation), 87, 88 and 89 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). OBJECTIVES Effective police cooperation is a key plank in making the Union an Area of Freedom, Security and Justice based on respect for fundamental rights. Cross-border law enforcement cooperation — involving the police, customs and other law enforcement services — is designed to prevent, detect and investigate criminal offences across the European Union. In practice, this cooperation mainly concerns serious crime (such as organised crime, drug trafficking, money laundering, euro counterfeiting, trafficking in human beings and cybercrime) and terrorism. Europol is the EU’s law enforcement agency. ACHIEVEMENTS A. Beginnings Police cooperation among the Member States began in 1976 through what was known as the ‘Trevi Group’, an intergovernmental network of representatives of justice and home affairs ministries. The Treaty of Maastricht then set out matters of common interest which gave legitimate grounds for police cooperation (terrorism, drugs and other forms of international crime). It also established the principle of creating a ‘European police office’ (Europol), which initially took shape as the Europol Drugs Unit.
    [Show full text]