The Lisbon Treaty in Replacing the Old EU with the New EU - Essay Example

?Running head:  Critical Analysis - The Lisbon Treaty has replaced the “old” European Union With the “new” European Union. [Course] [Date] Abstract Though a widely contested concept, the Treaty of Lisbon provides a way forward for the European Union (EU) after nearly 50 years of European integration. The essay evaluates the statement “The Lisbon Treaty has replaced the “old” European Union with the “new” European Union,” Schutze, 2012). In so doing, it illustrates to what extent the Lisbon Treaty presents a new direction in the institutional arrangement and decision-making process of the European Union. Thus it critically evaluates the statement based on an overview of how it came into being, followed by a review of its four structures to demonstrate to the extent and ways it represents a new way forward. It also reviews how the treaty seeks to increase the effectiveness of the new EU compared to the old EU through more qualified majority voting, institutional changes and co-decision procedure. In addition, it offers an analysis of how the democratic values and the roles of the national parliaments are strengthened compared to the old European Union1. Further analysis includes improvement of citizen’s rights and political changes that signify a change from the old system. Section A: The Lisbon Treaty has replaced the “old” European Union with the “new” European Union’ Background of the Treaty of Lisbon The Lisbon Treaty seeks to rectify the structure and the function of the old European Union, which justifies the statement that it has replaced the “old” European Union with the “new” European Union2. Also known as the Lisbon Treaty (LT), it comprises an international agreement that seeks to amend or revise the Maastricht Treaty and the Treaty of Rome, the two treaties that make up the European Union’s (EU’s) constitution3. The Lisbon Treaty was signed on December 13, 2007 and became operational on December 1, 2009. It is largely an amendment of the Maastricht Treaty and the Treaty of Rome that was later renamed the “Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (TFEU)”. Although it was originally unveiled as an amendment of the existing EU treaties and not to replace them, its role has been largely seen as having replaced the old operational system of the EU with a new one4. Upon the expansion of EU to comprise 27 member states, it was necessary that amendments be made on the way Europe’s institutions function and how they make decisions. It was further agreed that the treaty shift focus on modernizing European Union, which also justifies the statement that it replaced the old order5. The Lisbon Treaty’s objectives are categorized into four primary areas6, namely to create more transparent and democratic Europe, to promote citizen rights, to build a more efficient Europe and to reposition Europe as a key figure on the global scene7. Shift in decision-making process The Lisbon Treaty transformed the decision-making process of the EU8, thus implying a change from the old system enabling it to work more effectively. First, it seeks to render the EU a stronger yet more coherent say with the creation of a new position of the President of the European Council who chairs the activities of the heads of governments of the member states9. This way, he works towards facilitating consensus as well ensuring the continuity of the policy. The LT has therefore increased the significance of the Presidency as a decisive organ in the policy-making process10. The president can today mediate between the actors during negotiations while at the same juncture pushing the process towards a favorable direction. He also guides the strategy direction of policy-making. In addition, the LT has created changes to the European Union’s internal decision-making apparatus. The changes are intended to rationalize the process and make it less vulnerable gridlocks by a single member-state. The treaty further attempts to address issues on the democratic transparency and accountability in the EU policy-making strategy as it grants greater responsibility to the directly elected European parliament, citizen’s initiatives and national parliaments. Lisbon Treaty in transforming EU institutions Lisbon Treaty presents a new direction in the institutional arrangement of the new European Union that harbingers the exit the old European Union. First, it creates a position to fortify the EU’s internal visibility called “the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy” 11. The Lisbon Treaty has enabled the European parliament to hold the right of co-decision with Council Ministers. Unlike in the old EU, both institutions are obligated to endorse a legislation before it becomes law12. The Lisbon Treaty has also heralded more democratic accountability by extending the co-decision powers of the parliament to now include additional policy areas such as home affairs issues and agriculture. In a way, the LT gives the national parliaments greater say in the EU policy-making, as well as powers to challenge the EU legislation. In addition, it introduces the concepts of citizen’s initiative that allows the European citizens the right to petition European Commission. The old EU allowed no such fringe benefits13. The European Parliament, which has 736 members, now remains the sole EU body that is directly elected by the European citizenry. Since its introduction in 1951, the Lisbon Treaty is the only treaty thus far that increased its formal responsibilities to an intensity that some analysts have argued to be unmatchable to other community institutions. In fact, the parliament, in its early years, was consulted on legislative procedures. Thanks to the Lisbon Treaty, it is today, along with the Council, the chief legislator of EU’s policy areas14. Further, to justify the statement, the Lisbon Treaty has made it possible for several “old European Union” policies to be reformed. It has also redefined and reinforced a number of actions taken and European level. Streamlined decision-making by EU institutions Evaluation of the new decision-making dispensations and the balance of power among the EU institutions as enhanced by the Lisbon Treaty show a distinction from the old EU. Some theorists observe that the co-decision procedure heralded a major turning point in the EU’s institutional history. This attempts to justify the evaluation of the statement that the Lisbon Treaty transformed the new UE from the old EU, as it highlights that the Interdependence of the Council, the Parliament and the respective informal and formal contacts radically increased after the treaty’s introduction in 2007. Generally, the decision-making process at the EU is largely characterized by changeful cross-institutional and intra-institutional alliances that can rarely form stable coalitions. The Lisbon Treaty has been further earned praise for rationalizing the decision-making role of the EU, which illustrates a departure from the old EU. The EU leaders settled on a basic formula called Qualified Majority Voting (QMV) system for the Council Ministers. Decisions reached by the QMV can only pass if 55 percent of the member states, who represent 65 percent of the EU population, support it. The formula was reached upon after the leaders of EU held a contentious debate with Poland. As a dispensation to Poland, the new double majority system is expected to start in 2014. The QMV formula in the new EU is further expanded to policy areas that in the old EU were subject to unanimity, particularly in issues that are related to judicial or police cooperation. Unanimity is currently required in susceptible areas like taxation as well as a majority of defense or foreign policy. Increased EU effectiveness On critical analysis of the Lisbon Treaty, it is observable that it seeks to increase the effectiveness of the “new European Union” in a world that is potent with exemplified change. First, to ensure the treaty has the ability to work in the view of expansion of the EU, as well as to make it more legitimate, its decision-making process is largely democratized and simplified. For instance, unlike in the old EU treaties, the Lisbon Treaty’s qualified the majority vote (QMV) is extended to about 40 new policy fields in EU’s council. This is based on the principle of dual majority15. Taking a definite shift from the ways of the old European Union, decisions must now be supported by at least 55 percent of the member states, which represents 65 percent of the European Union’s population. This is hoped to create more equality between the member countries that have larger and smaller populations. In addition, a blocking minority must comprise of at least four member states16. However, some decisions are still to be made unanimously. Unlike in the “old European Union”, the LT replaces the old decision making procedure with its co-decision procedure that aims to position the European Parliament on an equal platform with the Council. This is with regard to the double legitimacy between Member States and EU citizens17. In addition, the Treaty of Lisbon gives the “new European Union” a single legal status. Section B. The Lisbon Treaty has NOT replaced the “old” European Union with the “new” European Union.’ Ascertaining a Constitution for Europe The Constitutional Treaty extensively motivates the Lisbon Treaty. In actual fact, a large percent of the policy and institutional reforms, though presented in a different structure, are envisaged in the Constitution are embraced in the Treaty of Lisbon18. This signifies a shift from the two founding treaties -- the Treaty establishing the European Community and the Treaty on European Union -- that constituted the “old European Union.” The Constitutional Treaty was created to revoke the previous treaties of the “old European Union” and to replace the the Constitution of Europe. On a critical analysis however, the Lisbon Treaty does not replace those previous treaties, it in fact amends them just like the Treaty of Nice and the Amsterdam Treaty19. In this case, it can be argued that the Lisbon Treaty assumes the form of revising the founding treaties. In addition, the change in form should not be dismissed as affecting the matters at the judicial level as it has significant impact on the policy plans20. In this case, the concept of European Constitution, though seemingly abandoned, the European Law remains established by the international treaties. For that reason, the “new European Union” is still based on the founding treaties21. Nevertheless, the treaty that established the European Community is now known as the “Treaty on the Functioning of the EU” (TFEU)22. The accord on the “Functioning of the European Union (TFEU)” was introduced on December 1, 2009 after the signing of the Lisbon Treaty that amended the Treaty establishing the European Community(TEC) and the Treaty on European Union (TEU). The TFEU contains enhancements to the dimension of the new EU that have amended its functionality. For instance, Article 8 of the TFEU, commonly known as the “horizontal” social clause, stipulates that the aggregate EU policies must consider social requirements hence guaranteeing that the Union’s actions are coherent. Other such as Article 10 of the non-discrimination principle and Article 8, of equality between men and women, have both institutionalized the Union to be more appealing to the citizens. The old EU lacked such enhancements.This seems to refute the idea that the Treaty of Lisbon has replaced the “old” European Union with the “new” European Unionas they are actually ammendments. Strengthened European democracy One of Lisbon Treaty’s key focuses are on strengthening European democracy so as to advance the legitimacy of decisions and to ensure that the EU and its citizens are brought closer together as members of a close knit bloc23. The founding treaties of the “old European Union” seemed to have overlooked these codes hence justifying the concept that the Treaty of Lisbon replaced the “old” European Union with the “new” European Union. For instance, the treaty has ensured that powers of the European Parliament are significantly increased as it also gives national parliaments of member states significant roles in the UE. To explain this further, a segment of the Treaty of Lisbon is committed to the EU’s renewal of democratic principles thus opening and increasing the influence of its citizens. In addition, unlike in the “old European Union”, member states now posses the official right to secession, which represents a significant change and indicates that the EU has disposed of its power-hungry giant-state approaches24. However, to a certain extent, the LT cannot be fully credited for replacing the “old” European Union with the “new” European Union as had the Constitutional Treaty been implemented, the drastic changes wouldn’t have been brought as practically, democracy is a dynamic process that is always evolving. Though the Lisbon Treaty has sought to reduce democratic deficit as a result increasing citizen’s rights and boosting that of the qualified majority vote, it does not make it citizens to feel fully recognized, or included, in its policymaking. Analysts have noted that for the majority of citizens, the EU is still a vague set of institutions based in Brussels that consists of vague spokespersons who make decisions that are more to their benefits. Similar remarks were made on the old European Union and its founding treaties25. Recognition of Citizens An additional action that justifies the statement that the Treaty of Lisbon has replaced the “old” European Union with the “new” European Union is the introduction of an article that wholly recognizes the European citizenship26. In Article 10, the treaty requires that the European Parliament at the institutional level directly represent citizens. According to this article, the representative democracy should in addition be the pillar of the EU27. However, the recognition does not serve to possess strong symbolic value as it protects the principle of European Citizenships that existed in the founding treaties. With regard to this, it would also be safe to understand that the Treaty of Lisbon does not replace but amends the “old” European Union with the “new” European Union28. To strengthen this point, it is observable that Article 10 further contains the principle of proximity, which though new, requires that decisions be taken closely to the citizens29. This principle seeks to amend and not to replace the founding treaties as it serves to ensure that the EU’s competence is ensured. In this case, it demands that for any implementation, the participation of the local and national administration has to be invited. Even so, The Lisbon Treaty to a larger extent replaces the “old” European Union with the “new” European Union as unlike the founding treaties, it puts the citizens at the centre of focus. Indeed when the treaty took full effect in 2009, the European parliament assumed more power as it now has powers over legislation or finances. Citizens also began to have more say in a way European projects were conducted30. For instance, with time, the European Citizens Initiative (ECI) was unveiled to link the EU and its citizens as well as to eliminate its democratic shortfall31. The issue of the democratic deficit has come about in 2005 upon the rejection of the constitutional treaty by the Dutch and the French citizens citing lack of cohesion between the EU and its citizens. The Lisbon Treaty introduced the ECI to offer the public an opportunity to communicate directly to the commission32. It is critical to understand further that the Lisbon Treaty has not offered to replace the complex structures and procures of the old EU, but rather amend them. Unlike the founding treaties, the Lisbon Treaty to a large extent clarifies the EU’s operatives to make it possible for the citizens to better understand its functions33. In a similar context, the Lisbon Treaty seeks to make the EU’s work more transparent. Through it offers amendments and not replacement of the founding treaties, it offers better and simplified information to its citizens on the legislative proceedings’ content. Global Arena With reference to the global arena, the European Union as a major player on foreign and key policies has still a wide capability-expectation gap that the Lisbon Treaty still seeks to strengthen. For example, the difference in opinions on recent conflicts such as the American and Iraq have indicated that, like the old European Union that differed on the 2003 Iraq and Kosovo war, the EU lacks a formidable foreign and security policy that represents the entire Europe34. General Analysis On analysis of the Lisbon Treaty’s implications on its citizens, it can be argued that it cannot be credited for fundamentally changing the status quo as much of the original content of the Constitutional Treaty is preserved35. Furthermore, the treaty’s functions are intended to amend rather than replace the founding treaties. In fact, on deeper observation, the Lisbon Treaty would actually be non-existent if the amendment of the Amsterdam Treaty and the Nice Treaty are not amended. Consequently, the Lisbon Treaty has been criticized by for adding rather than subtracting the EU’s intricacies. Thus, though the LT is intended to simplify, it is much complex and has failed to change the earlier perception and awareness of the EU. For instance, only a sizable number of citizens are aware of their rights, meaning not many have been able to submit a petition or communicate directly with the EU. So long as this continue to be the case, a continual debate on the matters of legitimacy and that of the democratic deficit will continue to be vague, hence the Lisbon Treaty has to a larger extent served to replace the “old” European Union with the “new” European Union36. In conclusion, the Lisbon Treaty seeks to create expressly effective European Union that has particularly increased qualified majority voting and co-decision procedure. It also seeks to improve the democratic values as well as offer political changes that improve the EU’s policies in environmentalism, social welfare and economics while fortifying the Union as a global player with one voice37. In essence, after the failed Constitutional Treaty, the LT can be viewed as being the major component of the Union’s euphoric constitutionalism. 38The Lisbon Treaty has since its implementation in 2009 brought some revolutionary reform, some of which have tended to replace the “old” European Union with the “new” European Union39. It is however, safe to maintain that the LT was created with the purposes of amending the Union’s founding treaties. Even though it largely ensured necessary adjustments to the founding treaties that constituted the “old European Union”, it to a large extent has sought to bring in the old order. For instance, though the democratic deficit is much improved, with regard to public awareness and transparency, it still has a long way to go40. The LT can further be criticized for its complexity that has failed to unite the “new European Union” closer to the people. Overall, the Lisbon treaty has not replaced the “old” European Union with the “new” European Union’ and has instead just managed to amend EU’s founding treaties41. Bibliography Ackerman, B. We The People: Transformations, Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press, 1998. Alexander, L. (ed.) Constitutionalism: Philosophical Foundations, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003 Andenas, M., ‘Can Europe Have a Constitution?’ in Melissas, D. and I. Pernice, (eds) Perspectives of the Nice Treaty and the Intergovernmental Conference, Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2004. Bale, T. ‘The end of the nation-state?’ in European Politics: A Comparative Introduction, 2nd edn Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008. Bartolini, S., Restructuring Europe: Centre Formation, System Building, and Political Structuring Between the Nation State and the European Union, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2005 BBC News [online] (2010, 22 November) “Q&A: Irish Republic finances”, Available: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11766346 [Accessed: March 9, 2013]. Carr, E. “Europe’s Chance”, The Economist [online], The World in 2010: Beyond the economic crisis, Available: http://www.economist.com/node/14742167, (2009, 13 November), [Accessed: March 9, 2013]. Cini, M., ‘Intergovernmentalism’ in Cini, M. and N. Perez-Solorzano Borragan, European Union Politics, 3rd edn, Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 2012. Church, C. and D. Phinnemore, ‘From the Constitutional Treaty to the Treaty of Lisbon’ in Cini, M. and N. Perez-Solorzano Borragan, European Union Politics, Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 3rd edn, 2010. De Witte, B., The closest Thing to a Constitutional Conversation in Europe: The Semi-Permanent Treaty Revision Process, in P. Beaumont, C. Lyons and N. Walker (eds), Convergence and Divergence in European Public Law, Oxford, Hart, 2002, pp. 39-57. Declan J., Ratification by referendum – How Ireland changed from No to Yes, Paper presented at the 4th Annual Research Conference of the EU Centres of Excellence (EUCE), Delhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, June 8 - 10 2010, p.8. Demas-Marty, M. Towards a Truly Common Law. Europe as a laboratory for Legal Pluralism, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1994 De Witte, B. (ed.), Ten Reflections on the Constitutional Treaty for Europe, Fiesole (Firenze), EUI, Robert Schuman Centre, 2003 Dinan, D., ‘Governance and Institutional Developments: Coping Without the Constitutional Treaty’, Journal of Common Market Studies, 45 (s1) 67?87, 2007 Duff, A., True Guide to the Treaty of Lisbon, Available: http://www.euromove.org.uk/fileadmin/files_euromove/downloads/True_Guide_to_the_Treaty_of_Lisbon_EN_1_.pdf, 2007, [Accessed: March 9, 2013]. Europaforum.lu [online] “The Lisbon Treaty: Information leaflet for the citizens of the European Union”, Available: http://www.europaforum.public.lu/fr/dossiers-thematiques/2008/traite-lisbonne/Traite_Lisbonne_EN_08-04-2008_def_SIP.pdf [Accessed: March 9, 2013]. Erk, J., Real Constitution, Formal Constitution and Democracy in the European Union, Journal of Common Market Studies, June 8 - 10 2010, 45(3): 633?652 Fischer, J., Chirac, J., Blair, T. and P. Lipponen, ‘Reflections on a Constitution for Europe’ in Nelsen, B. F. and A. Stubb, The European Union: Readings on the Theory and Practice of European Integration, Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003 Gilbert, M., Surpassing Realism: The Politics of European Integration since 1945, Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield, 2003 Guyomarch A., Machin, H. & Ritchie, E., France in the European Union, New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 1998 Hill, C., The Capability-Expectations Gap, or Conceptualizing Europe’s International Role’, Journal of Common Market Studies, 31(3): 305-328, 1993 Jean-Claude P., The Lisbon Treaty: A Legal and Political Analysis. 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 450pages Kesselman, M. and J. Krieger, The European Union, the Failed Constitution, and the Prospects Ahead’ in European Politics in Transition, Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2009. Marquand, D., A Parliament for Europe, London, Jonathan Cape, 1979. Raz, J. On the Authority and Interpretation of Constitutions: Some Preliminaries, 1998. Reh, C. (2009) ‘The Lisbon Treaty: De-Constitutionalizing the European Union? Journal of Common Market Studies, 47(3): 625-650. Risse, T. and M. Kleine, ‘Assessing the Legitimacy of the EU’s Treaty Revision Methods’, Journal of Common Market Studies, 45(1): 69?80, 2007 Robert, K. O. Paradise and Power: America and Europe in the New World Order, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2003, p.22. Stone, S., Governing with Judges. Constitutional Politics in Europe. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2007. Snyder F., The Unfinished Constitution of the European Union: Principles, Processes and Culture’, in J.H.H. Weiler and M. Wind (eds.), European Constitutionalism Beyond the State, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2003, pp. 55-73 Taggart, P., The Domestic Politics of the 2005 French and Dutch Referendums and Their Challenge for the Study of European Integration, Journal of Common Market Studies, 44, Annual Review, 2006, pp. 7-25. The Economist [online] “What Lisbon contains: The small print of a notably complicated document”, Available: http://www.economist.com/node/10024471?story_id=10024471, 2007, 25 June, [Accessed: March 9, 2013]. The Economist [online] “Allons, citoyens de l’Europe: Yet another dubious provision in the Lisbon treaty: citizens’ initiatives”, Available: http://www.economist.com/node/15269065, (2010, 14 January), [Accessed: March 13, 2013]. The Economist [online] (2010, 21 October) “The treat of treaties: Why the European Union is talking yet again of renegotiating its rulebook”, Available: http://www.economist.com/node/17307985?story_id=17307985 [Accessed: March 9. 2013]. The Economist [online] “A grim tale of judges and politicians: The scary effect of constitutional courts on the politics of the European Union”, Available: http://www.economist.com/node/17414379?story_id=17414379, (2010, 4 November), Accessed: March 9, 2013. The Economist [online] “Just bury it: It is time to accept that the Lisbon treaty is dead. The European Union can get along well enough without it” Available: http://www.economist.com/node/11580732, 2008, 19 June, Accessed: March 9, 2013. Weiler, J., A Constitution for Europe? Some Hard Choices, Journal of Common Market Studies, 40(5): 563?580, 2002 Zweifel, T., Democratic Deficit? Institutions and Regulation in the European Union, Switzerland and the United States, Lanham, Lexington Books, 2002 Ondarza, Nicolai and Roderick Parkes. "Implementing the Lisbon Treaty's Solidarity Clause, SWP Comment, "Solidarity or Sovereignty? EU Cooperation in Civil Protection" in Journal of European Integration 28/5". pp. 457-476, 2010 Zurn, M. & Jurgen Neyer, The Condition s of Compliance“, in: Michael Zurn / Christian Joerges (eds.): Law and Governance in Postnational Europe, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 183 – 217, 2005 P. Craig & G. De Burca (eds), 1999, The Evolution of the EU Law, Oxford, Oxford University Press. Eur-Lex [online] (2007) “Treaty of Lisbon amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community, signed at Lisbon, 13 December 2007”, Official Journal of the European Union, Avalaible: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:C:2007:306:SOM:EN:HTML [Accessed: 18 November 2010]. Read More