Recent events demonstrated once more to the world how European Union executives would like their citizens to behave. Many people witnessed how entire nations and personalities were abused if lobbyists had reason to suspect dissent regarding the EU treaty and a voting result other than the desired one. Defamation and the pressure imposed were unprecedented. Was that not in contradiction to the statement of the German Constitutional Court which named the European Union member states – not the Brussels officials! – the “Sovereigns of the treaty”? The court also attested both institutional and structural deficits in democracy to the treaty. After all that should not come as a surprise considering that this treaty is the final outcome of a sinister concept pursued for 50 years aiming from the start for power to control Europe in America`s interest. And democracy never had a place in this concept. It fits the plan that the functionaries would love to apply the treaty to Switzerland straightaway, although they know well that a majority of the Swiss say, No, we do not want that. The EU style sham democracy procedures, in which political positions and institutions are only too often more important than people will make sure that citizens with a true feeling for self-rule and independence will realize only after some time where the democracy deficits are after the treaty takes effect. In order to push through the treaty’s ratification, a propaganda and blackmailing campaign costing billions of taxpayers’ euros was unleashed. Especially “the German policy”, it was claimed1, “is tearing down democratic minimum standards, which, already at various stages of the ratification process of the so-called Lisbon Treaty, have been ridiculed”. Meanwhile every child knows that a EU referendum “can be repeated until the PR offensive achieves the desired results”2. In view of the fact that the “elites” were anxious not to disclose the actual contents of the treaty (such as the introduction of the death penalty for insurgents) some consider this a cold coup d’état. In retrospect one can only realize now what should have been thematized much earlier. Danish member of the European Parliament Jens-Peter Bonde for instance stated as early as in March 2008: “The European Council has issued an order that no institution within the European Union is permitted to publish or print a concise and readable version of the reform treaty before it was ratified by all 27 member states.”3 This highly undemocratic behavior was observed until Vaclav Klaus’ final signature had been obtained. The opinion is voiced by more and more people that the European Union as such is incompatible with democracy for structural reasons, and that all efforts to democratize it are doomed to failure. Organization and structure of the EU do not leave room for democracy and EU bureaucrats never intended to do so. However, Europe gets less compliant with these procedures and the ever-expanding boundaries of the Union. The haste was too obvious, especially when Berlin urged to ratify. Thus, democratic principles were circumvented and the people disempowered. The Swiss, too, refuse to tolerate such malice from inside or outside and do not fall for misleaders who want to define politics as a business of lies, deceit, show and seduction4 and who have no heart for the unique Swiss model. Here and there, evidence grows that this fake democracy will not be tolerated by the citizenry for much longer. Malicious gossip has it that Augean stables like the EU need a muck-out. Alternatives to the current system need to be established and then things should be a bit fairer. A fair undertaking, which is a reliable und successful alternative to the EU, is EFTA, the European Free Trade Agreement. Still valid, it honors national sovereignty and is strictly against the principle of supranationality. Moreover, this alternative offers a platform at the level of membership states to discuss questions concerning the welfare of the country and its citizens in a free and equal manner without political dependencies. Something to think about eventually for certain states interested in keeping their national sovereignty. It hurts to remember the words of Klaus uttered after his signing the treaty, when he warned of the consequences of the EU reform treaty: “With the Lisbon treaty taking effect the Czech Republic ceases to be a sovereign state.”5 Since democratic political intensity is mostly linked with small units, democracy tends to come in small entities – or put in other words “How much Europe can democracy stand?” 6 Therefore, we should not expect too much of an illegitimate “federal state” with the current size of the EU if it comes to democracy. In fact Europe had an uneasy sense beforehand: not only had the EU been able to sort out a single annual budget for 14 years7, the citizens also felt the lack of democratic principles in their daily lives, although many tried to put up with that somehow. If the democratic principle demands that laws of the state are executed by democratically legitimized bodies of that state, then this is no longer fulfilled under the conditions of the reform treaty. This is something unheard of since the times of monarchy. Which modern citizen wishes these times to come back?8 Democracy and free government under the law are expressions of freedom. All justice is based on freedom and where there is no justice there is no freedom either. Citizens who feel attached to the principles of freedom, human rights, habeas corpus and rule of law will always dare to defend these hard-won rights again, which their ancestors had fought for over centuries. A necessary decision in order to “reestablish the fundamental principle of democracy”9 and re-enforce the people’s will. Citizens are beginning to realize the necessity of not giving up the fundamental principle of democracy and maintaining the notion that all legal power is derived from the people.10 If they want to defend these values for the future, the citizens will have to face considerable resistance under current anti-democratic EU conditions. For that matter any country may recall the approved elements of direct democracy as they have been developed in Switzerland, where they are executed as people’s votes, people’s initiatives and referendums and belong to the routine of daily life to this day – reminding the world that in Switzerland the citizens matter and the will of the people is the decisive element of politics. 1 Defenestration of Prague, Number Four, http://www.german-foreign-policy.com/en/fulltext/56288 of 14 October 2009 Current Concerns
Strengthening True Democratic Tendencies in Europe
http://www.currentconcerns.ch/index.php?id=941
About the historical situation with the EU Reform Treaty taking effect
by Dr Titine Kriesi, Switzerland
Now we learn that in the “new EU”, the European Council is entitled to legal modifications without consent by either the European or the national parliaments, the European Parliament has no actual democratic legitimacy, the European Commission is the only body with the right to legal initiatives and the European Court does by no means observe the democratic principle of separation of powers. In other words, the fog lifts rapidly and truth comes to the surface. Sobered and disillusioned citizens grasp the consequences of the treaty and foresee the loss of democracy in their daily lives. It will be even harder for them to put up with the factual “thinning” of their political influence, for instance when they realize that “their countries” have practically no longer a national jurisdiction…Democracy deficits and growing resistance
EFTA preserves national sovereignty
Democracy in small entities
No foreign judges – re-enforcing the people’s will
Resorting to the nation state being the only legal protection will be unavoidable, as well as a reconsideration of fairness, meaningful lives and values which bring people together and establish peace. Gradually reclaiming Europe, in which decisions are made in consensus rather than according to power balance, where people can act in close association with each other – this ought to be on today’s agenda. Just like Immanuel Kant already wrote in his essay “Perpetual Peace”: only democracy (or the republic) can guarantee peace. •
2 ibid.
3 Bonde Jens-Peter, dänischer EU-Abgeordneter im März 2008. In: Der “kalte Staatsstreich” der EU – Wie der Lissabonner Vertrag die EU-Nationen entmachtet, www.sein.de/gesellschaft/politik/2009/der-kalte-staatsstreich-der-eu.htm
4 Cf. Leuenberger, Moritz: Bundesrat ist ein mächtiges Amt. Thurgauer Zeitung, 26 January 2008, and: Das Böse, das Gute, die Politik. Bern, Luzern, 6 September 2002
5 europolitan: Vaclav Klaus unterschreibt EU-Reformvertrag – Regelwerk tritt endlich in Kraft, 5 November 2009, p. 1
6 Prof. K.A. Schachtschneider, Constitutional Complaint, 25 May 2008, p. 263.
7 Cf. Andreasen, Marta: Brussels Laid Bare, 2009, ISBN 978-0-9554188-1-5
8 Form 1849 on, Albert Galeer suggested a united Europe in terms of a democratic Europe as an alternative concept to a Europe of monarchies in his magazine “L’Alliance des Peuples – Der Völkerbund”.
9 Prof. K.A. Schachtschneider, Constitutional Complaint, 25 May 2008, p. 74
10 Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany (Grundgesetz, GG), Art. 20, par.2,1
Saturday, 26 December 2009
Posts
