eurealist.co.uk

From Anne Palmer;
Perhaps the Jack Straws of this world would apply themselves to the questions raised in this article. One thing the Constituion will do is increase the powers the EU has over its citizens.

CONVINCED that, while remaining proud of their own national identities and history, the peoples of Europe are determined to transcend their former divisions and, united ever more closely, to forge a common destiny,

GRATEFUL to the members of the European Convention for having
prepared the draft of this Constitution on behalf of the citizens and States of Europe,WHO, having exchanged their full powers, found in good and due form, have agreed as follows:
Eurealist Files

Citizenship of the European Union.

Each ratified new EU Treaty has resulted in the transferring of more national sovereignty to the European Union, for with the Maastricht Treaty one of the biggest changes was, from a “Community”(of nation states working together-a free association of sovereign states) to, as the title suggests a “Union”, a political entity, a new creation. It became a highly centralised creation. We also became “citizens” of this Union and there is an argument for realising that because the United Kingdom is a subordinate constituent of the European Union, must we consider that our citizenship is subordinate to EU citizenship? And if not now, will this happen when the EU has gathered for itself more authority through the EU constitution? Where will allegiance lie? Is it with the laws of the European Union or with the United Kingdom? Can one create a citizenship without a STATE? To add insult to injury, acceptance of EU Citizenship was not a voluntary matter, we had to accept it, and it was thrust upon us.

We should ask ourselves, what is the point in creating European Citizenship? The answer has to be for the creating of one State, and an obligation by the citizen to that state. The Commission proposed that the European Citizen would have the right of free residence and movement and a right to vote in local and European parliamentary elections, (municipal) and it said that targets for the definition of the individuals civic, economic and social rights would be set at a later stage. There is also a question of what the word “municipal” means, does it mean, ‘local’ or ‘national’ and in the end it will surely be the European Court of Justice that decides. Food for thought?

The Encyclopaedia Britannica defines “citizenship” as the “relationship between an individual and state, defined by the law of that state, with corresponding duties and rights”, so the new state can decide and change those duties anytime it wants to. We have been given “new” rights in the charter of fundamental rights. One thing we have not been given “is the RIGHT to say “NO”. We were never given the chance by the EU or our Government, for they did not ask whether we wanted EU citizenship.

We are told not to worry, it is only “additional to”, an “add on”, a bonus” not “in place of”, so WHAT is the point of it? Accept the EU constitution and then ask where will our oaths of allegiance lie? Will it be in conflict with our oath to the Queen? Perhaps we should change our loyal oath and then it will not be in conflict? That change to our oath is happening now (SOCA and police) yet these changes are contrary to our Constitution. According to R v Thistlewood 1820, to destroy the Constitution is “an act of treason”. If that action is an act of treason-repeal the Treason Acts then? This has happened already. I would like you to think about this puzzle. What if the European Court of Justice decided that the Oath of Allegiance to our Queen was superseded by a superior allegiance owed to a different political organisation such as the European Union? The Constitution we have recently accepted knowing and agreeing that it is superior even to our highest Court, and cabinet, proving eventually that the European Union citizenship we thought was additional to, is now superior to our British citizenship? What then? Can any Government of this Country afford to take a chance? Is it not being the tiniest bit reckless with our country?

Simply using the European Communities Act to remove this Country from the Union after ratification of the EU constitution may well bring down scorn from the Union. What about the Exit clause that this Country’s Government have ‘freely and willingly’ agreed to? Try and get the other 24 states (that might no longer exist) to agree?

We are only just beginning to realise just how precious “citizenship”, is to us. It is an attribute most dear to an individual, and primarily acquired by virtue of birth. If it is not acquired by birth, citizenship is acquired by conscious and carefully considered application-in this country by a process of naturalisation.

There is no doubt that this EU citizenship comes within the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. Therefore, the duties imposed by the Treaty (of Maastricht and any further treaties) will be adjudicated upon by the European Court of Justice. When we consider that the European Court of Justice describes itself in political terms as the agent for greater federalism, we should sit up and take note of that fact. It is also important to note that the preamble is justiciable and something the European Court of Justice is obliged to take into account.

With citizenship goes the right to deny oneself citizenship, in other words, to give it up. We cannot repeal the EU citizenship that has been “bestowed” upon us. It has been suggested that the only way in which a “European national” could renounce his European citizenship is to renounce the nationality of his birth or the nationality he acquired by naturalisation. This makes a nonsense because in international law, no one is allowed to be “stateless”. Why did I, along with many others renounce our European Citizenship? This came about after the Home Secretary gave himself the powers to remove the citizenship of a person born here in the UK. The thought was by renouncing the one citizenship-EU-we could not then have our British citizenship removed, leaving us simply with EU citizenship.

What is the purpose of citizenship of the EU? We can read that “Citizens shall be subject to the duties imposed” but nowhere are those duties made clear. Only a fool signs a contract without knowing what their “duties” are. What if it is a ‘duty’ to pay taxes? To eventually have our youth “conscripted” into a Euro Army? This was brought home to us very recently over our involvement in Iraq, when other countries, quite correctly used their own authority to keep out of it. In an EU State, we would have to do as we are told. If a European State decides that its forces are to go into Iraq, we would have to conform because our EU citizenship will eventually place a duty and an obligation on us to abide by their orders.

Union Citizenship cannot be acquired alone, nor can it be forfeited without giving up nationality. EU Citizenship becomes a nightmare. It becomes like Ivy that clings to another living plant until eventually it strangles the life out of that that gave it life in the first place.

I have placed a great deal of emphasis on EU Citizenship, because there is a great deal in the proposed EU documentation, from schools to old age on “deeper and more meaningful EU citizenship. And a proposed increase for “town” and or “schools” for “twinning” (Wasn’t there an Oath made in that too?).