eurealist.co.uk

EUbusiness - ‘No’ camp accuses French government of pro-constitution propaganda: “French opponents of the EU constitution on Tuesday accused the government of illegal propaganda for issuing a pre-referendum information dossier which they say is clearly biased towards the ‘yes’ camp.

Philippe de Villiers, who heads the anti-EU Movement for France, filed suit before the Constitutional Council — the body that supervises elections in France — claiming that a text that accompanies a copy of the EU constitution ‘is of a nature to pervert the sincerity of the vote.’”

The controversial document — entitled a “presentation of motives” — is contained in a dossier to be sent out to France’s 42 million voters by May 14 — two weeks ahead of the referendum on May 29

EUobserver.com:

Pressure is mounting on the Swedish government to allow a referendum on the EU Constitution, as “Over 120,000 Swedes have signed a petition calling for a the Constitution to be put to a referendum, this is something the Swedish government do not want to risk, as in the last EU related referendum in September 2003 a majority of Swedes rejected the euro. So much for the EU claims of any democratic mandate.

An article in Die Welt by Professor for public law at Ludwig-Maximilian University Munich Peter M. Huber

The parliaments of the member states must control the Council of Ministers better.

In the article Huber suggests that the EU Constitution will lead to a further disempowerment of the member states”, and will cause a major constitutional problem in Germany. He says, “Individual voters, as well as the Federal Constitutional Court will lose influence in the democratic decision-making process.

Huber suggests that it is urgently required also from the point of view of the Basic Law to markedly extend the influence of the Bundestag on the law-making in the European Union. So far the Basic Law regulated procedures was not sufficient, in order to prevent the continuous deprivation of power of the parliament.

The democratic endorsement level drops, the constitutional basic choice of the people’s sovereignty and democracy would be under pressure. There needs to be a stronger participation of the national parliaments in the law-making process of the European Union it is the most important vehicle, in order to solve the authentication and problems of acceptance.

FT.com / Comment & analysis / Letters - Europe’s centralising dynamic must be checked: ”
Europe’s centralising dynamic must be checked
By Prof Roland Vaubel

Published: March 23 2005 02:00

From Prof Roland Vaubel on behalf of the European Constitutional Group.

Sir, The signatories to this letter - more than 100 from universities and think-tanks in Europe - unite in rejecting the agreement reached by heads of state or government on the proposed constitution for the European Union. We call on the peoples of the Union to withhold ratification through their parliamentary representatives or through referendums.

First, the proposed constitution paves the way for ever-more matters to be decided at an ever-increasing distance from the citizen. Instead of trying to provide a clear focus on what the Union can do best and leave the rest to member states and their regions, the constitution opens doors for the Union to pre-empt the role of other jurisdictions in an increasing number of fields.

Second, the proposed constitution opens up numerous new avenues for increased regulation in Europe. It would undermine Europe’s competitiveness in the world economy. Europe needs less regulation, not more.

Third, by centralising policymaking the proposed constitution gives the state more power over the citizens and suppresses international differences in preferences and needs. The centralising dynamic has to be checked by institutions that do not have a vested interest in centralisation.

Fourth, the fundamental purpose of a constitution to base the rules of political association on popular assent cannot be achieved with such a complicated and ambiguous document.

Crucially important matters such as whether or not the Union has the power to tax or how the charter of rights is to be applied have been left deliberately obscure or have become hopelessly over-complicated.

We do not deny that the proposed constitution costitution contains some positive elements. But on balance it clearly makes things worse. It pushes people still further away from those who exercise power in their name. It must be rejected.

Roland Vaubel, Professor of Economics, University of Mannheim, D-68131 Mannheim, Germany

For the complete list of signatories and their affiliations see the website http:// admin.fnst.universum.de/uploads/1207/ LetterDD.pdf