The EU’s statements on these topics and how they match with reality.
|What Does the EU Say It Is?||What Is the EU Reality?|
|From the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), Article 14: “The European Parliament shall, jointly with the Council, exercise legislative and budgetary functions. It shall exercise functions of political control and consultation as laid down in the Treaties.”
From the TFEU, Article 17: “Union legislative acts may only be adopted on the basis of a Commission proposal, except where the Treaties provide otherwise.”
|Clearly “legislative…functions” do not include proposing or implementing laws, so there is a contradiction between these two Articles. In practice Article 17 holds but Article 14 doesn’t. The European Parliament does not “exercise legislative and budgetary functions”, as stated in the Article, though it may veto proposed legislation (except that in practice it doesn’t). The Parliament is redundant, except as a screen and to reinforce the pretence that the EU is democratic.|
|The EU is based on the rule of law. Everything the EU does is founded on treaties, voluntarily and democratically agreed by its EU countries. Law and justice are upheld by an independent judiciary.
The EU has made it clear that it expects everything to be tied up in law and so subject to the remit of the Court of Justice of the European Union. For example, from the Withdrawal Agreements (Article 166):
“The decisions adopted by the Joint Committee shall be binding on the Union and the United Kingdom, and the Union and the United Kingdom shall implement those decisions. They shall have the same legal effect as this Agreement.”
|The honourable judges of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) have shown themselves to be above natural justice and indeed any other law than their own. Union law and its guardian, the CJEU, are the means by which a federal government continues to be stealthily imposed on the citizens of Europe and their democratically elected governments.
The Withdrawal Agreements tell us much about the EU project, about the UK’s supine Governments and about the threat to seriously weaken the UK’s democratic system.
Article 166 states clearly that decisions of the Joint Committee will override any non-compliant decisions of the UK Government. Has the UK Government notified its citizens and voters that their elected governments can be overruled in this way?
The European Union is primarily a political project. Union law and its guardian, the CJEU, are the means by which a federal government continues to be stealthily imposed on the citizens of Europe and their democratically elected governments.
|‘Euro-law’ takes precedence in all areas where the acquis communautaire has been authorised, which means it overrides national law almost everywhere.
In an important ruling in 1964, the European Court of Justice said that the states had agreed to limit their sovereign rights in the areas covered by the treaty and could not adopt national laws that were incompatible with European law.
|Law-making dominates the activities of the EU institutions and while the European Parliament has to approve all laws it does not have the power to initiate them, which lies with the non-elected Commission and the Council. This is already evident in the volume of unnecessary legislation to which member states and their peoples have to conform in order to participate in the union projects.
The EU acquis communautaire dominates huge areas of our everyday life. The rules are made by a legislature in which citizens play no part. “No longer is European law an incoming tide flowing up the estuaries of England. It is now like a tidal wave bringing down our sea walls and flowing inland over our fields and houses – to the dismay of all.” Lord Denning in 1974.
|“Accepting and respecting a final judgement is what it means to be part of a Union based on the rule of law. Member States gave final jurisdiction to the European Court of Justice. The judgements of the Court have to be respected by all.”
From Jean-Claude Juncker’s State of the Union presentation in September 2017.
|In this quotation “the law” means EU law, which is enforced by the European Court of Justice; it is fundamentally different from English law. The benefit of parliamentary law over expert, judge-made, law is one of the most important ways in which the UK is different from most EU countries. Common Law (the UK variety) is necessary for democracy and without it (and with Continental Europe’s Civil Law tradition) democracy may slowly decay and die (e.g. Poland, Hungary). Laws based on precedent can be changed through popular agreement, which means that they become popularly accepted, unlike EU law, which is handed down from on high and is aimed mainly to whose benefit?
The rule of law is a declared value that the EU does not itself always follow, while it expects everyone else to do so. They claim that law and justice are upheld by an independent judiciary but in practice the judiciary is not independent of the European Commission and other EU institutions.
|“To coordinate better regulation in the Commission and ensure every proposal respects the principles of subsidiarity (no EU intervention when an issue can be dealt with effectively by EU countries) and proportionality (EU action must not exceed what is necessary to achieve the objectives), which are at the heart of the Commission’s work.
Better regulation is a way of working to ensure:
|Over-regulation is a persistent problem with the EU bureaucracy. Bendy bananas and curved cucumbers became a popular joke that caused the authorities to relent, but damage to competition and innovation is real in many cases, from farming to finance. A frequent complaint about the EU is its obsession with regulation. Is this necessary and are the regulators qualified to set the rules? Not always.
EU (Roman) law overrules and undermines UK (Common) law. While Britain remains in the EU (or if it leaves under some ‘soft-Brexit’ formula) we are subject to the judgements of a ‘superior’ court, even when these matters are purely local. Article 13 of the Treaty on European Union obliges the EU’s institutions to act within the limits of their competences under the treaties; however, these competences are relentlessly expanding with every decision of the Commission and every judgement of the ECJ. The ECJ is mandated to make judgements that further the aims of the EU’s treaties regardless of the best interests of member states.
The need to make joining the acquis communautaire a legal obligation results from the underlying federalist ideology. EU leaders can’t rely on their powers of argument or persuasion and they certainly can’t rely on the enthusiasm of their citizens, so union has to be enforced by multiple laws and regulations.