header-logo header-logo

17 July 2008 / Seamus Burns
Issue: 7330 / Categories: Features , EU
printer mail-detail

No=Maybe=Yes

Seamus Burns considers whether or not the Irish “no vote” means the Lisbon Treaty is confirmed dead

The rejection of the Lisbon Treaty, (LT) by the voters of the Republic of Ireland on 12 June 2008 can be interpreted as a total and final repudiation of LT with the juggernaut of ever-increasing EU integration being derailed, or alternatively viewed as merely an inconvenient red stop signal halting only temporarily the EU train on its relentless one-way journey to the federal EU superstate called Europe.

Background

The Lisbon Treaty was signed by the governments of the 27 member states of the EU in December 2007. LT had been created and designed to replace the draft European Constitution, which itself had been rejected by the voters of France and Holland in referendums held in both countries in 2005. Each of the 27 member states had to then subsequently ratify the LT before it came into force. Moreover, under EU rules all 27 member states had to ratify LT before it became effective, thus in essence conferring a veto to all member states. As at 23/6/2008, 18 of the

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll