Comments for Behind the Scenes http://blogs.euobserver.com/mahony Honor Mahony is editor of the EUobserver in Brussels and has also written for The Irish Times, Sunday Business Post and Spiegel Online. Her blog takes a closer look at political life in Brussels as well as wider trends in the European Union. Fri, 10 Feb 2012 09:17:51 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 Comment on Taking your friends to court by Denis Cooper http://blogs.euobserver.com/mahony/2012/02/07/taking-your-friends-to-court/comment-page-1/#comment-28187 Denis Cooper Fri, 10 Feb 2012 09:17:51 +0000 http://blogs.euobserver.com/mahony/?p=1571#comment-28187 Victor - Firstly, Article 259 TFEU starts: "A Member State which considers that another Member State has failed to fulfil an obligation under the Treaties may bring the matter before the Court of Justice of the European Union." As the "fiscal pact" is not part of "the Treaties", ie the EU treaties, this Article is inapplicable to any obligation under the "fiscal pact" which is not already an obligation under the EU treaties, and there is no obligation under the EU treaties for a member state to adopt a "balanced budget rule" and enshrine it in its law. Secondly, Article 126(10) explicitly excludes the ECJ from any involvement in the excessive deficit procedure: "The rights to bring actions provided for in Articles 258 and 259 may not be exercised within the framework of paragraphs 1 to 9 of this Article." Thirdly, why do you think that the "fiscal pact" itself does not cite Article 259 as a legal base for involvement of the ECJ, but falls back on Article 273? Fourthly, why do you think that the later drafts of the "fiscal pact" attempt to justify the imposition of fines by a misleading partial gloss of Article 260? Article 260 starts: "If the Court of Justice of the European Union finds that a Member State has failed to fulfil an obligation under the Treaties, the State shall be required to take the necessary measures to comply with the judgment of the Court." and once again it is inapplicable when the obligation is not an obligation under the Treaties, ie the EU treaties. Victor -

Firstly, Article 259 TFEU starts:

“A Member State which considers that another Member State has failed to fulfil an obligation under the Treaties may bring the matter before the Court of Justice of the European Union.”

As the “fiscal pact” is not part of “the Treaties”, ie the EU treaties, this Article is inapplicable to any obligation under the “fiscal pact” which is not already an obligation under the EU treaties, and there is no obligation under the EU treaties for a member state to adopt a “balanced budget rule” and enshrine it in its law.

Secondly, Article 126(10) explicitly excludes the ECJ from any involvement in the excessive deficit procedure:

“The rights to bring actions provided for in Articles 258 and 259 may not be exercised within the framework of paragraphs 1 to 9 of this Article.”

Thirdly, why do you think that the “fiscal pact” itself does not cite Article 259 as a legal base for involvement of the ECJ, but falls back on Article 273?

Fourthly, why do you think that the later drafts of the “fiscal pact” attempt to justify the imposition of fines by a misleading partial gloss of Article 260?

Article 260 starts:

“If the Court of Justice of the European Union finds that a Member State has failed to fulfil an obligation under the Treaties, the State shall be required to take the necessary measures to comply with the judgment of the Court.”

and once again it is inapplicable when the obligation is not an obligation under the Treaties, ie the EU treaties.

]]> Comment on Taking your friends to court by Victor http://blogs.euobserver.com/mahony/2012/02/07/taking-your-friends-to-court/comment-page-1/#comment-28143 Victor Thu, 09 Feb 2012 20:40:53 +0000 http://blogs.euobserver.com/mahony/?p=1571#comment-28143 @Cooper Please compare Article 273 with Article 259...what is the purpose of Article 273 then? The purpose of the Union is for disputes to be solved peacefully by either political or legal means. Article 273, which is one of the oldest in the treaties, has the general purpose you deny, even if doesn't talk specifically about fines. The EU Court has the same powers between EU states in the subject matter of the treaties (which is quite broad) under special agreements as would say the International Court of Justice. The purpose is for disputes between EU states to be solved by EU judges. @Cooper
Please compare Article 273 with Article 259…what is the purpose of Article 273 then?
The purpose of the Union is for disputes to be solved peacefully by either political or legal means.
Article 273, which is one of the oldest in the treaties, has the general purpose you deny, even if doesn’t talk specifically about fines.
The EU Court has the same powers between EU states in the subject matter of the treaties (which is quite broad) under special agreements as would say the International Court of Justice.
The purpose is for disputes between EU states to be solved by EU judges.

]]> Comment on Taking your friends to court by Ivan Bilderberg http://blogs.euobserver.com/mahony/2012/02/07/taking-your-friends-to-court/comment-page-1/#comment-28129 Ivan Bilderberg Thu, 09 Feb 2012 16:16:08 +0000 http://blogs.euobserver.com/mahony/?p=1571#comment-28129 European Union (EU) is neither the reincarnation of Charlemagne's empire nor a virtuous peoples' Europe that will sweep away warring nation-states. Instead, the EU is a set of agricultural subsidies and an arrangement for free trade with a complicated system of rules worked out by the member states to protect their interests. http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/55417/patrick-mccarthy/the-grand-bargain-a-new-book-demystifies-european-integration Some stats: A, 85% of agro subsidies in EU stays in west. B, Eurofonds from EU to Slovakia equal Slovakia to EU till 2009, and 11% diference 2010 and 11. C, Productivity of Slovakia is (+/-) 60% of Denmark, but wages are only 17%. We call it Colonization Fee http://www.scribd.com/doc/48468193/Colonization-Fee Solutions: To protect market, country and economy Eastern countries of EU must apply high import taxes on those goods from EU which are highly subsidized and where is disparity of income/productivity. We work as germans do but we live like 3rd world countries. All state reps must file oath to the country similar as Hungary did to bankers in their New Consti. Watch viideo and see how Schultz get red face http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvadsbue_wY Like it or not. There is nothing on the west. Almost ZERO natural resources. As Putin once stated: You even do not have wood for heating houses. And You see what he does. Iran is just another story. Iranian rep in Berlin said: If you do not want to our goods China and India will. And they pay in gold. Watch how petrodollar shakin'. It was nice game, folx, but is over. www.one-evil.org European Union (EU) is neither the reincarnation of Charlemagne’s empire nor a virtuous peoples’ Europe that will sweep away warring nation-states. Instead, the EU is a set of agricultural subsidies and an arrangement for free trade with a complicated system of rules worked out by the member states to protect their interests.
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/55417/patrick-mccarthy/the-grand-bargain-a-new-book-demystifies-european-integration

Some stats:
A, 85% of agro subsidies in EU stays in west.
B, Eurofonds from EU to Slovakia equal Slovakia to EU till 2009, and 11% diference 2010 and 11.
C, Productivity of Slovakia is (+/-) 60% of Denmark, but wages are only 17%. We call it Colonization Fee
http://www.scribd.com/doc/48468193/Colonization-Fee

Solutions: To protect market, country and economy Eastern countries of EU must apply high import taxes on those goods from EU which are highly subsidized and where is disparity of income/productivity. We work as germans do but we live like 3rd world countries.
All state reps must file oath to the country similar as Hungary did to bankers in their New Consti.
Watch viideo and see how Schultz get red face
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvadsbue_wY

Like it or not. There is nothing on the west. Almost ZERO natural resources. As Putin once stated: You even do not have wood for heating houses. And You see what he does. Iran is just another story. Iranian rep in Berlin said: If you do not want to our goods China and India will. And they pay in gold. Watch how petrodollar shakin’.

It was nice game, folx, but is over.
http://www.one-evil.org

]]> Comment on Taking your friends to court by Jose Maria G http://blogs.euobserver.com/mahony/2012/02/07/taking-your-friends-to-court/comment-page-1/#comment-28125 Jose Maria G Thu, 09 Feb 2012 14:57:22 +0000 http://blogs.euobserver.com/mahony/?p=1571#comment-28125 Given the testimony from today’s court case in Georgia, Obama has a lot of explaining to do. http://radiopatriot.wordpress.com/2012/01/26/today-the-lights-went-out-in-ga-for-obama/ A former employee of one of the world’s largest international banks has provided WND with more than 1,000 pages of documents, including customer account ledgers for dozens of companies through which the financial institution was laundering money each month, according to the whistleblower. http://www.wnd.com/2012/02/see-big-bank-money-laundering-evidence/ In London, a symbiotic relationship formed between the City Corporation and the Crown of England. Indeed, to this day, the monarch observes the custom of obtaining permission from the Lord Mayor before entering the one-mile-square City. The City became the prime influence on English politics, and gained a reputation as the maker of kings. The City would always support the Crown, as long as the support was mutual. If not, the City would make sure that someone more cooperative took over. A book called London For Ever: The Sovereign City, by Colonel Robert Blackham, published in the early 1930s, explains it well: http://www.quintessentialpublications.com/tracyrtwyman/?p=2636 Paradoxically Rand’s capitalist ideals have gone far off the course defined by Adam Smith, warping into an unwritten conspiracy binding conservative politicians and the egocentric excesses of Wall Street, Corporate CEOs, and the Forbes 400 Super Rich. Warning: Rand hates altruism, religion, social programs, average folks. http://www.marketwatch.com/story/ayn-rands-death-of-the-soul-of-capitalism-2011-06-14 Given the testimony from today’s court case in Georgia, Obama has a lot of explaining to do.
http://radiopatriot.wordpress.com/2012/01/26/today-the-lights-went-out-in-ga-for-obama/
A former employee of one of the world’s largest international banks has provided WND with more than 1,000 pages of documents, including customer account ledgers for dozens of companies through which the financial institution was laundering money each month, according to the whistleblower.
http://www.wnd.com/2012/02/see-big-bank-money-laundering-evidence/
In London, a symbiotic relationship formed between the City Corporation and the Crown of England. Indeed, to this day, the monarch observes the custom of obtaining permission from the Lord Mayor before entering the one-mile-square City. The City became the prime influence on English politics, and gained a reputation as the maker of kings. The City would always support the Crown, as long as the support was mutual. If not, the City would make sure that someone more cooperative took over. A book called London For Ever: The Sovereign City, by Colonel Robert Blackham, published in the early 1930s, explains it well:
http://www.quintessentialpublications.com/tracyrtwyman/?p=2636
Paradoxically Rand’s capitalist ideals have gone far off the course defined by Adam Smith, warping into an unwritten conspiracy binding conservative politicians and the egocentric excesses of Wall Street, Corporate CEOs, and the Forbes 400 Super Rich.
Warning: Rand hates altruism, religion, social programs, average folks.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/ayn-rands-death-of-the-soul-of-capitalism-2011-06-14

]]> Comment on Taking your friends to court by Patrick http://blogs.euobserver.com/mahony/2012/02/07/taking-your-friends-to-court/comment-page-1/#comment-28101 Patrick Thu, 09 Feb 2012 11:31:57 +0000 http://blogs.euobserver.com/mahony/?p=1571#comment-28101 I wouldn't make any assumptions about Hollande just yet. Let's not forget that he is the former protege of Jacques Delors and thus potentially even more pro-European than Sarkozy. On the the fiscal pact, all he's asked for is for measures to encourage growth to be added. He already came out in favour of the debt brake last year. Similarly, I wouldn't write off Merkel, one of the most pragmatic German chancellors of recent times. I wouldn’t make any assumptions about Hollande just yet. Let’s not forget that he is the former protege of Jacques Delors and thus potentially even more pro-European than Sarkozy. On the the fiscal pact, all he’s asked for is for measures to encourage growth to be added. He already came out in favour of the debt brake last year.

Similarly, I wouldn’t write off Merkel, one of the most pragmatic German chancellors of recent times.

]]> Comment on Taking your friends to court by Denis Cooper http://blogs.euobserver.com/mahony/2012/02/07/taking-your-friends-to-court/comment-page-1/#comment-27989 Denis Cooper Wed, 08 Feb 2012 17:38:05 +0000 http://blogs.euobserver.com/mahony/?p=1571#comment-27989 You're talking about two member states asking the ECJ to arbitrate in a dispute about the adequacy of the "balanced budget rule" law passed by one of them, under Article 273 TFEU: "The Court of Justice shall have jurisdiction in any dispute between Member States which relates to the subject matter of the Treaties if the dispute is submitted to it under a special agreement between the parties." It's already a legal stretch to accept that "the subject matter of the Treaties" includes provisions of the "fiscal pact" which have actually been excluded from being part of the EU treaties, but to go from there to say that in such a case the ECJ can fine a country is stretching the EU treaties well beyond breaking point. The preamble to the "fiscal pact" tries to justify this by citing Article 260 TFEU as empowering the ECJ to fine a country for failing to comply with one of its judgments. Which it does, but only when the judgment relates to infringement of the EU treaties or laws, not to infringement of a treaty which is not an EU treaty. Even if it never happens that the ECJ fines a country for infringement of the "fiscal pact", just admitting the principle that the ECJ could fine a country for infringement of a treaty which is not an EU treaty could be used as a precedent. Indeed two appalling precedents are being set: Firstly, that the ECJ may punish an EU member state for something which is not an offence under the EU treaties and laws, but only an infringement of some other treaty or agreement outside the EU treaties. Secondly, that the ECJ may be granted, or invited to assume, a new power by just a group of EU member states, directly contrary to the basic principle of "conferral" which is supposed to underpin the EU and which is enshrined in the EU treaties as agreed and ratified by all EU member states, and in particular in Article 13(2) TEU: "Each institution shall act within the limits of the powers conferred on it in the Treaties". You’re talking about two member states asking the ECJ to arbitrate in a dispute about the adequacy of the “balanced budget rule” law passed by one of them, under Article 273 TFEU:

“The Court of Justice shall have jurisdiction in any dispute between Member States which relates to the subject matter of the Treaties if the dispute is submitted to it under a special agreement between the parties.”

It’s already a legal stretch to accept that “the subject matter of the Treaties” includes provisions of the “fiscal pact” which have actually been excluded from being part of the EU treaties, but to go from there to say that in such a case the ECJ can fine a country is stretching the EU treaties well beyond breaking point.

The preamble to the “fiscal pact” tries to justify this by citing Article 260 TFEU as empowering the ECJ to fine a country for failing to comply with one of its judgments.

Which it does, but only when the judgment relates to infringement of the EU treaties or laws, not to infringement of a treaty which is not an EU treaty.

Even if it never happens that the ECJ fines a country for infringement of the “fiscal pact”, just admitting the principle that the ECJ could fine a country for infringement of a treaty which is not an EU treaty could be used as a precedent.

Indeed two appalling precedents are being set:

Firstly, that the ECJ may punish an EU member state for something which is not an offence under the EU treaties and laws, but only an infringement of some other treaty or agreement outside the EU treaties.

Secondly, that the ECJ may be granted, or invited to assume, a new power by just a group of EU member states, directly contrary to the basic principle of “conferral” which is supposed to underpin the EU and which is enshrined in the EU treaties as agreed and ratified by all EU member states, and in particular in Article 13(2) TEU:

“Each institution shall act within the limits of the powers conferred on it in the Treaties”.

]]> Comment on Taking your friends to court by Europe Midi n° 1226 – 8 février 2012 | Mouvement Européen – France http://blogs.euobserver.com/mahony/2012/02/07/taking-your-friends-to-court/comment-page-1/#comment-27969 Europe Midi n° 1226 – 8 février 2012 | Mouvement Européen – France Wed, 08 Feb 2012 11:28:47 +0000 http://blogs.euobserver.com/mahony/?p=1571#comment-27969 [...] Taking your friends to court, par Honor Mahony, blogs.euobserver.com [...] [...] Taking your friends to court, par Honor Mahony, blogs.euobserver.com [...]

]]> Comment on Wishful treaty thinking by paroxetine dosage http://blogs.euobserver.com/mahony/2011/10/23/wishful-treaty-thinking/comment-page-1/#comment-27948 paroxetine dosage Wed, 08 Feb 2012 05:31:42 +0000 http://blogs.euobserver.com/mahony/?p=1330#comment-27948 to agree on a treaty requires a lot of discussion and if the discussion seems positive then only it will pass. to agree on a treaty requires a lot of discussion and if the discussion seems positive then only it will pass.

]]> Comment on Brussels gets paraded by online gambling ireland http://blogs.euobserver.com/mahony/2009/03/16/brussels-gets-paraded/comment-page-1/#comment-27910 online gambling ireland Tue, 07 Feb 2012 20:46:02 +0000 http://blogs.euobserver.com/mahony/?p=121#comment-27910 <strong>online gambling ireland...</strong> [...]Brussels gets paraded « Behind the Scenes[...]... online gambling ireland…

[...]Brussels gets paraded « Behind the Scenes[...]…

]]> Comment on Taking your friends to court by Treaty on Stability Coordination & Governance in the EMU - commentary links. http://blogs.euobserver.com/mahony/2012/02/07/taking-your-friends-to-court/comment-page-1/#comment-27895 Treaty on Stability Coordination & Governance in the EMU - commentary links. Tue, 07 Feb 2012 17:31:55 +0000 http://blogs.euobserver.com/mahony/?p=1571#comment-27895 [...] [...] [...] [...]

]]>