Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

The Treaty of Amsterdam and Constitutional Revisions in France

The Treaty of Amsterdam and Constitutional Revisions in France The Treaty of sterdam and Cons~tu~onal Redsf on i mance n Susan WSiIPms* The Christmas present delivered on 31 December 1997 by France's Constitutional Council was a decision to the effect that ratification of parts of the Treaty of Amsterdam was contrary to the French Constitution (1958).' Consequently France was not entitled to ratify the Treaty (signed by all Member States of the European Union on 2 October 1997) unless a revision of the Constitution were undertaken. For those pro-European politicians still smarting from the scars of the debate following ratification of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) in 1992, the Constitutional Council's Christmas message did not bring much festive cheer. No doubt one of their New Year resolutions must have been to seek ways of downplaying the constitutional problem and of avoiding a rerun of the bruising Maastricht debate. This was no easy task given the controversial nature of the issues involved. It hardly needs stating that the European Union itself stirs up passionate hostility in anyone concerned about the struggle over national identity and sovereignty. Moreover, in this case the Treaty provisions declared contrary to the Constitution were those relating to the ultra-sensitive area of visas, http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png European Public Law Kluwer Law International

The Treaty of Amsterdam and Constitutional Revisions in France

European Public Law , Volume 5 (1) – Mar 1, 1999

Loading next page...
 
/lp/kluwer-law-international/the-treaty-of-amsterdam-and-constitutional-revisions-in-france-lEyrcVTork
Publisher
Kluwer Law International
Copyright
Copyright © Kluwer Law International
ISSN
1354-3725
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

The Treaty of sterdam and Cons~tu~onal Redsf on i mance n Susan WSiIPms* The Christmas present delivered on 31 December 1997 by France's Constitutional Council was a decision to the effect that ratification of parts of the Treaty of Amsterdam was contrary to the French Constitution (1958).' Consequently France was not entitled to ratify the Treaty (signed by all Member States of the European Union on 2 October 1997) unless a revision of the Constitution were undertaken. For those pro-European politicians still smarting from the scars of the debate following ratification of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) in 1992, the Constitutional Council's Christmas message did not bring much festive cheer. No doubt one of their New Year resolutions must have been to seek ways of downplaying the constitutional problem and of avoiding a rerun of the bruising Maastricht debate. This was no easy task given the controversial nature of the issues involved. It hardly needs stating that the European Union itself stirs up passionate hostility in anyone concerned about the struggle over national identity and sovereignty. Moreover, in this case the Treaty provisions declared contrary to the Constitution were those relating to the ultra-sensitive area of visas,

Journal

European Public LawKluwer Law International

Published: Mar 1, 1999

There are no references for this article.