Beloveds,

as most of you surely know, the member states of the European Union currently undergo the ratification process of the „EU Reform Contract“ (a.k.a. Lisboa Contract). As of today, 19 of the 27 states have completed the ratification process. And as you probably also have noticed, Ireland is the ONLY nation which held a referendum – and voted NO. Germany and Poland’s presidents currently refuse to sign the contract, and also Tchech’s Vaclav Klaus will probably not sign the contract documents.

Furthermore, there are several member states (i.e. Germany) with constitutional complaints and the necessity that these are decided by the appropriate courts.

It is essential that WE THE PEOPLE are informed of the facts. The essential communication in the media is:

• Currently, all member states have to agree to proposals. In the future, majority votes are possible (55 per cent of member states representing 65 per cent of the people must agree).
• More competencies are given to the European parliament – it has to agree to nearly all proposals of the European Council or the European Commission.
• The presidency of the European Council doesn’t change each 6 months, instead, the head of the European Council is elected for 2 1/2 years. But the European Commission keeps changing the presidency every 6 months.
• The European Union represents itself by means of a “Secretary of State”.

So far, so good – but there are some traps in this.

First, the matter is extremely complex. The contract has 145 pages in print, and an addendum of 132 pages with 12 protocols and 51 explanations and declarations. All this is written in legal terminology – which means that WE THE PEOPLE aren’t supposed to read and understand the thing. For good reasons.

As I stated above, we have a pending constitutional complaint here in Germany. I browsed the web and found some interesting additional material. The following information is based on a legal opinion of Professor Dr. Dietrich Murswiek, issued in May 2008. I left out all the facts which a specific to Germany, but there are several hidden facts in the contract which have relevance to ALL 27 states and for you personally. So let’s dig in.

1. We have to note that the European Union changes from an economic union. The Lisboa Treaty gives nearly all competencies of inner security and prosecution to the European Union. This is a major change, as these competencies are central elements of a state’s sovereignty.
2. With the Lisboa Treaty, the European Union becomes an entity of public international law. It acts like a sovereign state – with all consequences. Especially, the European Union gains responsibility of nearly all areas of politics, be it in matters of “inner security”, economy or “matters of state”. Think of that by yourself, folks!
3. The European Union gains far-reaching competencies in terms of law-making/legislation. And furthermore, the contract holds a special clause which allows to the “flexibility of extending the competencies” should there be any restriction.
4. The laws of the European Union take priority over ANY national laws. This INCLUDES constitutional law. National  constitutional courts loose their competencies.
5. National sovereignty ceases to exist, with the Lisboa Treaty the European Union is an organization acting as a state – although the member state don’t see the EU as a state. But this can easily change by means of a proclamation either by the EU or the member states.
6. The national parliaments have to execute higher-leveled European laws and loose the competency to reign in national sovereignty. The influence of national cabinets rises due to their direct representation in the European Commission and the European Council. In Germany, this is a violation of democratic principles set by the constitution. I assume the situation is the same in other member states of the European Union.
7. The national cabinets can overrule the parliaments by utilizing the European law-making/legislating powers for laws which would never gain approval by the parliaments or the constitutional court of a country.

I doubt that this can be good for US THE PEOPLE, and my personal opinion is that all activities in the past – be it the  Euro, freedom of movement and trade and several others “in the name of globalization and security” – were a preparation to make sure that WE THE PEOPLE don’t see the “real deal” behind this.

So I encourage you to

• Make yourself informed about the matter and the consequences for your country and for yourself personally,
• Spread the word,
• ACT!

Namasté,
Atélo (Henning)