DEMOCRACY MOVEMENT
_________________________________________________________________________________
Richmond & Twickenham Branch
23 Denbigh Gardens, Richmond, Surrey TW10 6EL
Tel: 0181-940 5754 Fax: 0181-948 8140 E-mail:
c.mowbray@virgin.netKingston upon Thames Branch
18 Hogarth Way, Hampton, Surrey TW12 2EL
Tel: 0181-391-2190 E-mail:
director@bcar1.demon.co.uk__________________________________________________________________________________
Threats contained within the Treaty of Nice
The Treaty of Nice is due to be discussed and voted upon by the Council of Ministers on Thursday 7th and Friday 8th December 2000. If the present proposals are accepted in their entirety Britain would almost overnight be subsumed into a federalist Eurostate, run by unelected, unaccountable and virtually unsakable bureaucrats based in Brussels (European Commission), Frankfurt (European Central Bank) and Strasbourg (European Court of Justice). Our Parliament would find itself nothing less than a form of local council whose laws could be (indeed already are) overruled as the ECJ would start interpreting and applying the new EU ‘constitution’ (Charter of Fundamental Rights).
Whilst the above is worrying enough what appears to be being overlooked is that the upcoming Nice Treaty contains new proposals which could now lead to the creation of a superstate with all the characteristic and powers of a totalitarian state. Consider these three articles which will be placed before our Prime Minister in December:
Article 7
This proposes new powers which will allow the EU to give an ‘early warning’ to possibly remove the voting rights of member countries if they ‘threaten’ to breach the Article 6.1 (unspecified general principles which, in effect, they can interpret as they wish) of the Treaty of Rome, as amended by Treaty of Amsterdam - such a decision to remove their voting rights would then be taken by qualified majority voting. This is an extension of the powers taken at Amsterdam, when an actual breach was required and a majority of 14:1 was needed. After Nice, only a ‘threat’ will activate the early warning.
This means that a country could be ganged up upon purely because the Commission said that they ‘threatened’ to breach the undefined principles mentioned in 6.1. With no votes and an occupying para-military armed force (Europol) such a country would effectively have become a voteless colony of the EU.
Article 191
This proposes a new statute for ‘European political parties’ - which will give the EU power to finance parties of which it approves, and ban those of which it disapproves. A "requirement of recognition" will be required for ‘European’ political parties - thus purporting to make all opposition illegal (see overleaf for the actual wording of this proposal).
What this could mean is that any political party could be ‘banned’. Taken against the background of the recent comments made by Advocate-General of the ECJ that "any criticism of the European Union is akin to blasphemy" and perpetrators could be "restricted" without violating freedom of speech (most states, including Britain, allow abridgement of free speech rights in the special case of religious blasphemy), one can easily envisage the creation of a approved party state /dictatorship.
Article 280A
This calls for the creation of the European Public Prosecutor ("EPP") whose remit would be decided after the Treaty by QMV.
It seems reasonable to assume that Corpus Juris would be forced onto Britain, leading to the end of Habeas Corpus, the Right to Trial by Jury (won by the English over 700 years ago through Magna Carta) and Double Jeopardy. Europol, a para-military police force with full diplomatic immunity, would no doubt be introduced. It is more than possible that the 60,000-strong Rapid Reaction Force would also gain a remit to operate within the EU rather than just externally. If these proposal were to be accepted Britain would find itself with an occupying armed force (Europol), immune to prosecution and answerable not to our sovereign or parliament but to Brussels only. To have an occupying army on British soil has not happened since 1066. Many people believe that to allow this would be nothing short of Treason.
Many people find it almost impossible to believe that these proposals are on the table. The EU propaganda machine keeps telling them that there are just scare stories around which have no substance –
so read below what they ACTUALLY say in their draft proposals (part shown only as these are long documents):
PROPOSAL FOR AN AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE 7 (Proposal by the Belgian delegation)
1. In order to prevent a serious and persistent breach by a Member State of the principles mentioned in Article 6(1), the Council, acting by a qualified majority on a proposal by one third of the Member States or by the Commission, may determine the existence of a threatened breach of those principles in a Member State and
address the appropriate recommendation, if necessary accompanied by appropriate measures, to the Member
State in question, after inviting the Government of that Member State to submit its observations on the subject. The President of the Council shall inform the Parliament of the recommendation and of any measures.
2. The Council, meeting in the composition of the Heads of State or Government and acting by a qualified majority, on a proposal by …..
NEW ARTICLE 191
Political parties at European level are important as a factor for integration within the Union. They contribute to forming a European awareness and to expressing the political will of the citizens of the Union. [insert new paragraph as follows:] Before [ date to be agreed], the Council, acting in accordance with the procedure
referred to in Article 251, shall lay down the statute for European political parties, in particular the conditions governing their recognition and the rules regarding their funding
NEW ARTICLE 280A
1. To contribute to the attainment of the objectives of Article 280(1), the Council, acting on a proposal from the Commission by a qualified majority with the assent of the European Parliament shall appoint a European Public Prosecutor for a non-renewable term of six years. The European Public Prosecutor shall be responsible for detecting, prosecuting and bringing to judgement the perpetrators of offences prejudicial to the Community's financial interests and their accomplices and for exercising the functions of prosecutor in the national courts of the Member States in relation to such offences in accordance with the rules provided for by paragraph 3.
2. The European Public Prosecutor shall be chosen from persons whose independence is beyond doubt and who possess the qualifications required for appointment to the highest judicial offices in their respective countries. In the performance of his duties, he shall neither seek nor take any instructions. The Court of Justice may, on application by the European parliament, the Council or the Commission, remove him from office if he no longer fulfils the conditions required for the performance of his duties or if he is guilty of serious misconduct. The Council, acting in accordance with the procedure laid down by Article 251, shall lay down the regulations applicable to the European Public Prosecutor.
3. The Council, acting in accordance with the procedure laid down by Article 251, shall lay down the general conditions governing the performance of the functions of the European Public Prosecutor and shall adopt, in particular:
(a) rules defining the facts constituting criminal offences relating to fraud and any other illegal activity prejudicial to the Community's financial interests and the penalties incurred for each of them;
(b) rules of procedure applicable to the activities of the European Public Prosecutor and rules governing the admissibility of evidence;
(c) rules applicable to the judicial review of procedural measures taken by the European Public Prosecutor in the exercise of his functions.