Obsah
The Constitutional Court has begun to deal with the Motion of a Group of Senators to review the Treaty of Lisbon
The Constitutional Court, Brno
On 29th September 2009, the Constitutional Court was delivered a petition of a group of senators to review the Treaty of Lisbon, which amends the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community, from the point of view of its compliance with the constitutional order.
The group of senators led by senator Jiří Oberfalzer and represented by Jaroslav Kuba and Vladimír Balaš submitted a motion to open proceedings as per art. 87 sec. 2 of the Constitution of the Czech Republic, requiring the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic to review the compliance of the Treaty of Lisbon with the constitutional order.
The group of senators explicitly threw doubts on the compliance of the Treaty of Lisbon as a whole, Maastricht Treaty as a whole and Treaty of Rome as a whole with art. 1 clause 1 of the Constitution and art. 2 clause 1 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms, respectively.
Besides, the senators questioned the listed provisions of the Treaties of Maastricht and Rome.
Furthermore, the group of senators proposed the Constitutional Court to claim that so-called guarantees for Ireland (a decision taken on 18th and 19th June 2009 by chiefs of states or prime ministers of governments sitting in the European Council) is an international treaty as per art. 10a of the Constitution of the Czech Republic, which is why such guarantees require the approval of the constitutional majority of both Chambers of the Parliament.
The proposing senators also made reference to their previous petitions submitted on 31st August and 1st September, respectively, (file reference Pl. ÚS 26/09) concerning the “Lisbon” provisions of standing orders of both Chambers of the Parliament, proposing the Constitutional Court to unite both proceedings and decide on both petitions within the framework of one proceeding.
The petition and its reasoning contain almost 60 pages. In the introduction, the proposing senators declare that they “reserve the right to amend the petition with a proposal to review other selected clauses of the Treaty of Rome.”
The Constitutional Court has already begun to deal with the petition taking the first procedural steps, which is a prerequisite for further continuous course of the proceedings.
On 30th September 2009, in compliance with the valid work schedule, a file number Pl. ÚS 29/09 was assigned to the petiton of the group of senators, and according to the established algorithm, the motion was assigned to the reporting judge Dr. Jiří Mucha.
However, judge Jiří Mucha is currently on a several-week holiday abroad. For such a reason, he submitted the President of the Constitutional Court a motion as per section 4.2 of the Work schedule in force, proposing to assign the case to another judge as a rapporteur.
The wording of the provision of section 4.2 of the Work schedule of the Constitutional Court is as follows: “On the proposal of the reporting judge and with the approval of the Plenum, the case may be assigned to another judge, if such a judge agrees with such an assignment. Following case of such a judge is then assigned to the judge to whom the case as per the first sentence hereof was originally assigned.”
For such a reason, the Plenum of the Constitutional Court met and approved of the exchange of the reporting judge as per section 4.2 of the Work schedule. Having obtained the approval of the Plenum and also expressing his consent, Pavel Rychetský, the President of the Constitutional Court, became the reporting judge.
Only three hours after having received the motion, an extraordinary session was summoned of the Plenum of the Constitutional Court, which adopted a resolution on the urgency of the above case which might be dealt preferentially as per section 39 of the Act on the Constitutional Court. Besides, such a proposal could have been made by the petitioners themselves in compliance with the explicit provision of section 71 para. 1 of the Act on the Constitutional court; however, they did not make use of such a possibility. The Plenum may decide to adopt such a procedure itself even without having received any proposal, which is what the Plenum did.
The reporting judge decides on further procedural steps. He will especially examine if such a motion for the commencement of the proceedings meets all the formal prerequisites and procedural conditions as per the Constitution of the Czech Republic, if such a motion may be dealt with. He will keep the Plenum of the Constitutional Court informed of such examinations in closed sessions. During the course of the examination of the above motion, the Constitutional Court will not make any declarations regarding either a possible duration or result of such proceedings.
Liaison:
Tomáš Langášek
Secretary General of the Constitutional Court
Phone No.: +420 542 16 1031
In case of his absence:
Vlastimil Göttinger
External Relations Advisor
Phone No.: +420 542 16 1195
Publikováno: 5.10.2009
David Krev
