Rashomon in Karlsruhe: A reflection on democracy and identity in the European Union

摘要

On June 30, 2009, the German Constitutional Court declared the Lisbon Treaty to be compatible with the German constitution. At the same time, the Court held that the German statute implementing the participatory rights of national Parliaments, which the Lisbon Treaty provides for, was unconstitutional. It emphasized that Germany could only deposit its ratification instrument after a new statute on the German Parliament's rights had been drawn up. In spite of an upcoming electoral campaign, the statute on Parliament's rights was re-drafted over the summer of 2009, and entered into force in September 2009. After a last, futile attempt to have the Lisbon Treaty stopped by the German Constitutional Court, Germany ratified on September 25, 2009. The Treaty of Lisbon entered into force on December 1, 2009, following the second referendum in Ireland and the ratifications of Poland and the Czech Republic. The Lisbon decision marked the end of an intense constitutional battle, which began when the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe of 2004 was challenged before the German Constitutional Court in May 2005, which continued with the constitutional challenge of the Lisbon Treaty in 2008 and which delayed German ratification of the Lisbon Treaty for more than one year, a battle that saw hundreds of pages of legal arguments being exchanged, two full days of oral hearings in February 2009, and that ended with a decision of 147 pages. These 147 pages may be seen as the first elaborate, long-in pages-and deep-considering the time it took eight co-authors to prepare the text-reflection on the state of European constitutionalism under the Lisbon Treaty. The decision has triggered a widespread debate on its message and its scope, and on the role of the German Constitutional Court in European integration. The following text illustrates how different views on and different understandings of European constitutional law and European integration and, more generally speaking, different backgrounds and perspectives may lead to different readings of the decision (section 1). The Lisbon decision and the debate allow an assessment of the state of European constitutionalism and changes in its landscape (section 2).