Where do I find a consolidated, readable version of the EU’s Treaty of Lisbon?
How is the accuracy of the Article by Article Lisbon Treaty consolidation appearing on this blog checked?
I answer the questions in reverse order:
After arriving at what I think would be the consolidated wording of an Article, I usually compare it with four existing consolidations to see if I got it right (or if they did). They are the following versions: the IIEA, the FCO, Statewatch and Klemens H. Fischer.
The practical and sane quite naturally access these consolidations or other (language) versions directly. My latest compilation of references to existing consolidated versions of the Lisbon Treaty in different languages is found in the post ‘EU UE: Lisbon Lissabon Lisboa Lisbonne Lisbona Lisboa’ of 5 March 2008:
http://grahnlaw.blogspot.com/2008/03/eu-ue-lisbon-lissabon-lisboa-lisbonne.html
I hope that the Council is aware of the fact that there is a continuing daily trickle of visitors to this blog, who are looking for a consolidated version of the Treaty of Lisbon, but the search engines seem to steer them towards earlier versions of the list.
If the Council cared for transparency and sound priorities, it would surely long ago have published consolidated versions of the Lisbon Treaty in every official language of the European Union, because it is arguably the most important document to emanate from the EU since 2004.
Because the Council has referred to practices concerning earlier treaty reforms, it is meet to point out that both the web and conceptions about public communications have evolved greatly since 2001, when the Treaty of Nice was signed, and that the draft Constitution was published immediately and that the Constitution was published about a month and a half after signing, both in the Official Journal in all the treaty languages.
Why revert to worst practices?
Ralf Grahn
Saturday 22 March 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Subscribe To Grahnlaw
Posts
Comments
Why revert to worst practise?
ReplyDeleteThe reason is clear, Mr Grahn, and can only be that by avoiding an official consolodated version they hope to continue beyond ratification the clear lie that this is not the Constitutional Treaty, largely reborn.
Because of this gross deception, mainly contrived for the voters of Ireland and the lying parliamentary politicians of the UK, any analysis of the leagalities of the resulting Treaty take on an air of surrealism, for politicians who will stoop to such conspiracies can clearly never be relied upon to adhere to any terms of any treaty which do not plainly suit their own, self-serving purposes.
Legal niceties along with democratic accountability and the right for voters to bloodlessly periodically remove their rulers all disappear with the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty.
Mr Cole,
ReplyDeleteI agree that the resistance against publishing readable versions of the Lisbon Treaty has done little to credit the European leaders in the eyes of citizens.
Fortunately other actors have provided consolidations, in some of the languages of the EU.