Continued Treaty tribulations in the Czech Republic
Wednesday 28 October 2009By EU Reporter Correspondents
On Tuesday the Czech Constitutional Court delayed a hearing over the legality of the Lisbon Treaty until next week. As EU leaders prepare to meet for a summit in Brussels on Thursday, they will be unable to take the ratification of the treaty for granted and must endure further deliberation in the Czech Republic.
Progress has been sporadic in Prague where nominal opposition to Lisbon may be in the minority but is certainly vocal. The Chamber of Deputies (the lower house of the Czech parliament) gave formal support for the treaty in February of this year while the Senate approved the treaty later in May with a vote of 54 to 25. However President Vaclav Klaus and a significant number of Czech senators have been heavily critical of the potential reforms, and despite the emphatic Irish ‘yes’ earlier this month which many commentators expected to catalyse the inevitable process of ratification in Prague, Klaus’s signature remains absent from the treaty.
The latest delay has been caused by the petition of seventeen eurosceptic senators who believe the treaty should be rejected on the grounds that it violates the Czech constitution. The constitution allows for “a transfer of certain powers of bodies of the Czech Republic to an international organization or institution” but a number of senators believe the transfer of power is substantial enough to threaten Czech sovereignty, with particularly emphasis being placed on Czech property law.
Indeed while euroscepticism in the Czech Republic is certainly grounded in notions of sovereignty, with Klaus stating that “the Lisbon Treaty contains commitments that de facto mean giving up basic attributes of the sovereign state”, these concerns are by no means abstract. Recent criticism of the treaty has drawn attention to the Benes decrees, legislation implemented in the aftermath of the Second World War which resulted in the expulsion of ethnic Germans and Hungarians from Czechoslovakia. Subsequently the implications of ratification on Czech property law are allegedly a cause of concern amongst Czech citizens with a recent poll showing sixty three percent of Czechs feel the treaty needs an amendment to avoid compromising the post-war edicts and putting the ownership of thousands of Czech properties into question (Median).
Although the delay in proceedings is widely expected to be just that, tensions are certainly rising in the Czech Republic with the stakes perhaps higher here than for other member states. Fundamental questions about constitution violation are counteracted with warnings over jeopardising the Czech Republic’s position in the EU. The claim of a constitutional breach is generally seen as one final roll of the dice for the treaty’s dissenters yet there is no reason to assume that the ongoing debate between Czech politicians does not reflect a wider apprehension amongst voters. Although it is assumed by many the Treaty will soon be signed off, it is not necessarily guaranteed that if public opinion were to turn in the Czech Republic, the treaty could not be derailed. It is not difficult to conceive of the combination of Czech procrastination and David Cameron’s promise of a referendum on the treaty eventually scuppering the reforms. Collaboration between the two eurosceptics was initially reported by the Daily Mail newspaper in September when Cameron sent a letter of assurance to the Czech premier who also notes that the German Constitutional Court took ten months to deliberate over the legality of the Lisbon Treaty and then recommended that amendments be made.
The apparent inconsistencies in the opinion polls whereby sixty five percent of Czechs support Klaus’ defiance of the treaty according to a Median poll while three fifths of those surveyed feel his actions are harming the country’s standing in Europe according to research by the STEM polling agency may highlight a general lack of consensus amongst Czech citizens. While this does not automatically indicate any significant level of inherent euroscpeticism it probably serves to illustrate the apparent success of the ‘no’ campaign waged by senior political figures. It is also important to remember that approval of the treaty by the Czech parliament coincided with the Czech Republic’s presidency of the EU. Notions of collegiality and general optimism towards the Union may well have enjoyed greater primacy then than they do now.
Whilst many had expected the Czech Republic simply to follow suit following approval in Ireland, it is clear that in spite of the weight of twenty six signatures and an incredibly anticipant Europe, the Czech Republic will not be forced into a rushed decision over its sovereignty, regardless of whether that decision may be one of technicality or one with serious implications for Czechs.