International agreements: the Council reprimands the Parliament

Between the Member States (the Council of the EU) and the MEPs elected by universal suffrage (the Parliament), to say that the understanding is cordial is a mild understatement. The dispute over international competences, in particular with the new provisions resulting from the Lisbon Treaty. The balance point does not seem to have been found yet. And it seems likely that the Court of Justice will, once again, be seized to settle this dispute.

The President of the Council thus concocted a letter addressed to Jerzy Buzek, the President of the European Parliament, which shows all the annoyance of the Ministers towards the attitude of the MEPs who try to grab certain powers in international matters to the detriment of the Member States. The tone of the letter sounds, indeed, like a serious reprimand addressed by a school principal to a pupil who persists in his impertinence.

Two bypass attempts

The Parliament has twice failed to comply with the procedures provided for by the Treaties, the letter states. Firstly, when the Parliament decided to put on the agenda of the November session two agreements between the EU and Georgia on visas and readmission, " before Parliament has received the formal request from the Council, and for one of these agreements, before (even) its signature ". The point was withdrawn after the intervention of the General Secretariat of the Council. In the second case, which is the most serious », the parliamentary fisheries committee voted against an EU-Chile agreement on the conservation of fish stocks in the Pacific Ocean. " Once again, Parliament acted in the absence of a formal request from the Council and before the signature of the agreement ».

Parliament illegal

To insist a little more, the Council reminds the President of the Parliament of the procedures provided for by the Treaty (Article 218 TFEU, §5 and 6 (1). The Council can only conclude an agreement after having obtained the consent of the European Parliament. But this does not mean that the Parliament can decide before the signing of the Treaty (which is a different thing), underlines the letter. Treaty is very clear ". This approval is required “ after the signature and before the conclusion (of the agreement), who must obtain the consent of the Council ».

At the risk of insisting, the letter takes care " to draw attention to the importance of fully respecting the procedures of the Treaty”. " If the Parliament examines the agreement in advance, it risks doing so on the basis of a text which has not yet been finalized ". For the Council, any formal decision by Parliament on an international agreement in advance will be considered as " not in conformity with the Treaty ».

(update) A working group is due to finalize the draft letter on Friday 14 January, which will still be approved by Coreper.

(1) Section 218
(...)

5. The Council, on a proposal from the negotiator, shall adopt a decision authorizing the signing of the agreement and, where appropriate, its provisional application before entry into force.
6. The Council, on a proposal from the negotiator, adopts a decision concluding the agreement.

Except where the agreement relates exclusively to the common foreign and security policy, the Council shall adopt the decision concluding the agreement:

(a) after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament in the following cases:

(i) association agreements;

(ii) agreement on the accession of the Union to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;

(iii) agreements creating a specific institutional framework by organizing cooperation procedures;

(iv) agreements with significant budgetary implications for the Union;

(v) agreements covering areas covered by the ordinary legislative procedure or the special legislative procedure where the consent of the European Parliament is required.

The European Parliament and the Council may, in urgent cases, agree on a time limit for approval;

(b) after consulting the European Parliament, in other cases. The European Parliament delivers its opinion within a time limit which the Council may set according to the urgency. In the absence of an opinion within this period, the Council may rule.