CYIL 2010

EMIL RUFFER CYIL 1 ȍ2010Ȏ possibility of suspending the rights of a Member State for a violation of these principles (Art. 7 TEU). (ii) Position of the Government The Government intervened as a party in the proceedings and submitted its written observations. 14 The Government’s statement addressed all of the issues highlighted by the Senate concerning the constitutional conformity of the Treaty of Lisbon and contained legal argumentation supporting the conclusion that all of the provisions of the Treaty of Lisbon referred to by the petitioner, as well as the Treaty of Lisbon in its entirety, conform with the constitutional order of the Czech Republic. The Government’s statement was based on its assumption that the Treaty of Lisbon conforms with the constitutional character of the Czech Republic as a sovereign, unitary, and democratic state under the rule of law based on respect for the rights and freedoms of persons and citizens pursuant to Art. 1(1) of the Constitution and that the ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon would in no way lead to changes in the fundamental requisites of a democratic state under the rule of law. Art. 2 TEU states that “The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. These values are common to the Member States in a society in which pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men prevail.” In the Government’s view, it was apparent in general terms that both the constitutional system of the Czech Republic and the Treaties’ system of the EU are based on and draw from the same tenets and principles that are common to all EU Member States. In other words, the EU is built on the same principles and values as the Czech Republic, and the Treaty of Lisbon does not alter this fact in any way. In relation to this starting point, the Government responded in detail to each argument and deliberation contained in the Senate’s petition. As to the issue of division and classification of competencies within the EU, the Government referred to the fundamental principle of conferral of competencies, i.e., the principle according to which the Union has only those competencies that were transferred to it by the will of the Member States. The power to decide on the competencies of the EU belongs to and will continue to belong to the Member States. The Government was of the opinion that the delimitation and classification of competencies introduced by the Treaty of Lisbon did not mean that the European Union would acquire the attributes of a federal state. The Government was certain 14 As a party to the proceedings, the Government was entitled to submit a statement on the petition for the initiation of proceedings (Sec. 32 of the Constitutional Court Act). In response to a summons of the Constitutional Court dated 7 May 2008, in which the Court asked the Government to submit a statement on the petition filed by the Senate, a draft of the respective statement was presented to the Government for approval. The Government approved the statement by its Resolution No. 804 of 27 June 2008.

28