CYIL 2010

THE QUEST OF THE LISBON TREATY IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC … the requirement of ratification without undue delay, basically excluded the option of further applications for review. This corresponds with its conclusion about the Treaty of Lisbon’s compliance, as a whole, with the constitutional order. Regarding the objection of a democratic deficit in the European Union , the Constitutional Court referred to the conclusions in its “Lisbon I” judgment. In the Constitutional Court’s opinion, the contested article of the TEU, which provides that “ the functioning of the Union shall be founded on representative democracy ” is directed at processes both at the European and domestic level, not only at the European Parliament. The European parliament is not the exclusive source of democratic legitimacy for decisions adopted on the EU level. That legitimacy derives from a combination of structures existing both on the domestic and European level, and it is not possible to demand absolute equality among voters in individual Member States. That would be possible only if decisions in the European Union were adopted concurrently with a ruling out of legitimating connections to governments, and above all to legislative assemblies in the individual member states. 107 As regards objections concerning the loss of the Czech Republic’s sovereignty , or objections alleging the non-existence of the concept of shared sovereignty, which the President raised in his written observations, the Constitutional Court stated that the concept of shared sovereignty was already know to the Government of the then Prime Minister Václav Klaus in 1995, when the Czech Republic applied to join the European Union . 108 According to the Constitutional Court, “in a modern democratic state governed by the rule of law, state sovereignty is not an aim in and of itself, i.e., in isolation, but is a means for fulfilling the fundamental values on which the structure of a democratic state governed by the rule of law stands [...] The transfer of certain competences to the state, which arises from the free will of the sovereign and will continue to be exercised with its participation in a pre-agreed, controlled manner, is not a sign of the weakening of sovereignty, but, on the contrary, can lead to strengthening it in the joint process of an integrated whole. ” 109 It should be stressed that the Constitutional Court treated the review of the Treaty of Lisbon as its utmost priority, giving the judgement in the “Lisbon II” case very expediently, approximately one month after the submission was filed. It also provided for maximum transparency of the proceedings, giving access to all submissions of the parties and related documents online on its website. This approach deserves praise 107 Ibid., paras. 134-140 (emphasis added). 108 Resolution of the Government of the Czech Republic No. 732/1995 of 13 December 1995, regard ing the Czech Republic’s application to join the European Union, which indeed explicitly mentioned the concept of “shared sovereignty”. On 26 November 2009, one day before the oral hearing, the Government received a letter from the Chairman of the Constitutional Court, Mr Pavel Rychetský, in which he requested the government to produce a certified copy of the relevant resolution and all the accompanying documents. After a prompt search in the National Archives, the documents were produced and the Government’s representative at the hearing, Minister for European Affairs Mr Štefan Füle, handed the documents over to the Court at the beginning of the hearing. 109 Ibid., para. 147 (emphasis added).

55