CYIL 2010

EMIL RUFFER CYIL 1 ȍ2010Ȏ and enhances the image of the Court as an accessible and open institution that communicates with the general public, thus making its work open to public scrutiny. By the “Lisbon II” judgement, the gates for the constitutional review of the Treaty of Lisbon in the Czech Republic were firmly shut and locked for good. There was no further legal impediment to the ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon, as the Court expressly stated in the conclusion of the judgement: “ this judgment refutes the doubts concerning the consistency of the Treaty of Lisbon with the Czech constitutional order, and removes the formal obstacles to its ratification. ” 110 Consequently, the President signed the instrument of ratification on the same day as the judgement, on 3 November 2009 at 3 p.m. Nevertheless, at the same time he made a statement that although he respected the judgement of the Constitutional Court, 111 he fundamentally disagreed with its content and criticised the quality of its legal reasoning. He further declared that with the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, the Czech Republic would cease to be a sovereign state. Finally, he added that he could not respect “ the duty of the President to ratify this (or any other international treaty) ‘without undue delay’.” 112 I humbly beg to differ on all those points addressed in the President’s statement and consider the judgement of the Constitutional Court to be well argued and legally persuasive, as can be rightly expected from the highest judicial authority of a sovereign state (such as the Czech Republic, notwithstanding the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon). VIII. Impacts of the Treaty of Lisbon on EU international agreements The Treaty of Lisbon does not introduce any fundamental or radical changes in the area of treaty making powers and procedures in the EU. Nevertheless, there are a few changes worth mentioning which, to a large extent, stem from the change to the EU’s structure. 113 It is significant that tthe EU gained international legal personality and would henceforth act in external relations as a single entity, without constantly making the distinction between the European Community and the European Union, as had been required until now. This should lead to a greater unification of procedures for negotiating EU international agreements as well as to more clarity and transparency. (i) (International) legal personality of the EU The explicit conferral of international legal personality can be found in Art. 47 TEU: “The Union shall have legal personality.” This short and simple statement has, 110 Ibid., para. 179. 111 The President is by virtue of Art. 89(2) of the Constitution bound by decisions of the Constitutional Court, since these are “ binding on all institutions and persons ” (which naturally includes the President, who does not stand above the law). 112 The statement of the President is available (only in Czech) on his personal website http://www.klaus. cz/klaus2/asp/clanek.asp?id=CF9ck3ExsEbC. 113 The current structure of a temple with three pillars (1 st European Community pillar, 2 nd Common Foreign and Security Policy pillar and 3 rd Justice and Home Affairs pillar) should be replaced by a mod ernist structure without supporting pillars, which presents a more coherent façade from the outside.

56