The revised EU constitution explained
Some of the key terms to feature in the summit debate on the future EU treaty are peculiar to Brussels. An explanation is offered below.
European Constitution vs. Reform Treaty
The draft European Constitution was signed by all member states in October 2004. It has been largely ratified by 18 countries but was rejected by French and Dutch voters in 2005. It was designed to replace all eight EU treaties signed over the last 50 years, with the exception of the Euratom Treaty.
Join EUobserver today
Get the EU news that really matters
Instant access to all articles — and 20 years of archives. 14-day free trial.
Choose your plan
... or subscribe as a group
Already a member?
The newly envisaged "Reform Treaty", emerging from the rejected constitution, would just add amendments to previous treaties without replacing them. Under a timetable envisioned by Germany and backed by several member states, the treaty should be ratified in all countries by mid 2009, ahead of the next European elections. Most states are likely to try and avoid having a referendum on the treaty – with only Ireland and Denmark obliged to – and will aim to ratify it via their national parliaments.
Under current plans, the new treaty would keep most of the institutional innovations, such as a permanent EU president, a foreign minister under a different title, the same distribution of parliamentary seats, a reduced number of commissioners and a clause on withdrawal from the EU.
On the other hand, it would drop state-like features such as the name "constitution" , as well as a reference to EU symbols (hymn, flag, anthem, motto). It would also drop a sentence on the primacy of EU law and new names for various types of EU legislation.
The Reform Treaty is likely to provide countries with a chance to opt out of EU policies in the area of police and criminal law - something pushed for by the UK.
Intergovernmental Conference
The summit will seek agreement on a clear and strong mandate to convene an Intergovernmental Conference (IGC). This is the only body - represented by national governments - that can change existing EU treaties.
Its decisions must be made unanimously and their results must be further ratified by member states in line with their national procedures. The most recent conferences were concluded in Nice (2001), Amsterdam (1997) and Maastricht (1992).
Portugal - set to take over Germany as the EU's chair in July - is pressing for a deal on the next IGC mandate that would only need to be followed by talks on technical details. The plan is to open the meeting in early July, talk all summer and wrap up in October.
Voting weights
One of the key sticking points before the summit is Poland's demand for a change in the proposed voting system.
Under the currently applicable Nice treaty, 258 out of 345 votes (74%) representing 62 percent of EU citizens is required to establish qualified majority (QMV) - the bloc's key way of decision-making in the absence of a consensus. The most populous four states (Germany, UK, France and Italy) are allocated 29 votes, while Spain and Poland get 27 votes.
The constitution envisaged 55 percent of member states representing 65 percent of EU citizens for the QMV which better reflects the size of populations and boosts the power of big countries.
Poland is instead proposing a "square root" system which would narrow the weighting of votes between the largest and smallest countries in terms of population. The Czech Republic is supporting its bid to an extent, but has warned it would not back a Polish veto. All the other states remain opposed.
Charter of Fundamental Rights
This 54-article document lists citizens' political, social and economic rights. In the rejected EU constitution it was integrated into the text of the treaty and was legally binding. The UK, however, is strongly against making it legally binding.
The German presidency is suggesting a reference to it with a single article in the "Reform Treaty" but maintains that it should be legally binding, with possibly some extra safeguards to prevent the EU court's interpretation of the charter forcing a change of national laws. It is set to be a major topic of discussion at the summit.
EU pillars and legal personality
Under the constitution, the EU's "pillar" structure is scrapped with the union's competencies in two major legislative areas or "pillars" - foreign and security policy (second pillar) and justice and home affairs (third pillar) boosted. However, this is opposed by the UK which wants to limit the Union's powers in the two areas.
At the moment, the EU does not have a full legal personality meaning it cannot sign international agreements. The constitution would have given it this legal status but this is now up for discussion again.
Yellow card for national parliaments
The "Reform Treaty" may slightly strengthen the role of national parliaments in EU decision-making by granting them eight rather than six weeks to study European Commission law proposals before they proceed into the bloc's legislative pipelines.
Germany has suggested that if a third of national parliaments object to a proposal, then the commission will have to submit a "reasoned opinion" as to why it is bringing the law, but will not be obliged to withdraw it.
Enlargement
The new EU treaty may see some language on potential member states having to adhere to the bloc's values if they want to become members of the union. But a Dutch suggestion to enshrine criteria for further enlargement in the new treaty has not been fully taken on board as there are fears it would lead to Luxembourg judges having the last word on who could join the EU, rather than its political leaders.