Lisbon Treaty: explained by political science

an equivalent of coup d’état

I. Initial statements supported by scientific knowledge of political concepts

1. The Lisbon Treaty is a constitution; it is the same as the text of the rejected EU Constitution after omitting the state symbols of the new federal state. The Lisbon Treaty is a federal constitution granting essential powers to the federal EU-state (superstate) over the EU-member states.

2. A country can have only one constitution in effect at a time, the provisions of which have primacy over all other laws. In the case when a state is arranged as a federal union, the federal constitution enjoys primacy over the provision of the dependent state constitutions.

3. A constitution is the fundamental set of laws, a social contract concluded between citizens and the state. Being the fundamental set of laws, the provisions of a constitution should be strictly followed by both the state officials and by the citizens.

4. It is the absolute requirement of democracy, rule of law and people’s sovereignty that a state’s constitution, as the foundation of all other laws, institutional arrangements and state powers of a country, is NOT to be replaced without a referendum, without the approval of the citizens themselves.

5. Being the fundamental set of laws, a constitution does not allow being replaced with another set of fundamental laws, i.e. does not allow the act of overthrowing it. On the contrary, such act is normally known and punished as treason. (Britannica: “treason = offence of attempting to overthrow the government of one’s country or of assisting its enemies in war.) Overthrowing a constitution can take different forms, as a gradual process known as “constitutional/institutional engineering”, or sudden, (violent or non-violent) forms of power-grab. When the unconstitutional status needs to be sustained by military force, it is called coup d’état. This act – both in violent and non-violent forms – may also be called revolution, describing a significant change that usually takes place in a short period of time. Aristotle described two types of political revolution: 1. complete change from one constitution to another, 2. modification of an existing constitution. Note: the very act of overthrowing a constitution and replacing it with another makes the consideration of the actual content of the overthrown constitution irrelevant.

6. Representatives elected to perform the duties on behalf of the state are elected on the basis of the provisions of a state’s constitution. Representatives of democratic countries have been elected to act according to their constitution rather than overthrowing it. If elected representatives commit overthrowing a constitution, their status of having been elected does not justify their deed, on the contrary. By overthrowing the constitution that has been the basis of their mandates with electorate legitimacy, the elected representatives have invalidated the basis of their legitimacy, thus terminated their mandates and elected status. By accepting a new constitution they have abolished the constitutional status of their country and introduced a status that lacks electorate legitimacy.

7. The constitutional duty of the independent courts would be to ensure that the fundamental laws of the constitution are followed by the state and are not replaced with a new constitution. Their duty also includes preventing governments to gradual constitutional engineering altering the fundamental laws of a constitution. If the courts do not perform their constitutional duty, the lack of their act does not validate the new constitution. This merely indicates that in such case the courts are collaborators in the unconstitutional transformation of a state.

8. The EU, according to existing treaties, is an international organisation that commits itself “to develop and consolidate democracy and the rule of law and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. “The main EU’s institutions are the European Commission, European Council, Council, European Parliament and European Court. The European Council is an EU institution comprising the country leaders of the EU member states (prime ministers and presidents). The Council of Ministers is an EU institution comprising selected ministers of the EU member states.

9. The members of the European Council and Council have agreed in advance to ratify the Lisbon Treaty in each member state without referendums – with one exception: Ireland.

II. Conclusions from above regarding the parliamentary ratifications of Lisbon Treaty

1. To satisfy the principles of democracy, constitutional status and rule of law and people’s sovereignty in any EU member state, it is a requirement that the Lisbon Treaty is ratified by referendum in each state.

2. If a member state’s elected representatives accept a new constitution on behalf of the state’s citizens without the approval of its citizens, it is an act of overthrowing the nation’s constitution, a non-military equivalent of coup d’état. The ratification of the Lisbon Treaty on behalf of a member state means a complete change from one constitution to another.

3. Elected representatives who have been using their election period for overthrowing their states’ constitution, have committed treason and breached the constitution on the basis of which they had obtained their election mandates. The very act of overthrowing a national constitution and replacing it with the Lisbon Treaty makes it irrelevant to consider the actual content of the overthrown constitution. By the act itself, regardless of the content of the overthrown constitution and their formerly elected status, the national governments have given up their electorate legitimacy-based mandates, invalidated their elected status and have terminated the constitutional status of their country.

4. The members of the European Council and Council have agreed in advance to pursue parliamentary ratification of the Lisbon Treaty because the referendums hold the “danger of a negative outcome“. Such an agreement is a premeditated plan to organise overthrowing constitution in the EU member states (in all except Ireland). The European Commission’s hastening, encouraging and greeting the parliamentary ratification in the member states is an act of collaborating in the state-level coup d’état and promoting the abolishing democracy in the member states.

5. The EU, which in theory commits itself “to develop and consolidate democracy and the rule of law, and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms“ is the organisation under which the plan of the EU-wide power-grab is being executed. The members of the European Parliament who ratified the Treaty without referendums and the members of the Commission, who have encouraged the unconstitutional power-grab in the member states, are collaborators in this plan. The Lisbon Treaty was drafted and translated in a manner that would facilitate the process of constitutional engineering, i.e. altering the existing constitutions of the member states. The EU has even started to implement the Treaty in the member states, and exercises its arbitrary powers even without the appearance of legitimacy. The premeditated constitutional engineering, the acceptance and implementation of the Lisbon Treaty by the Union’s institutions long before the ratification is completed in all member states, are all parts of the prearrangement (or conspiracy) of the dictatorial transformation of the EU member states. The assumption of conspiracy is also reflected in the fact that the European Parliament itself takes it for granted that the result of the Irish referendum will be ‘yes’ and the EP has ratified the treaty long before the ratification is completed in all of the member states. From both the perspectives of the states and of the Union, the acceptance of the Lisbon Treaty by parliamentary means is by definition a revolution or arbitrary power-grab over the EU-countries of Europe.

6. In order to restore democracy, rule of law and the constitutional status in Europe, all national governments which took part in the unconstitutional takeover of Europe as described above are required to immediately invalidate the parliamentary ratifications and commit themselves to referendums, or immediately resign from both national and/or EU-level political office.

7. If the political leaders collaborating in the EU-takeover remain in office sustaining the parliamentary ratification of the Treaty, it is the duty of the peoples of Europe to restore democracy and constitutional status of Europe by forming temporary governments to replace their unconstitutional regimes, immediately terminate membership with the EU and defy the officials of the EU, i.e. any members of any institution thereof, legislative and executive acts, laws, law-enforcements, regulations, military duties, taxes and any other measures pertaining to EU membership.

8. In lack of performing step 7, after the state-level power-grab has been performed in all member states, the dictatorial transformation would be realised on the level of the whole European Union and EU-takeover would be completed, which would result in the foundation of the federal EU-state as a dictatorial federal regime. The political oligarchy of the EU would occupy the nations under their federal control by unconstitutionally imposing the Lisbon Treaty on Europe’s nations. By exploiting the self-amending features of the Lisbon Treaty, the European political class would continue the ongoing process of constitutional and institutional engineering, dictatorial transformation of the EU-institutions, and concentration of the EU powers.
In case of protests the EU would most likely use military forces, security measures and other dictatorial powers it vested in itself by the Lisbon Treaty to stabilize its totalitarian rule with a justification of its rule “to ensure internal security“.


Tags: , , ,

%d bloggers like this: