To what extent has the EU become a federal state? Does the Treaty of Lisbon form a constitution for that state?

It is often argued that today, the division of powers, as organized by the Treaties, is not clear enough. It is true that, for example, when the EC becomes a member of an international organization, it is sometimes difficult to give to that organization and to its members a precise indication of the boundaries between the powers of the EC and the powers of its Member States.

Another and more acute problem is that Member States, and also their sub-entities wherever the latter have powers of their own cannot be fully guaranteed that, in such or such an area, the EC will never adopt legislation.

Let me take a concrete example: the Treaty does not give to the EC the power to legislate in the fields of health or of culture. But the internal market requires that distortions of competition be eliminated, as well as national provisions which hinder freedom of movement, and the EC is therefore able to adopt rules on the basis of Article 95, which might have an effect on health or culture.

Others also stress that the institutions may abuse their powers under Article 308 (ex-Article 235), or their budgetary powers, or their "implied powers" as recognized by the Court of Justice, resulting in the fact that the boundaries between EC and Member States' powers become even more blurred. Moreover no one can guarantee the equal power between members. For example Germany has 99 seats in EU parliament and a country such as Slovakia has jus 14. The best country to compare with is Unites States of America. The United States Congress is the   of the  of the , consisting of two houses, the  and the . Both senators and representatives are chosen through . A Each of the 435 members of the House of Representatives represents a  and serves a two-year term. House seats are  among the  by . The same thing is in EU there number of seats in EU parliament is given by population. It should be mentioned, that political power is not really equal in European Union, despite all the democratic elections bigger counties such as United Kingdom or France are “fighting” for the superiority.

STATE        

A state is a political  with effective  over a geographic  and representing a . These may be ,  or . A state usually includes the set of  that claim the  to make the rules that govern the people of the society in that territory, though its status as a state often depends in part on being recognized by a number of other states as having internal and external  over it.  State refers to the set of governing and supportive institutions that have  over a definite  and .  Despite the fact, EU can’t be called state even if we have governing and supportive institutions over a define territory. Every member state has its own rules and regulations which often are different from rules determinate by European Council of ministers which is official law making body. Law made by EU Council is binding in European Union countries, but the problem rises the law is different from the particular state law. ( Leonosio v Italian Ministry of Agriculture) . Or then new law is not yet implemented in member state. (Von Colson v Land Nordrhein – Westfalen)

In addition to this, it’s hard to call Europe state, because all the countries speak in different languages. Moreover, all of them have other traditions, mentality. One thing which is probably clear for all citizens of the EU is that it is not a State we know that the EU has no Head of State. On the other hand, the component Members of the EU does have all the attributes of States: Head of State, Head of Government, army, police, courts, prisons, 

Black's Law Dictionary defines a State as:

"A people permanently occupying a fixed territory bound together by common-law habits and custom into one body politic exercising, through the medium of an organized government, independent sovereignty and control over all persons and things within its boundaries, capable of making war and peace and of entering into international relations with other communities of the globe".

Geographically, Europe is a more or less distinct entity, forming a peninsula with its extensive sea-coasts in the North, the West and the South. As far as a land frontier in the East is concerned, the Ural Mountains form natural landmarks separating Europe from Asia, but one has to admit that it is not always obvious to decide, on purely geographical grounds, exactly where the limits are.

Historically, Europeans share their roots in the civilisations of Ancient Greece, Rome and Judaeo-Christianity. By the time of the Enlightenment, the term "Europe" as such had gradually been adopted. Rousseau even went so far as to announce that.

Compared to the Constitutional Treaty

Most of the institutional innovations that were agreed upon in the European Constitution are kept in the Treaty of Lisbon. The most prominent difference is arguably that the Treaty of Lisbon amends existing EU treaties, rather than re-founding the EU by replacing old texts with a single document with the status of a constitution. Other differences:

The planned 'Union Minister for Foreign Affairs' has been renamed 'High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy'. EU symbols like the flag, the motto and the anthem, are not made legally binding in the Treaty of Lisbon. All of them are however already in use; e.g. the flag was adopted in the 1980s. Sixteen EU-countries have declared their allegiance to these symbols in the new treaty, although the annexed declaration is not legally binding. In line with eliminating all 'state-like' terminology and symbols, new names for various types of EU legislation have been dropped, in particular the proposal to rename EU regulations and EU directives as EU 'laws'. Due to Poland's pressure during the June Council in 2007, the new voting system will not enter into force before 2014. Combating climate-change is explicitly stated as an objective of EU institutions in the Treaty of Lisbon. The EU Constitution would have lain down as an objective of the EU the encouraging of "free and undistorted competition". Due to pressure from the French government, this phrase was not included in the Lisbon Treaty.

The  is not  a federation but some academic observers conclude that it is one, after 50 years of institutional evolution caused by the  The European Union possesses attributes of a federal state. However, its central government is far weaker than that of most federations and the individual members are  under international law, so it is usually characterized as an unprecedented form of supra-national union. The EU has responsibility for important areas such as trade, monetary union, agriculture, fisheries, and today around sixty per cent of the legislation in member-states originates in the institutions of the Union. Nonetheless, EU  retain the right to act independently in matters of foreign policy and defence, and also enjoy a near monopoly over other major policy areas such as criminal justice and taxation. The proposed  would codify the Member States' right to leave the Union, but would at the same time also provide the European Union with significantly more power in many areas.

Here is the view of Thomas Risse and Tanja A. Börzel , "The EU only lacks two significant features of a federation. First, the Member States remain the `masters' of the treaties, i.e., they have the exclusive power to amend or change the constitutive treaties of the EU. Second, the EU lacks a real `tax and spend' capacity, in other words, there is no fiscal federalism."

The European Union does not have "Constitution like a State's", just because it is not a State. Its powers derive from its component Member States and not directly from their peoples. Also, Union does not have the objective of getting rid of the Nation States which it comprises, in order to create a European Nation State. On the contrary, the Treaty of Amsterdam has enshrined the obligation of the EU to respect the national identities of its Member States.

Therefore, the real question is that, despite the significant improvements to its Constitutional Charter made by the Single European Act and the Treaties of Maastricht and Amsterdam, this Charter is still on the making. Further improvements are necessary in order to make the EU institutions more effective, more democratic and more transparent. This could be achieved, in particular, through a more representative and legitimate European Parliament, a stronger and more independent Commission, a more effective and consistent Council, greater control by national Parliaments over their Governments and tighter control by the latter over their civil servants. All of this has become an absolute necessity, with the perspective of a Union which could be made up of more than thirty States.

Bibliography

• Survey of Judges, July 1985, New South Wales Law Reform Commission

• P.A. Jacobs, “Trial by Jury - Its Origin and Merits” (1948) 21 Australian Law.

• L. Re. “Eyewitness Identification: Why So Many Mistakes?” (1984) 58 Australian Law Journal 509, at p.516.

• Canetti, E. (2000) Crowds and power. Translated from the German by C. Stewart. London, Phoenix.

• Confederation of British Industry (1989) Towards a skills revolution: a youth charter. London, CBI. Quoted in: Bluck, R., Hilton, A. & Noon, P. (1994) Information. SEDA Paper 82. Birmingham, Staff and Educational Development Association, p.39.

• Bennett, H., Gunter, H. & Reid, S. (2006) Through a glass darkly: images of appraisal. Journal of Development, 5 (3) October, pp.39-46.

---