The rejected European Consitution, which was abandoned in 2005 but reintroduced in 2007 as the Lisbon Treaty (a form which member states’ voters coould not reject in national referenda,) was tailor-made to strip nation states of their power and centralise control in the hands of a Brussels cabal, according to a leading authority on international law.
Professor Richard Epstein, one of the foremost authorities on international law and treaties, exposed the cryptic clauses of one of the most important agreements in the history of the EU in a shock essay and in doing so exposed the true nature of the treaty and the power grabbing political monster the EU has become. At the time Mr Epstein warned the EU Constitution would result in less individual freedom and more bureaucratic interference, and centralised government from Brussels and advised Britain to chuck the treaty in the bin.
The document analysed by Mr Epstein was never formally ratified after being voted down in plebiscites in France and Netherlands, but it became the Lisbon Treaty, which passed in 2007 after being rejected in a referendim in Ireland, they only country consitutionally required to put a treaty change involving a surrender of sovereign powers to a public vote. But but Ireland is much smaller and has much less economic clout than France or Netherlands, and after the European Central Bank had shafted the Irish economy, Brussels told the Irish government the referendim result was not acceptable and the vote must be rerun.
The Lisbon Treaty contained 95 percent of the same text as the EU constitution, according to analysis by the London think tank Open Europe.
After being ratified by the political elites of member states and voted through at the second time of asking by Ireland, the Lisbon treaty became the legal bedrock of the EU, updating laws and regulations for member states, establishing a more centralised leadership and foreign policy, a process for countries that wish to leave the bloc, and a streamlined process for enacting new policies, in effect shifting the EU from being a free trade club to being a political entity.
In his 2005 essay called “American Lessons for European Federalism”, Mr Epstein, Professor at the New York University School of Law, argued that the EU constitution lacked many of the democratic checks and balances contained in the American constitution and the consitutions of democratic nations. Absolute power is weilded by a committee of unelected bureaucrats.
Predicting where the document’s internal structures, which lacked of any clear definition, would lead, centralising massive power into the hands of unaccountable executives in Brussels, Mr Epstein wrote: ”For those who want a strong state with weak individual rights, then this Constitution achieves many of their goals.