Abstract
Courts in a given institutional context are aware of the implementation costs of their decisions. Contrary to some interpretations of Higher Courts’ reasoning, these have decided, in most cases, that EU treaties are compatible with national constitutional law. In cases on the constitutionality of EU treaties, a negative decision on a given treaty offers only two possible implementation options: either the treaty is re-negotiated or the constitution is modified. The most rigid constitutional revision procedures involve citizens either by means of a referendum and/or an intervening election. Therefore, and despite a significant number of appeals, Higher Courts have not ruled that EU reform treaties require constitutional revision for their ratification when citizens intervene in constitutional amendment procedures
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.