26 Amendments of João PIMENTA LOPES related to 2022/2143(INI)
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the attempt to impose the primacy of EU law over the law of each Member State by way of the Draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe was clearly rejected by the peoples of a number of countries in referendums;
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
Ab. whereas allowing an external political/legal power to take precedence over a state's constitutional order endangers the sovereignty of a people and, therefore, democracy;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas, as a legal community and not a state, the EU is dependent on the effective and uniform application of its law;, whereas such effectiveness and uniformitich should comply can only be ensured if EU law takes precedence over national law; whereas the principle of primacy therefore constitutes a cornerstone of the EU’s legd be consistent with the constitutional order, which of its essential for the EU’s functioningMember States;
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the so-called principle of primacy of EU law is not enshrined in the Treaties, buwhich is a fact thas developed over decades through thet cannot be obscured or modified by any case- law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU); whereas, ever since its landmarkthat includes the Costa v E.N.E.L. judgment of 15 July 1964 in Case C-6/646, in which the CJEU has reaffirmed that EU law takes precedence over the law of the Member States, regardless of the rank of the national legislation or the time of its adoption; whereas the principle of primacy therefore applies to any provision of domestic law, including provisions of a constitutional nature, in accordance with the well-established case-law of the CJEU; _________________ 6 Judgment of the Court of Justice of 15 July 1964, Costa v E.N.E.L., C-6/64, ECLI:EU:C:1964:66.
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas, in Declaration No 17 concerning primacy, annexed to the Treaty of Lisbon, the Conference recalls that, in accordance with the well-settled case-law of the CJEU, the Treaties and the law adopted by the Union on the basis of the Treaties have primacy over the law the reason why the so- called principle of the primacy of EU law has never been enshrined in the Treaties is that, as well as failing to generate consensus, it was roundly rejected by the peoples of the Member States, uander the conditions laid down by the said case-lawis situation cannot be changed or undermined by Declaration No 17 concerning primacy, annexed to the Treaty of Lisbon;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the case-law establishing the principle of primacy has been implicitlynever been transposed into the Treaties and therefore cannot be deemed to have been accepted by the Member States, which have never used a Treaty revision to lay down exceptions to the precedence of EU lawthe principle of primacy of EU law, which was roundly rejected by the peoples at the time of the so-called Constitution for Europe;
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas several national constitutional courts have nevertheless defended the existence of certain limits to the so-called principle of primacy; whereas these reservations mostly concern respect for EU competences and the national constitutional identity;
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas it is stated that the principle of primacy does not imply a hierarchy between the legal orders of the EU and the Member States, but rather requires that, in the event of conflicting provisions of EU and national law, national courts must disapply those national provisions, and that national courts interpret their national law in conformity with EU law, which is a contradiction in itself;
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Reiterates that, by their accession to the EU, the Member States have adhered to a certain number of core values and principles, which they share and have undertaken to respect at all times; recalls that these include the principle of primacy;
Amendment 114 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Rejects the intention to impose on the constitutions of Member States the principle of primacy of EU law and the neoliberal, militaristic and federalist policies laid down in its Treaties, concentrating power – in line with the interests of large economic and financial groups – in the hands of institutions dominated by the major powers, responsible for eroding rights, worsening social inequalities, increasing imbalances between countries and imposing unequal relationships of dominance and dependence;
Amendment 119 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Stresses that the erosion of social rights and achievements being encouraged by the European Union has gone hand-in-hand with instruments and mechanisms – such as the 'Economic and Monetary Union', the 'Fiscal Compact', 'Economic Governance', the 'European Semester' or the 'Banking Union’ – which seek to monitor and circumscribe Member State policies and are an obstacle to the full exercise of the sovereign powers of Member States that are fundamental to their development, instruments and mechanisms that the attempted imposition of the so-called principle of primacy of EU law seeks to bolster;
Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Considers that, in order to uphold democracy – in particular by bringing decision-making processes closer to the grass roots in the Member States – it is not necessary to centralise power in the hands of European Union supranational institutions, dominated as they are by the major powers, but to respect and sustain national sovereignty and independence and cooperation on the basis of equal rights;
Amendment 123 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 d (new)
Paragraph 1 d (new)
1d. Considers that the path of blackmail and interference that the so- called primacy of EU law seeks to impose on the constitutions of Member States will not only fail to help solve problems but will exacerbate tensions and conflicts and at the same time hamper states' development and undermine the people's interests and aspirations and their participation in democratic processes;
Amendment 126 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recalls in this regard that, in accordance with consistent case-law and on the basis of Article 4(2) TEU, although the Member States have a certain degree of discretion in implementing the principles of EU law, their obligations as to the result to be achieved do not vary from one Member State to another and the executive force of EU law may not vary from one Member State to another; emphasises that the same logic applies within the Member States, as compliance with EU law and its principles may not vary over time as a result of national legal, political or social changes;
Amendment 137 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 150 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 160 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 172 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Believes that the case-law of any national constitutional court challenging the principle of primacy has an important influence on the doctrines of the constitutional courts of the other Member States with regard to the scope of the primacy of EU law; points, therefore, to the risk that this could pose to the effectiveness and uniformity of EU law;
Amendment 187 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 199 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Considers it vital to respect national sovereignty and democracy and the right of peoples to determine their destiny, including by bolstering national parliaments' decision-making capacity regarding European Union policies;
Amendment 201 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Considers it necessary for the EU Treaties, policies and rules to be reversible – starting with the repeal of the Fiscal Compact and the Treaty of Lisbon – with a view to the progressive adjustment of the status of each country according to the will of its people and its actual situation, while safeguarding its specificities and permitting the necessary exception clauses;
Amendment 203 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8c. Calls for cooperation among sovereign states with equal rights by rejecting the imposition of power relations in EU institutions that keep the major powers in a dominant position in decision-making processes;
Amendment 204 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 d (new)
Paragraph 8 d (new)
8d. Upholds the principle of equality among states – one country, one vote – and the right to veto on all matters deemed to be of vital interest for upholding each Member State's right to development, sovereignty and independence;
Amendment 236 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Reiterates that, although it is not enshrined in the Treaties, the principle of the primacy of EU law applies to, and its effects are binding on, all bodies of the Member States at all tim the principle of the primacy of EU law is not enshrined in the Treaties;
Amendment 245 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Recommends nevertheless that, in the event of a revision of the Treaties, the principle of primacy be codified; recalls that the precedence of EU law was explicitly laid down in the Constitutional Treaty; regretalls the fact that this primacy clause was not included in the Treaty of Lisbon;