论文部分内容阅读
2009年,德国联邦宪法法院就里斯本条约的合(宪)法性所做的判决引起了一场争论,争论的焦点在于欧洲一体化的主导权究竟应当由成员国掌握还是由欧盟掌握。判决的支持者认为,该判决有力地保障了成员国本应享有的主导权,联邦宪法法院的审查权仍将一如既往地防止德国在与欧盟的关系中陷于被动地位;判决的反对者则认为,里斯本条约的意义在于使欧盟获得主导权,但是该判决为了狭隘的国家利益违背了这一精神,因此必将阻碍欧洲一体化的进程。孰是孰非?后里斯本时代的欧盟究竟距离“同一个欧洲”的梦想还有多远?我们可以通过梳理里斯本条约案中的法律逻辑来解读这个问题。
In 2009, the judgment of the German Federal Constitutional Court on the constitutionality of the Lisbon Treaty raised the debate over whether the dominance of European integration should be controlled by member states or by the European Union. Proponents of the ruling believe that the verdict has effectively protected the dominance that members should have enjoyed and that the review power of the Federal Constitutional Court will, as always, prevent Germany from being in a passive position in its relations with the European Union. The opponents of the ruling say, The significance of the Lisbon Treaty is that it gives the EU the dominance of the EU, but the judgment runs counter to this spirit in the interests of narrow national interests and will certainly hinder the process of European integration. What is the right and wrong? How far behind the dream of the “same Europe” in the post-Lisbon era? We can interpret this question by combing the legal logic in the Lisbon Treaty.