TheJournal.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more »
Dublin: 15 °C Saturday 25 May, 2013

Independent TD launches legal challenge against ESM treaty

Thomas Pringle says he wants the High Court to establish whether the European Stability Mechanism requires a referendum.

Thomas Pringle had previously led backbench calls for a referendum on the Fiscal Compact.
Thomas Pringle had previously led backbench calls for a referendum on the Fiscal Compact.
Image: Laura Hutton/Photocall Ireland

AN INDEPENDENT TD has initiated legal proceedings seeking a High Court ruling on whether Ireland can ratify the treaty establishing the eurozone’s new permanent bailout fund, the European Stability Mechanism (ESM).

Donegal South West TD Thomas Pringle has initiated proceedings, arguing that ratification of the ESM treaty – which is due to be brought before the Dáil in June – could mean Ireland would lose direct control over some financial affairs.

The €7o0 billion fund could require Ireland to contribute up to €11.1 billion in order to finance the bailouts of other countries – but the €700 billion figure can be raised at the prerogative of the ESM itself, with no apparent limit.

“In effect, it can direct the State to raise sovereign debt, give the money so raised to it and can then decide where, when, whether and how it is spent,” Pringle said.

“Therefore Ireland will not have the power to control decisions regarding the use of funds raised by it.”

Pringle said the possibility that the ESM treaty was unconstitutional, or would require a referendum, needed to be established before Ireland voted on the fiscal compact, where many votes would be influenced by the fact that a Yes vote is needed in order to access ESM funds.

Pringle said he was therefore asking the court to examine the legality of the ESM Treaty’s proposed amendment to existing EU treaties, saying the amendment was being adopted under the “simplified revision procedure” which he believes is “legally wrong”.

This procedure is permitted under the Lisbon Treaty, but only in cases to “internal policies and action of the Union”. Pringle said this had been breached given the significance of the structure being set up.

The independent TD, who tomorrow takes over as one of the Dáil technical group’s three ‘leaders’, is also to ask the court whether the ESM treaty was in breach of existing EU treaty principles which had been incorporated into Irish law.

It is not clear when the legal action might be heard: assuming the High Court grants leave for the treaty to be challenged, it can only intervene after the government has published the legislation and set about trying to have it adopted in the Oireachtas.

Tánaiste Eamon Gilmore today said that while the government intended to publish the legislation on the ESM treaty before the fiscal compact referendum is taken, it would not trying to have it approved by the Oireachtas until after the referendum.

Pringle had previously led independent calls for a referendum on the Fiscal Compact treaty, and had set about organising a petition of TDs and Senators which would have required President Higgins to consider putting the deal to a public vote.

Read: Government defeats Sinn Féin motion on bailout fund ‘blackmail clause’

More: Noonan closes door on amendments to EU bailout treaty

Read next:

Comments (32 Comments)

  • The introduction of the ‘blackmail clause’ should be the subject of a court review also.

    Reply
    • You mean asking that countries keep their houses in order before they have access to bailout funds… Remember this applies to all countries, not just Ireland!

      Reply
    • Actually no David, the blackmail clause threatening that Ireland won’t have access to the ESM funds if we vote no on the fiscal compact, which your mentors in FG so joyously allowed to be inserted at the last minute to threaten the Irish people.

      Reply
    • and no again david,, read the treaty please,, it states yhat countries can be held to account, but if certain countries are allies with others and the wish to block proceedings that they need to hold a majority in the case,,, now voting rite in the treaty stat that germany have 27.1%, france have 20.3% and italy have17.9%,,,so 3 countries out of 17 hold a total of 65%, do you see a trend,,, just for those that dont know,,, Ireland have 1.6% of the vote,,

      Reply
  • well done Thomas, keep up the good work

    Reply
  • If it has to go to referendum , it would be our ‘nuclear option’. A complete writeoff of the bankers debts criminally imposed on our people would be demand numero uno

    Reply
  • Pringle – you are a patriot

    Reply
  • I hope he succeeds in his challenge, for all our sakes. We can’t afford this. Good on you Pringle.

    Reply
  • The reality is you have to pay tax.
    Perhaps you do not realise this, but once your tax is paid the money is no longer yours and you entrust the government to spend it wisely on behalf of the citizen.
    Every citizen has a legitimate complaint about how the money has been mis-spent over the years.

    This is very much about the constitution.
    We vote on amendments for our own constitution, and we *ought* to be voting for amendments to our European treaties. Are you suggesting that the correct procedures in law should be ignored?
    If the EU leaders are allowed amend treaties without referendums then that would have major ramifications for our Democracy.

    Reply
  • you will have to pay for water charges too,,, oh, and household charge, and the new property tax and broadcasting licence,,, does that annoy you Mr Slattery

    Reply
  • Wow all politicians aren’t traitors!! Come on micheal Martin don’t be a traitor like Cowen a window of opportunity for a good guy

    Reply
  • So two referenda in May then?

    Reply
    • Nope, the ESM ratification will be handled also via the fiscal compact referendum as the proposed constitutional amendment is: “The State may ratify the Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance in the Economic and Monetary Union done at Brussels on the 2nd day of March 2012. No provision of this Constitution invalidates laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the State that are necessitated by the obligations of the State under that Treaty or prevents laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by bodies competent under that Treaty from having the force of law in the State.” so you DO get a vote on the ESM treaty despite what some might say as it is a body competent under the fiscal treaty.

      Reply
    • @Ryan
      Good question. I think the answer is yes. This my understanding of it…..
      The Irish government & the European Union have attempted to subvert the democratic process in the following way:
      1. They changed Article 136 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) without holding a referendum
      2. That enabled them to create the European Stability Mechanism (ESM)
      3. They then came up with the idea of the Fiscal Compact, which contained a reference to the ESM
      4. They then re-opened the ESM and changed it so that only states that ratify the fiscal compact would be able to get money from the ESM.
      5. The Irish government then announced a referendum on the Fiscal Compact.

      If the court find that we need a referendum for Article 136 of the TFEU, then the ESM couldn’t exist (and I guess would have been illegal from the outset), as the treaty change would have been invalid. If we then vote NO on the TFEU and YES on the Fiscal Compact the wording of the Fiscal Compact would have to be changed to remove the reference to ESM, but as the Fiscal Compact is not a treaty so I don’t think that would require another referendum to do that.

      It’s all looking pretty messy.
      Fair play to Pringle for taking it on. What’s left of our eroded democracy kinda hinges on this case, imo.

      Reply
    • Actually it does karl,,, it proposes to change art 136 of the TFEU (lisbon) treaty,, which we all have a vote on

      Reply
  • To all those saying, good luck, blackmail clause, it is not a blackmail clause, it is a fact and the proposed amendment is: “The State may ratify the Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance in the Economic and Monetary Union done at Brussels on the 2nd day of March 2012. No provision of this Constitution invalidates laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the State that are necessitated by the obligations of the State under that Treaty or prevents laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by bodies competent under that Treaty from having the force of law in the State.” so you actually are getting a vote on the ESM treaty also. I have to say i recently changed my mind to support the yes side once I saw the proposed amendment because it allows for tougher fiscal discipline than I thought,my initial objection was that I thought it was just the fiscal that wasn’t tough enough on it’s own. Now we see the vote is on two treaties and also for other laws,etc to be brought forward in the interests of ourselves and Europe. His case is pretty laughable, he should really read the proposed amendments in future before he goes of to court.

    Reply
    • It’s not the ESM that’s being challenged Karl. It’s the Amendment to Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union which states:
      “Article 48(6) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) allows the European Council, …..to adopt a decision amending all or part of the provisions …….. Such a decision may not increase the competences conferred on the Union in the Treaties and its entry into force is conditional upon its subsequent approval by the Member States in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements.”

      Our state requires a referendum.

      Reply
  • why do I get the feeling that it is I .Mr taxpayer who will pick up the fee for his days out in the courts . If he had balls he would throw his cash in the ring and say if I lose there is my share of the costs… but pigs have yet to fly

    Reply
  • Is having a referendum not enough for Pringle and the rest of the No camp?
    Can they not trust the Irish people to make the right decision?

    Reply
  • This is so much more about keeping Mr Pringles name in lights then anything to do with the constitution
    What annoys me is that I will have to pay for it .
    The reality is that Independent members of the Dail have to rattle there prams as much as possible in order to justify there massive salaries and even more massive allowances .

    Reply

Add New Comment