0

As I understand it, the Lisbon Treaty ammended the two core treaties of the European Union: the Treaty on European Union (TEU), and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).

Did the Lisbon Treaty to some degree encode directives that were already in effect, and simply move them into treaty law?

2

Sort of, depending on what you mean by "directives that were already in effect".

If we look at the Wikipedia entry for the Lisbon Treaty, the first amendment it discusses is about the central bank. It makes the bank an official EU institution, and it makes the Euro the official currency of the Union. But the bank already existed (for a long time) and the Euro had been in use for several years.

On the other hand, it also introduced "Article 50". Which certainly was no encoding of existing directives.

  • Thank you. Am I correct in saying that some of the migration rules were an encoding of 2004/38/EC? – Ben Feb 1 at 16:38
  • @Ben That's a far more specific question, which I am not qualified to answer. Perhaps you should ask it as a separate question? – Abigail Feb 1 at 17:12
  • The ECB has a complex legal history but wasn't created by a directive. It was already in the treaties (including various protocols to earlier treaties). – Relaxed Feb 5 at 20:01
  • 1
    @Ben No, you're completely wrong about this. The Lisbon treaty did not include any major change to the migration rules. Freedom of movement for people has been in the treaties since the very beginning, the last major extension happened with the Maastricht treaty in 1992, the 2004 directive basically details those principles. – Relaxed Feb 5 at 20:05
  • If Maastricht already encoded the principles, why was 2004/38/EC necessary? The directive fleshed out details? – Ben Feb 5 at 21:12

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.