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?

Improve this question

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
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.

Improve this answer
4
  • Thank you. Am I correct in saying that some of the migration rules were an encoding of 2004/38/EC?
    – 52d6c6af
    Feb 1, 2019 at 16:38
  • 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, 2019 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, 2019 at 20:05
  • If Maastricht already encoded the principles, why was 2004/38/EC necessary? The directive fleshed out details?
    – 52d6c6af
    Feb 5, 2019 at 21:12

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .