The final recommendations of the Conference on the Future of Europe (CoFoE) have been published in recent days. They aim to pursue the federalization of the European Union. The conference was presented as a platform for social debate allowing citizens to express their views on the future of the European Union. In fact, the CoFoE had from the start to give the illusion of democratic legitimacy to the changes envisaged in the EU by the federal community. Recommendations included the postulate of depriving member states of the right of veto in the Council of the EU, the creation of supranational electoral lists, the unification of elections to the European Parliament in all countries or the drawing up of a “constitution of the EU”. In opposition to the manipulation, the whole group of European conservatives and reformists withdrew from the conference. The Ordo Iuris Institute produces a comprehensive analysis of all CoFoE recommendations. On May 4, the Institute will participate in a debate in the European Parliament in Strasbourg on the dangers of CoFoE, organized by the Identity and Democracy faction.
We are already familiar with the recommendations formulated within the framework of the summary of the Conference on the Future of Europe (CoFoE), that is to say a project which for one year was to be a place of meeting and debate with the public on the issues and priorities facing the EU. The Conference itself generated little public interest and failed to raise public awareness. In fact, the CoFoE aimed from the start to give the illusion of social legitimacy to the changes projected in the EU by the supporters of a federal state. The conference was to give the impression that there is a social consensus on the future of Europe, a common will of all to centralize power in Brussels and to further reduce the role of the Member States.
Recently published CoFoE recommendations include the introduction of common supranational electoral rolls for European Parliament elections. This postulate, placed alongside the proposal to unify the electoral laws of the Member States, not only raises concerns about interference in elections in these countries, but constitutes a simple means of placing electoral processes in the hands of central management. from Brussels. The cryptically worded recommendations allow for extremely broad interpretation in the future, which should further heighten concerns about the extent of changes in federal leadership that the EU wishes to implement. The proposal to introduce MEPs from “international” lists in the EP does not indicate whether these MEPs – as legitimate “pluses” – would be granted greater powers. Along with the proposal to grant the EP a legislative initiative, the whole thing appears to be an attempt to create an apparent democracy which will be controlled by politicians placed by political groups on “international electoral lists”, which will give almost 100 % of election.
Another revolutionary and diametrically different EU recommendation is the abandonment of unanimity voting in the Council of the EU in favor of qualified majority voting. According to this idea, the only exceptions should concern the admission of a new country to the EU and the modification of the fundamental principles of the EU set out in art. 2 TEU and in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. This limits the exclusion of the right of veto now available to each member state when the Council of the EU takes decisions on issues deemed sensitive by member states. It is precisely the right of veto that can enable Poland to defend itself against the EU’s continued attempt to impose the need to recognize same-sex parentage. The constant opposition from countries like Poland, which block harmful ideological ideas in the Council of the EU, is the real reason why the EU is so difficult to abolish the principle of unanimity. Officially, the EU calls it “improving the decision-making process in the Council”. Among the many recommendations of the CoFOE, there is also a postulate to introduce a referendum around the EU or a return to the concept of establishing a “constitution” of the EU.
In protest against the form of the conference and the “final demands” published, the whole group of European conservatives and reformists withdrew its participation in the conference, pointing directly to the lack of transparency, the selection truncated and adjusted to future “conclusions” of the participants and in defiance of the recommendations of the citizens.
It is no coincidence that the inauguration and the end of the CoFoE will take place on May 9, the anniversary of Robert Schuman’s declaration, considered a fundamental document of the European Union. Schuman himself wrote about European integration: “It is not about joining states, it is about creating a superstate. Our European countries are a historical reality; it would be psychologically impossible to make them cease to exist. Their diversity is even very beneficial and that is why we do not want to eliminate or equalize them. “At the same time, both in documents (e.g. the 2017 White Paper on the Future of Europe) and at the conference, the communist party The Manifesto is indicated as the ideological basis for the functioning of the EU from Ventotene.
“From the start of the Conference on the Future of Europe, it was known that its objective was to lay the foundations for greater federalization of the EU. Left-wing factions in the EU used the event to create the illusion of debate and equality of discourse. In fact, the supposedly consensus recommendations to sum up a conference that spanned several months and covered hundreds of events is a comprehensive list of radical left-wing ideas like the EU that we have known in principle before. The difference is that today these postulates are presented as > obtained by consensus of all – because the Conference theoretically gave the opportunity to express one’s opinion”, comments Anna Kubacka, analyst at the Ordo Iuris Center for International Law.
The Ordo Iuris Institute is already working on a comprehensive commentary on the published CoFoE recommendations. The Institute will share its first comments on May 4 in Strasbourg, where, at the invitation of the Tożsamość i Demokracja group, the director of the Ordo Iuris Center for International Law, Weronika Przeździeła, will participate in the discussion on the CoFoE and the future of the EU.