Draft:Intergovernmental Conference for Constitutional Treaty: Difference between revisions
Chefs-kiss (talk | contribs) fixed citations to avoid clutter |
Chefs-kiss (talk | contribs) Submitting using AfC-submit-wizard |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | |||
{{AfC submission|||ts=20240128153234|u=Chefs-kiss|ns=118}} |
|||
{{AFC submission|d|v|u=Chefs-kiss|ns=118|decliner=Mattdaviesfsic|declinets=20230607100149|ts=20230206172644}} <!-- Do not remove this line! --> |
{{AFC submission|d|v|u=Chefs-kiss|ns=118|decliner=Mattdaviesfsic|declinets=20230607100149|ts=20230206172644}} <!-- Do not remove this line! --> |
||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | |||
{{Infobox event |
{{Infobox event |
||
Revision as of 15:32, 28 January 2024
 | Review waiting, please be patient.
This may take 3 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 2,638 pending submissions waiting for review.
Where to get help
How to improve a draft
You can also browse Wikipedia:Featured articles and Wikipedia:Good articles to find examples of Wikipedia's best writing on topics similar to your proposed article. Improving your odds of a speedy review To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags. Editor resources
Reviewer tools
|
| Submission declined on 7 June 2023 by Mattdaviesfsic (talk). This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.
Where to get help
How to improve a draft
You can also browse Wikipedia:Featured articles and Wikipedia:Good articles to find examples of Wikipedia's best writing on topics similar to your proposed article. Improving your odds of a speedy review To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags. Editor resources
This draft has been resubmitted and is currently awaiting re-review. |  |
| Date | October 4, 2003 – October 8, 2004 |
|---|---|
| Duration | 1 year and 4 days |
| Location | Rome, Italy |
| Cause | Signature of Constitution for Europe |
| Organised by | European Council |
The Intergovernmental Conference for Constitutional Treaty was an Intergovernmental conference which sought to modify and sign the draft made by the Convention on the Future of Europe
Precedence
The Laeken Declaration in its "Laeken Declaration on the Future of the European Union" established a Convention on The Future of Europe. This Convention on Europe produced the "Draft Treaty Establishing Constitution for Europe" also known as the Draft for the Constitutional Treaty. This would later serve as the agenda which the IGC followed.
Composition and Organization
Its composition was similar to that of previous IGC with heads of state and working groups.[1] Its functioning was different from previous Intergovernmental conferences; their agenda was set by the draft produced by the Convention on Europe. [1] It was hosted by the European Council under the Italian presidency. Its operation was meant to happen more speadily than prior IGC.[2]
Working Forums
- The Office of the President - Valéry Giscard d'Estaing
- The Praesidium - 13 Convention Members
- Working Groups - 11
- Plenary SessionsIGC would finish under the Irish presidency.
Proceedings
To avoid deadlocks the Italian presidency attempted to stick to the agenda set by the Council. However in December 2003 the negotiations stalled and deadlocked. The IGC was dissolved without a conclusion. Under the Irish presidency the IGC was reconvened in June 2004. Under this presidency the member states would sign Constitutional Treaty and pass it on to their nation for ratification.
Deadlocks
Scholarship commonly divides it into five deadlocks.[1][3] There is disagreement in the scholarship as to the reasons of the deadlocks with some attributing to the Italian Presidency, and some to different national interests.[4][3][5] The first issue was a Christian inheritance clause proposed by some states. The second issue was the collective defence clause. The third was the Council presidency. The draft proposal made it rotational. The fourth was the reduce the number within the collage of commissioners. [4] The fifth was the dropping of QMV as method of voting for the Council of the European Union. [6]
References
- ^ a b c Nungent 2017, p. 94.
- ^ Presidency Conclusions Seville European Council 21 and 22 June 2002, Brussels, 2002-06-24
{{citation}}: CS1 maint: date and year (link) CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link) - ^ a b Quaglia 2008.
- ^ a b Nungent 2017, p. 95.
- ^ Dür 2008.
- ^ Cameron 2004.
Sources
- Cameron, David R. (2004), "The Stalemate in the Constitutional IGC over the Definition of a Qualified Majority", European Union Politics, 5 (3) (published September 2004): 373–391, doi:10.1177/1465116504045158, S2CID 153965193
- Dür, Andreas; Mateo, Gemma (2008), "The Irish EU Presidency and the Constitutional Treaty: Neutrality, Skills and Effective Mediation", Irish Political Studies, 23 (1) (published January 2008): 59–76, doi:10.1080/07907180701767997, S2CID 145110089
- Nungent, Neil (2017). Paterson, William E. (ed.). Government and Politics of the European Union (8th ed.). Palgrave Macmillan. p. 94. ISBN 9781137454089.
- Quaglia, Lucia; MOXON-BROWNE, Edward (2003), "What Makes a Good EU Presidency? Italy and Ireland Compared", JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 44 (2), Journal of Common Market Studies (published June 2006): 349–368, doi:10.1111/j.1468-5965.2006.00626.x, S2CID 155032351