26 June, 2014

Circus3: World War One warns us that the Commission SCAM is a dangerous Act of political Nepotism!

The hundredth anniversary of World War One is a stark reminder of dangers behind the politicians’ fraudulent action on the European Commission.

Should someone who received less than ten percent support of the European electorate become Commission President? If this ludicrous choice is questioned, who decides?  A closed-door European Council cut off from democratic accountability? 57 percent of the electorate did not vote. Of those that did vote, up to a third voted for parties opposed to the lead candidates of the main parties (SpitzenKandidaten).

In the UK it is estimated that less than 0.2 percent voted for any party associated with the EPP’s Mr Jean-Claude Juncker.

What does this tell us?

It does not tell us that Mr Juncker is unpopular in the UK. He wasn’t a candidate for any party. He may have had scads of supporters but few could express that in a vote. It tells us that the political parties in UK conspired to make sure that a candidate like Mr Juncker was not considered in the ballot, directly or indirectly.

In reality no-one at all voted for Mr Juncker as President of the Commission! No ballot paper in all the European Union was headed ‘Election of the President of the European Commission‘!

The facts tell us that the elections are FIXED, undemocratic and falser even than the Soviet Union’s. At least they had proper ballot papers! In other words, the whole process stinks!

All the governmental parties all across Europe are involved in this political SCAM. They consent to say only one of their self-defining elite in a sort of Politburo — a member of their political parties — can become the President or a member of the Commission. The politicians have made themselves into SUPER-Citizens. Only they have the ultimate vote.

In fact there is nothing, NOTHING, in the European treaties that says the Commission President should be first elected to the European Parliament. NOTHING. Nothing about any elections. The governments must chose the Commission based on impartiality or independence. No treaty article talks about SpitzenKandidaten in any language, including German.

The Treaties say the opposite. No one associated with the European Parliament CAN be a candidate for the presidency of the European Commission. This was discussed at length when the Lisbon treaty (then named the Constitutional Treaty) was initiated more than a decade ago. Otherwise the advocates of a political Commission would have introduced an article saying that the lead candidate of the biggest party would automatically become Commission President. It was clearly nonsense then. It remains nonsense today.

Even if there were a smidgin of legal justification for the scam, there is another major problem. The public has no free choice about who will be the Commission President. The SpitzenKandidaten are decided by Party Political Machines. Mr Juncker received only 382 votes –less than half of the 800 party activists who could vote.

Could you get more than 382 friendly votes to stand? The Treaties are clear that all European citizens have the right to be considered to become European Commission President. How many friends do you have on FaceBook?

If the politicians were even a little more honest they would have created a presidential election where citizens could have voted for whomsoever they wished. Citizens should use something like the Citizen’s Initiative process to select candidates whom they consider honest, and who can find fair solutions to European challenges and are experienced with combating public mischief, abuse and corruption. The governments should set up an impartial Jury which could then select the best candidate. The treaties say that the Commission should be INDEPENDENT. It should have members who are impartial, who have renounced any partisan interest or personal gain, in order to be seen to be honest and fair.

This system combining the voice of the Citizen and the impartiality of a Jury would fulfill the requirements of the Treaties. The present political nepotism contradicts Treaty law. All nepotism contradicts justice. Will politicians learn why public trust is sinking into the abyss? Are governmental politicians ready to assume a higher level of political honesty? Or do they still have the mentality of ego-centric schoolchildren?

The Politicians’ SCAM tries to eliminate 98 percent of the European public who are not paid-up members of a political party. Does any politician believe this can go on forever without serious legal consequences? Big problems loom about legitimacy of all subsequent European laws and budget!

The reason why the Founding Fathers said that all citizens have the right to be considered as a candidate is simple. The post of Commission President is highly political. But it is not Party Political. It takes an honest and totally independent person to be truly political in office. He or she has to deal with of national governments, consultative committees, the Court of Auditors and the European Parliament. The President has to manage the budget free from any hint of doling out money to political friends or any private interests. Instead we see vast amounts of public money being slurped to political parties and party networks without the taxpayer being able to say ‘NO! ENOUGH!’. The Commission should be composed of people whose honesty has been tried and tested and they have shown they have a robust, honest character. They should embody Europe’s universal or supranational values.

Are the Party Machines free and independent of open and secret interest groups? Obviously not. The reason they are called parties is that they are PARTISAN. They represent open or hidden interests. The Commission is Europe’s anti-cartel agency. It is easy-peasy for an unscrupulous cartel to spend a few billion euros on a political party so that it can influence anti-cartel decisions worth many more billions!

The treaties define the Law of the Commission. It says that NO active party politician may become a member of the Commission. The Founding Fathers like Schuman were well aware that cartels controlling political parties led to two world wars! Before World War One, an international armaments cartel sold weapons to all European states. British soldiers were killed with British bullets. German weapons in the hands of their enemies killed Germans and Austrians. And French industries collaborated with German ones! And all these national champions (in the secretive international arms and raw materials cartels) had the support of the national political parties! In fact some of the parties and newspapers only survived with the active financial subvention of enemies!

Party politicians have turned the Treaty law upside down. They have illegally banned ordinary citizens from the Commission and unbanned party politicians. Is the law fair to ban party politicians today? Why do the treaties still discriminate against party politicians, making it illegal for them to be Commissioners? There is sound reason and judicial logic.

Exclusions are necessary for democracy. Parliaments also have exclusions. They eliminate some citizens to ensure the smooth working of democracies! Contrary to popular belief, not every citizen can stand for the European Parliament elections. Some very honest and upright citizens are excluded by law.

Who are they? And why?

These banned people include the most impartial people that you can think of. Their number includes judges, civil servants, the military, the national and European Ombudsman.

And actually it is quite normal. Would you as a Right-winger want to have as a judge in Court a person who had been elected on a rabid Left-wing policy or vice-versa? Would you want civil servants or generals to be espousing ideological party political propaganda? Should they they be standing up in the European Parliament and denouncing government policies?

Judges should be neutral and independent. If they have an obvious interest or bias, judges have to recuse themselves from a case. It has to be judged by a judge who is seen to be free of such prejudice.

The same goes for the Ombudsman. Would you like to put a case before the Ombudsman about maladministration committed by such highly political institutions as the Council, the Commission or the Parliament if you knew the Ombudsman was a paid up member of one of their dominant parties? Would you have a chance of getting a judgement of maladministration if the Ombudsman might be penalized or demoted politically if he or she gave a judgement against the Party?

The reason why a judge or an Ombudsman is forbidden to stand for the European Parliament and electioneer for a Political Party is simple. Political Parties are the biggest lobby groups in the EU. They have fixed and ideological positions on many if not all issues. Who decides on these is often not at all clear. Occasionally investigative reporters reveal that policies are paid for by major companies, interest groups, unions or consumer organizations.

Hence such a politically active judge is seen as unfair and potentially able to give biased decision as an advocate of all those policies rather than impartiality. The complainant in Court has no assurance that he or she is getting any justice at all.

Here are some of the professions that some European Member States ban from standing for Members of Parliament.
  • President of the Republic,
  • Member of the royal family including spouses,
  • Members of a national government,
  • Member of the Monetary Policy Council of the national Bank,
  • member of military, prison service or police force,
  • Ambassador,
  • Chancellor and Vice-Chancellor of Justice,
  • Supreme Court staff,
  • Supreme Administrative Court,
  • Religious functionary (din Adami)
  • Staff of electoral Commissions,
  • President or vice president of the Court of Auditors,
  • Public Prosecutor,
  • Ombudsman,
  • Executives in local communities,
  • Mayor,
  • President of the Economic and Social Council,
  • Member of the Commission for the Protection of Personal Data,
  • Member of Committee on Access to Administrative Documents,
  • Board Member of a publicly owned company,
  • Director of a limited company, bank, commercial, industrial or private transport company,
  • Director of a provincial credit establishment, medical insurance scheme or insurance company,
  • Persons serving prison sentences exceeding 12 months,
  • persons declared bankrupt,
  • Any person who has been punished for an action which according to common sense makes him/her undeserving of being an MEP.
The following are also legally incompatible with being a Member of the European Parliament in some EU States:
  • Member of the European Commission,
  • Member of Board of European Central Bank,
  • Court of Auditors,
  • Economic and Social Committee,
  • Committees constituted by EU treaties to manage funds or to perform permanent administrative tasks,
  • Board and Management Committee of the European Investment Bank.
Thus contrary to the action of several Commissioners who stood for Parliament recently, this practice is recognized as contrary to good European Community law and justice.

Making any active politician a member of the supposedly impartial Commission is an abuse of power by governments meeting in the European Council. It is a betrayal of Europe’s citizens.
And it is also ILLEGAL.

Circus2: Partisan Commissioners are illegal!

Seven Commissioners put their names forward as candidates for the European Parliament.
Don’t they know that this political activity makes their holding office as a Commissioner totally illegal?
  1. Vice President Reding, responsible for justice, fundamental rights and citizenship
  2. Vice President Tajani, responsible for industry and entrepreneurship
  3. Vice President Šefčovič, responsible for inter-institutional relations and administration
  4. Vice President Rehn, responsible for economic and monetary affairs and the Euro
  5. Commissioner Lewandowski, responsible for financial programming and the budget
  6. Commissioner Mimica, responsible for consumer policy.
  7. Commissioner De Gucht, responsible for trade, who curiously said he would not take up his seat.
The European Commission has become composed of wall-to-wall politicians. The Commission was originally all non-politicians! Over the years by sleight of hand governmental politicians replaced all independent thinkers by their Party buddies. This massive Party nepotism is contrary both to the spirit of the Community method and the letter of the treaties.
It is illegal. Politicians are directly and very specifically EXCLUDED by ALL treaties!
Who do political leaders now exclude from the Commission?
Ordinary citizens!
The European Commission was designed to be EXCLUSIVELY the domain of ordinary, honest citizens.
What sort of citizens should the Commission be composed of? The treaties from the first treaties (Paris 1951, the two treaties of Rome, 1957 up to the present Lisbon treaties) are clear.
The Commissioners are to be experienced in European sector matters. That is obvious but it is not the main qualification that the treaties insist on. The main criterion is INDEPENDENCE. They should be people of sterling character who are able to judge all matters before them with impartiality. They should not be moved by lobbies or disinformation. People of character like Walter Hallstein, Etienne Hirsch, Paul Finet, who stood up to the autocratic bombast of de Gaulle’s plan to turn the Commission into his secretariat (Fouchet Plan, policy of empty chair) required excellent political skills. These were not party politicians.
The Politburo parties want a full Fouchet Plan mark 2. But they have met with resistance by ‘populist’ parties that represent people who find their autocratic tactics unpopular and corrupt.
The Lisbon Treaty (TFEU) in article 245 says that:
The members of the Commission shall refrain from any action incompatible with their duties. Member States shall respect their independence and shall not seek to influence them in the performance of their tasks. The members of the Commission may not, during their term of office, engage in any other occupation, whether gainful or not. When entering their duties they shall give a solemn undertaking that, both during and after their term of office, they will respect the obligations arising there from and in particular their duty to behave with integrity and discretion as regards the acceptance, after they have ceased to hold office, of certain appointments or benefits.
What is meant by ‘INDEPENDENT’? The Commissioner must not depend, or be tied or be linked or associated with any other body or interest group. ‘Independent’ is plain English. Its equivalents are well understood in all European official languages of the treaties. There is no excuse for error!
What is the opposite of ‘Independent’? It is dependent, associated with another interest, tied to a faction. The opposite to independent is PARTISAN. That means the person is a member of a Party.
What have members of the Commission done illegally (besides misuse of Commission resources)? They have:
  • retained their active membership of political parties,
  • attended political party meetings of these chosen parties,
  • used public money (taxpayers’ money!) to attend these meeting and for other expenses,
  • involved officials (civil servants) of the Commission in these activities,
  • actively involved themselves in the partisan and ideological policies of their chosen parties,
  • put their names forward for party political posts,
  • militated for party policy for the European Parliament,
  • denigrated other parties and their policies,
  • been elected to the European Parliament as MEPs.
And in the final insult to the public
  • they have then returned to their offices in the European Commission with the hypocritical assertion that they are independent and impartial !!
In reality, these Commissioners done their utmost to prove they are absolutely PARTISAN !
The treaties do not take these violations as frivolously as the politicians. The same article says that in any breach of the Code of Independence, the Commissioner may be taken to Court and censored.
In the event of any breach of these obligations the Court of Justice may, on application by the Council, acting by single majority or the Commission, rule that the Member concerned shall be, according to the circumstances, either compulsorily retired in accordance to article 247 or deprived of his right of pension or other benefits in its stead.
The politicians may think they have things sown up so that this stipulation is rendered useless. Council politicians select subservient politicians who now dominate the Commission. They make their own internal Commission rules about parties. Nepotism rules both Council and Commission. They have excluded anyone who stands against them — especially critics who resent European policy being run for decades for the benefit of three mainstream parties in closed-door sessions in the European Council and the Council of Ministers.
Politicians have forgotten one other Court. That is the Court of Public Opinion. The European Parliament elections results show the mounting levels of distrust. The public turn away in contempt at this interminable stitch-up. Now the nepotistic system of biased national elections (and no European election) by governmental parties is working against the Politburo. It has returned between a quarter or a third of the seats to parties and personalities vigorously opposed to Euro-nepotism. Nearly three fifths of the public refuse to vote at all! Even taking into account the countries were voting is compulsory, the average turn-out for the EU is a derisive 43 percent.
The president of one of the EU institutions Henri Malosse warned that the crisis of confidence has reached such proportions that he wondered whether there will be another election!
What about the Court of Public Opinion? It has clearly given its opinion about the gerrymandering abuses of the European Parliament. Corruption in the EP increases corruption in the Commission. The public long recognized that most political parties are controlled by small groups and interests. External organisations, whether businesses, trade unions, consumer or environmental groups dominate both the policy and the activities. Political parties are by definition powerful lobby groups. The mechanisms by which they work is too often covered in sophisticated obscurity.
Does the public know what impartiality is? Can the public recognize partisans? Can the public understand who is really independent of partisan propaganda and disinformation?
Certainly! the public can analyze political abuse in politicians’ words and action. Political nepotism is easy to identify. It excludes independent non-party voices!
You can judge. When this question was put directly to the Commission’s Spokesperson, no public reply was forthcoming. The silence is eloquent. The public can conclude for itself whether this political nepotism is corrupt Politburo tactics or something honest.
These illegal acts can have catastrophic legal consequences for 500 million citizens!