Showing posts with label European Commission. Show all posts
Showing posts with label European Commission. Show all posts

15 July, 2021

Reply to Commission President von der Leyen on unpublished Democracy Treaty

In recent days the European Commission has initiated major changes to the European political architecture. The EU has renounced the need for budgetary independence ('balancing the budget') and is becoming willingly subservient to international financial debt markets for the foreseeable future. It is in the process of re-engineering the entire economy on  the basis of a 'Green Deal' that has enormous implications for every man, woman and child in Europe. 


Are citizens and industries in the deal and in agreement with it? Have they ever been able to discuss this in its integrality, in-depth or in detail? Will it hinder and hamstring Europe's economy while China powers ahead with its coal-fired industries? Why are Europeans paying twice the price for energy compared with the USA? 
The European Commission says it is open to criticism and improvement of these gigantic plans and changes. But is it? Can the people of Europe have any influence on these and other policies? The European Council sets guidelines and plans behind closed doors. Why? The Lisbon Treaty (TFEU art 15) says the councils should be as open to the public as the Parliament. The European Commission, more and more, acts as the secretariat for an oligarchy, off-limits to observation. 
Does the EU listen to the people? Does it listen to small and medium industries? Does it respond to requests to cut spending? 
Judge for yourself!
What is the record? The European Commission has refused for seventy years to publish the treaty on how democracy should work in the European system. The principles are outlined in a treaty that its founder, Robert Schuman, called the Charter of the Community (Pour l'Europe, p146). It was signed by the Founding Fathers, plenipotentiary ministers of the six founding States at Paris on 18 April 1951. The name reflects the Magna Carta that formed the basis for democracy not only in Britain but in the United States of America and elsewhere.
If the European Commission was listening to the people it would have long published this treaty both on its website and in the Official Journal.
It has refused.
In April I wrote to President Ursula von der Leyen about this. I received a reply from an official. I enclose my reply to this and the official's letter.
Feel free to publish these letters. I appreciate your support in the cause of press freedom and proper accountability for European institutions that are supposed to be democratic.



Following is the Commission's letter and my letter to President von der Leyen 




From: David Heilbron Price <davidheilbronprice@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 9:42 PM
Subject: My letter of 9 April on the Schuman Declaration and the Charter of the Community


Your ref: Ares (2021) 2498475


                                                                Schuman Project

                                                            David Heilbron Price, Editor   


President Ursula von der Leyen

European Commission


14 July 2021

Dear Madame President,

I am in receipt of the attached letter of 1 July from Dimitri Barua (Assistant to the Director General, Communications) in reply to my letter of 9 April, for which I thank you.  Unfortunately it did not resolve or even deal with the matters I raised: the official publication of the full Schuman Declaration text (not the Proposal) and, above all, the Charter of the Community.

 

These documents, one a governmental Declaration at the origin of European integration and the other a Treaty, are not of mere academic interest but involve the legal basis and in fact the constitutional foundation of Europe and its future. The non-publication of these legal instruments has already led to lost opportunities for prosperity and losses of European funds amounting to millions and, in the case of Brexit, billions of euros. It is not a matter of personal ‘passionate interest’ but acknowledging the legality of documents agreed to and signed by the Founding Governments.

 

I was glad to see the text of the Treaty of Paris on the Coal and Steel Community has been linked to the platform of the Conference on the Future of Europe. This Treaty was long published in the Official Journal and formed the basis for actions in the European Court. 

 

However, the ‘Schuman Declaration’ is mislabelled. The French Government of Georges Bidault decided on a Proposal after Cabinet discussions on 3 and 9 May 1950 (Pour l’Europe, p165).  This is called the Schuman Proposal. Then later on 9 May Foreign Minister Schuman made a Declaration to the public – the Schuman Declaration. This includes his one-page introduction, declaring that the proposal marks the birth of Europe and explaining its worldwide mission of peace.

 

The Schuman Declaration has legal authority and should be published in the Official Journal too. It describes the profound implications of the initiative on a

·      Historical basis (It would bring peace for the first time in several millennia),

·      Geographical: (it was open to all countries including those in the Soviet sphere),

·      Economical: it would bring prosperity as never seen before,

·      Strategic: it announced the creation of Europe as a new entity in world politics,

·      Geopolitical: including its mission to Africa and other trouble spots in need of peace.

 

As for this unpublished first page introduction, I am quite a little puzzled why the Commission made recourse to the 'Robert Schuman Foundation'. The Robert Schuman Foundation is not a depository organisation competent to find the full text of the Schuman Declaration. It makes the same mistake as the Commission. This text can be found at the Centre Robert Schuman at http://www.centre-robert-schuman.org/robert-schuman/la-declaration-du-9-mai-1950?langue=fr and elsewhere. The full text is reproduced in facsimile in the book of the Jean Monnet Foundation, ‘Un changement d’esperance’.

 

Two treaties were signed by Governments on 18 April 1951 in Paris, the European Coal and Steel Community Treaty and the Charter of the Community. The originals of these documents relating to the democratic foundation of Europe can only be found at the French Foreign Ministry, as I mentioned earlier, and as the Treaty of Paris declares in its article 100.

 

Even more importantly, the original of the other signed treaty, the Charter of the Community (Pour l’Europe, p146) is also archived at the French Foreign Ministry. I included html copies of this major, foundational stone of European democracy that I received from the French Minister for European Affairs, Bernard Cazeneuve. It has been on my website, schuman.info , for a number of years. 


Despite my bringing it to the attention of the European Commission a number of times and underlining its importance, it has still not been published by the European Commission on its website or published in the Official Journal.

 

I should inform you that a complaint (number 202101229) has now been introduced with the European Ombudsman about the reluctance of the Commission to publish these key legal documents that are vital for lawyers, politicians, the press and the general public.

 

Madame President, the European Commission as Guardian of the Treaties should have officially published these legal documents during the last seventy years. The course of European history would have greatly benefited. For whatever reason they haven’t. But that is no reason why they should not be published now when the need is great.

 

I look forward to hearing from the Commission about their immediate publication.

 

With my thanks,

 

Yours sincerely,

 

David H  Price

Schuman Project

Schuman.info

 

 

05 April, 2020

Covid-19: Lethal Fake News from 'Chinese' WHO?

Follow-up question to European Commission

As mentioned in my question of 30 March, the WHO tweeted on 14 January that it followed the Chinese authorities in saying Coronavirus was not transmissible to humans. This was lethal fake news and led to many deaths. Chinese doctors who wanted to present the facts like Dr Ai Fen of Wuhan hospital have ‘disappeared’ as have their research conclusions.
Japanese Deputy Prime Minister Aso Taro says that WHO should be renamed the Chinese Health Organisation and points out that Taiwan took intelligent measures to stop the spread of the contagion.
Although the details are murky, the previous Director General of WHO (Dr Margaret Chan) was a Chinese national and at the time there were complaints all around. Now in the East, the petition (charging her with inadequate accountability) has gathered 300,000 or rather 500,000 signatures. The World Health Organisation should change its name. It should not be called the WHO. It should be called the CHO, the Chinese Health Organisation. … The present Director General is no better for giving in to Chinese spin about the Coronavirus. Earlier on if China had not insisted that it had no pneumonia epidemic, everyone would have taken precautions. The WHO which is a global organisation does not even include Taiwan. And precisely because Taiwan is not a member of the WHO, it becomes a world leader in fighting the epidemic. Then after that statement is made, the Chinese Communist Party corrects it, saying Taiwan is not a country; it is a region.”
Japanese Deputy PM Aso Taro condemns ‘Chinese’ WHO
EU Commission President von der Leyen recommended on Tuesday that Europeans should follow the advice of WHO. Don’t Europeans deserve a more unbiased source of advice? How can they get this?
.
.
Commission reply


The Commission has always insisted on the importance of a science based approach of our response to the Corona virus. The Commission therefore relies on the advice and recommendations of the scientific community, including the World Health Organisation, the ECDC but also the advisory panel of scientists established by the President.”

31 October, 2019

EU Commission shuns UK as an Island of Lepers. Why?

For the whole of this century European Commission chiefs have been trying to stop Europeans asking the most vital, existential question!
Brexit, says EU Commission President Juncker, is Europe’s biggest issue! But he won’t come to Britain.
The Commission tactic: No debates on EU’s fundamental faults with Britain!
In the last two decades amidst the greatest political crises of Europe, Commission Presidents have made perhaps three or four visits to Britain. Most were semi-secret and not open to the public.
Hence Commission presidents Juncker and predecessor Barroso have held no top-level debates with the British public this century!
How many trips to UK? The Commission refuses to give any figures at all. Even less will it compare it with Mr Juncker’s incessant visits to France, Germany, Italy, Greece and everywhere else around the globe.
Great Destroyer
President Juncker has toured and spoken in Germany’s provincial parliaments. From the Saarland regional parliament, he denounced one British prime minister, who questioned Mr Juncker’s legitimacy, as a ‘great destroyer of modern times‘. That’s tough company if it includes Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Osama bin Laden and al Baghdadi of the jihadi Islamic State.
Mr Junker has lectured Belgium’s Flemish and Walloon parliaments with his doom-laden message of Europe’s inevitable decline. He has spoken to the tiny German-speaking community of Belgium.
The British Mother of Parliaments he treats with disdain. Not a word uttered there or any other association, club or assembly. For the Scots he is silent. For the Welsh he is wanting. For the Northern Irish he is aloof.
Across Britain, pro-Europeans march in their myriads. From Hyde Park Corner (legendary bastion of free speech) to the Houses of Parliament, they raise their voices. They wave their European flags. Monsieur Juncker is missing and mute. Bizarre conduct for someone who announced that he was changing the Commission’s impartial status in the treaties to become the first “political Commission”.
‘The Commission is not responsible for Brexit,’ Mr Juncker said on 24 October. He was speaking at the Brussels-based think tank, the European Policy Centre in what he billed as his last speech.
He said that, if UK media tells its public for 46 years that the UK is in EU only for the market — and the rest is bullshit — the referendum result should be no surprise.
Is this true?

“Brexit is a shame and is the most difficult problem we have ever had to face. I do not think that Brexit is in the interest of the Britain, nor in the interest of the European Union. All of us – we will pay the price,” Mr Juncker said.
Why then do Commission presidents refuse to step on UK soil? Wouldn’t coming and offering more money help morale? Money and markets seem available by the bucketload for other Member States via the €440 Billion Juncker Plan.
Real Problem
Something more serious is the core problem, not economics. The Presidents of the European Commission have been avoiding any real dialogue with the United Kingdom. They treat the UK as an Island of Lepers!
They refuse to cross the Channel. Why? Is UK contaminated? No, but it has a contagion. It is called:
D E M O C R A C Y.
Do European Commission presidents fear Hyde Park Corner? Or is it the House of Commons and British Common Law? British Common Law has upheld the nation’s democratic heritage together together for 3000 years — long before Romans ever thought of coming.
This diagnosis should come as no surprise to Brussels. The British have been complaining about the Democratic Deficit since 1977.
The complaints came from pro-Europe activists, not the sceptics.
Prof David Marquand used the term Democratic Deficit in his 1979 book on the European Parliament. The Political clique, the new Politburo, refused to heed.
Thus began the long, long road that led to Brexit. See YouTube Brexit: Cause & Solution

Democracy is essentially about HONEST GOVERNANCE. That applies to all institutions and how they conduct themselves.
Honesty has been singularly lacking for decades. Without honesty and openness democracy’s fuel tank is filled with sand. The motor blocks. That is what has happened today.

Democracy Postponed
The Deficit is not just about lack of ‘one elector, one vote‘ of MEPs. That elementary requirement for parliament democracy has NEVER been implemented in 70 years! Don’t hold your breath. There should be one set of election rules for Europe, not 28.
Schuman and Europe’s Founding Fathers said that the Consultative Committees should have a role comparable to the Council of Ministers. They must elect their own representatives of organised civil society. They would act as a sort of Europe-wide Think Tank. Thus representatives would be able to give in-depth understanding of the needs and potential of Europe’s
  • workers,
  • industries,
  • consumers and
  • regions.
Never happened. Elitist politicians decide on who can be members of these ‘democratic‘ bodies! On a temporary basis, of course.
The Founding Fathers said that Ministers should hold open Council meetings. What was said would be reported on TV and in the press. Today’s politicians refuse.
They now drive Europe further into secret government.
They created a super-secret European Council! The EU and its misbegotten currency the euro is run by the EuroGroup, an “institution” that appears nowhere in the treaties!
Deficit Origins
The Community system, announced by Robert Schuman on 9 May 1950, provided the most democratic proposal ever.
It worked.
He was inspired by his study of the British and American constitutions, themselves based, as he wrote, on biblical principles of justice. Instead of incessant wars that had plagued Europe for more than 2000 years, Europe had for the first time lasting peace and prosperity.
Many Britons wanted to join. Others suspected the Continentals were untrustworthy.
Europe’s Customs Union and Single Market flourished. Hit by labour unrest, UK had declined into a parlous economic state. UK was known as the ‘Sick Man of Europe‘. Britons learned the lesson that a democratic Customs Union was the way to prosper.
But British governments had left it two decades late to join. Since 1945 de Gaulle fomented a revolution to overturn the French Constitution. He seized power in France in 1958. France remained under the autocratic control of the Gaullists. They were intent on wrecking and destroying the Community’s democratic base while making sure France by political pressure had the lion’s share of the Community budget.
The UK arrived when the Community system was palpably in a major crisis of trust. The thirty glorious years of the postwar economic miracle were faltering because autocracy always damages the economy as well.
The Democratic Deficit can more properly be traced from 1973, the year UK joined the European Communities. To outsiders the damage was obvious. The British Labour Party was so disgusted at the way the Europe’s Parliament was treated under de Gaulle, and was still being treated, that they BOYCOTTED it!
How did it happen? How did a whole parliament, proposed by Schuman’s government in 1948, become a shipwreck?
The French autocrat, Charles de Gaulle, president from 1958-69, forced an agreement on the then politically weaker Germany, led by Konrad Adenauer. All the instruments of democracy were suspended. De Gaulle forbade European elections to the Parliamentary Assembly. All democratic institutions were frozen or “chloroformed” according to his scheme.
De Gaulle’s minions decided European policies behind the closed doors of the Council of Ministers. Power politics reigned. The Council and even the Commission consigned parliamentary Amendments on legislation to the dustbin without being read. The Consultative Committees were never elected. Gaullist graft ensured French farmers benefitted from his corrupt and bloated Common Agricultural Policy that cost two-thirds of the Community budget.
So, post-de Gaulle, did European politicians reverse the democratic deficit and stop having secret meetings? Did they have proper elections? Did they have budget accountability?
Not at all. Worse was to come. They grafted Gaullist graft into their system. They turned it into a secretive party political oligarchy.
The Acid Litmus Test
Today Europe is faced with a Europe divided between the neo-Gaullists who have absorbed anti-British attitudes and those who understand that open, democratic, Community principles brought Europe’s peace, prosperity and the freed the nations behind the Iron Curtain. Others are just confused about European governance.
Unhappily the confused seem to be in the majority when Europe’s future was discussed in 2001. Elitist authors of a new treaty failed to convince the public. It rejected Constitutional Treaty and its later identical twin, the Lisbon Treaty. Instead of insisting on Human Rights politicians tried to subvert them. The public smelt the fish.
Elitist projects are built on constitutional errors, lack of honesty and humility. Robert Schuman warned such schemes would lead to unrealisable utopias.
Human Rights Violations
Contrast that with Europe’s birth. The early Community treaties had to be examined by the Council of Europe, guardian of the Convention of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Elitist politicians knew they could not succeed under this scrutiny.
How can we Litmus test the anti-democratic acidity of the present politicians?
They abandoned any Human Rights checks on treaties.
They refused to recognise the public’s right to a referendum. If the public got the ‘wrong’ answer, the Commission told the Council the States must vote again.
  • Maastricht 1992 Denmark.
  • Nice 2001 Ireland.
  • Euro 2000 Denmark.
  • 2003 Sweden.
  • Constitutional Treaty 2005 France & The Netherlands
  • Lisbon treaty 2008 Ireland.
  • Greek Bailout 2015.
  • Ukraine Association 2016 NL
The UK was refused any referendum on any treaty since 1975. UK has not confirmed by Referendum the Lisbon Treaty (and its Article 50). The Brexit Referendum of 2016 based on Article 50 is illegal UNLESS Britons first agree by Referendum to this treaty!
The people are not subject to the Lisbon Treaty because it was imposed by Parliament contrary to Government promises that a Referendum would be held on the Treaty itself before Article 50 could be used. The Lisbon Treaty (then called the Constitutional Treaty) was rejected by France and the Netherlands and others. Parliament is subject to the voice of the people in legitimate referendums.
Now track the Commission. See what they are up to. See if and how they engage in democratic reform and debate with the public. For example, Britain.
The presidents of the Commission zip around Europe. They fly around the world. They collect fancy medals and honours. They collect scores of honorary doctorates.
But not in Britain. Why?
President Jean-Claude Juncker is nearing the end of his five-year mandate. What’s the record? At times he has seemed to spend part of every week in Berlin, if not in Paris. Then he’s off to the Mediterranean and Italy, Spain and Portugal or the Black Sea reaches of Bulgaria and Romania.
To England? Naaaaah! A fast Eurostar train from central Brussels to central London is just too far.
How many times has he visited London or any other part of the UK?
He made one trip for an evening dinner in London. Did he speak to a mass meeting of concerned British democrats. Did he speak to Parliament? No. On 27 April 2017 he had a private meeting with PM Theresa May to describe the length and breadth of any agreement on Brexit. With his team of Martin Selmayr and Michel Barnier, he visited 10 Downing Street under tight security to tell Prime Minister May that Brexit was no walk in the park. He came loaded with the Canada agreement to show how big a document a trade agreement normally was and how negotiations are conducted.
Mr Juncker told a Polish journalist that he has actually visited London on another occasion. When? No one can remember. That makes two trips in 5 years.
Why did he not come more frequently given the gravity of the Brexit crisis — which at the time threatened the disintegration of the EU. When asked by a Polish journalist how many times he has travelled to Mrs May at Downing Street, his less-than-chivalrous reply was:
“Why fly somewhere, if you can discuss it here?” He added: “She used to sit at the place where you are now, at seven in the morning, at eleven o’clock at night.”

Then there is a division of views on politics across the Channel. Many Continental politicians, regardless of what laws and treaties say, feel they can do what they like. No one will take them to Court.
Some of UK’s nearby neighbours don’t blink an eye at presidential slush funds. A mistress of 30 years is housed at the State’s expense or another lover is made prime minister. Would taxpayers in UK agree?
Ministers and prime ministers across the Continent get away with financial and political corruption.
In UK ministers are forced to resign if they mislead the police on a motoring offence. They may end up in prison.
The Question
What is the question that European Commission Presidents don’t want to hear? There are many words which point to the same direction: accountability to tax-payers, honesty to electors, open government … or simply real democracy.
What is the major chasm of credibility for Europe? Fraud. Political fraud.
What Commission presidents Juncker and Barroso fear is that the whole fraudulent Lisbon Treaty structure will come crashing down on their heads. It should.
Why is the Lisbon Treaty fraud big-time? It is not just that this changes the constitution of 28 Member States without the approval of the citizens.
It is not just that it puts European government in the hands of politicians who prefer secrecy and political plots above transparency.
It is that the whole treaty was rejected by Europeans in massive referendums. Further referendums on the renamed treaty were refused by the political clique. Elitists think they know better than everyone else.
The articles are the same as those misshapen monstrosities that appeared in the rejected Constitutional treaty, committee-written under the supervision of former French president Valéry Giscard d’Estaing. This camel of a treaty was roundly rejected by the French and the Dutch in 2005. Six other nations, including UK, were expecting to have referendums. But the political clique refused to let them. The outcome was clear to all. No. No. NO!
Mr Barroso said the camel looked partly like a horse. Spaniards (who were pretty fresh to democracy) voted for it. That’s no endorsement.
But politicians and bureaucrats thought they could get away with it. Two years later the rejected articles were forcefully re-instated as the Lisbon Treaty. How? Articles were retained and inserted as amendments to an old treaty, the much-amended European Economic Community treaty of Rome, 1957.
Why were no further referendums allowed? Bureaucrats said so.
Giscard himself explained in an article published in a number of newspapers. The British must be denied a democratic voice. Human rights must be suppressed.



This deception operation, was foisted on the public by the Council. It is an affront to any citizen with a micron of morality. It was whipped through parliaments because their ministers told their parties to avoid referendums at all cost.
In a democracy who tells parliaments to obey?
Not even the ministers. In the Brussels Bog it was the bullyboy bureaucrats at the Council who insisted that the Lisbon Treaty would not die by democratic decision. It must be re-instituted regardless of the cost to honesty and integrity.
Did Mr Barroso come and explain his strange decision to the great British public? He came to UK perhaps once to Chatham House for a one hour meeting at the end of his ten-year mandate (24 October 2014). Then, amid public outrage, he was off to join Goldman Sachs.
The Lisbon Treaty is illegitimate. So is its equally fraudulent Article 50. This is why the UK Referendum of 2016 is causing a political impasse.
The official name of the Lisbon Treaty is Treaty on European Union (TEU) plus the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). The EU Treaty, for short. But leaving the EU is not the same as leaving the European Communities. Hence, logically, a referendum that affirms the desire to ‘Leave the European Union‘ does not mean leaving the Customs Union and Single Market of the European Communities.
Rather the Brexit vote affirms that British electors want an end to the Lisbon Treaty fraud.
Before any progress in Europe can be made, legitimacy needs to be restored. Europeans require that THEIR VOICE is sovereign — not bureaucrats. Legitimate Referendums must be respected. Politicians should no longer hide themselves behind closed doors. The public must have an open dialogue about their plans and investigate their plots.
No more political Leper Colonies!



03 July, 2019

Rascals select EU Top Jobs without and against the People


The popular definition of democracy is that it is a system where the people can throw out the rascals — inept or corrupt politicians.
That is not the case of Europe today. Its hub has a system of autocracy. 28 politicians from nominal democracies don’t follow democratic rules. They self-select their Politburo, an oligarchy with no recourse to the voice of the people. It has become a system of the politicians, by the politicians, for the politicians. The people are excluded.
It is suicidal for rational politics and a prosperous economy.
Party politicians are a self-exterminating breed. They have stabbed themselves with the dagger of public distrust.
When the EC began, political parties in democracies used to attract 15 percentof the population to their ranks. No more. Today barely 2% of the population is a member of a party.
Public trust is punctured like a car hit simultaneously with four flat tyres! Trust is burnt out.
Europe is fast descending into a more and more anti-democratic system. An unrepresentative Politburo picks new rascals from a pack of rascals and makes it as difficult as possible to remove them.
Rascal is not just an uncomplimentary term. They have done their utmost to break the law!
In Brussels and behind firmly closed doors, the political class squabble for the top jobs. Instead of the eternal Brexit problem we now have a RascalENTRYproblem: non-qualified politicians being given the #TopJobs by other politicians to the exclusion of any qualified other citizen.
Rascal-IN is a greater problem than BREXIT, UK-Out. Brexit is a symptom. Democrats are no longer in control of European institutions.

Here are just some of antidemocratic methods in use.
1. European Council Secrecy.
The idea of having a secret conclave choosing friends of partisan politicians for Europe’s top jobs is totally contrary even to the politicians’ own corrupt Lisbon Treaty. The only people being considered for jobs are politicians, friends of power-brokers. They hope their nominees will return a favour. Favours are increasingly important for those who no longer have the public trust. Some nominees are unwelcome rivals in their home countries, exiled to Belgian Siberia. Others have been kicked out of government by the people. Brussels is their prize for failure. Hardly a system that reinforces public trust.
Meanwhile 98 percent of the public and the press are both excluded. A number of honest, non-politicians have put themselves forward as candidates for these high offices. They read the treaty and believed it meant something.
So where do honest, experienced citizens stand amid the game where the musical chairs are reserved in advance for a political oligarchy?
Nowhere. The Politburo meetings are cloaked in secrecy and political compromise. Rascals are in power and they will stay in power, regardless of what the treaties say.
So let’s remind them of their own rules. The treaty says:
“Union institutions shall conduct their work as openly as possible.” The Council shall meet in public when considering and voting on a draft legislative act. TFEU article15.
Their Lisbon Treaty also says that non-politicians should never be excluded.
“The Union shall observe the principle of the equality of its citizens.” Article 9 TEU.
“Every citizen shall have the right to participate in the democratic life of the Union.” Article 10 TEU.
So choosing top officials in such a conspiratorial manner is also illegal.
2. European Commission.
The qualifications of the members of the Commission have been set out clearly since 1951 when the body was called the High Authority. That meant high moral authority. In the Council of Ministers (not the so-called European Council), ministers would present candidates from any Member State who they considered to be of the highest moral character, independence and competence.
If any other minister had received reports that the candidate was
  • biased and prejudiced or
  • lacked experience,
  • could be shown to be dishonest or duplicitous,
  • were not independent but
  • the plaything of a party or State politics,

then they could veto the suggestion. That is, in fact, what happened in the early days of the European Community. Potential scoundrels, tied to cartels and other interests, were criticised in public and removed.
former Nazi diplomat responsible for Nazi radio propaganda in France, Ernst Achenbach, was nominated by Germany in 1970 as a Commissioner. As chief of political affairs he was instrumental in deporting thousands of Jews. He was exposed by Beate and Serge Klarsfeld. His name was vetoed. Do politicians now want to open the door for such rascals?
In that way the original system was designed to expose untrustworthy people with murky pasts. It is like the selection of a Jury of twelve honest men and women. An honest reputation is the prime attribute of a Jury member.
But Politicians didn’t like that. Nor the idea of high moral authority. The Authority was therefore renamed the Commission. That was just the first sleight of hand.
Today we could call the Commission the immoral authority. Europe is plumbing new lows. When in 1961 General de Gaulle wanted to change the European Commission into a political secretariat under his Fouchet Plan, real Europeans reacted. They stopped him creating a Gaullist Directory of the Continent.
Today politicians apply his tactics with a bit of camouflage. None of them say they are Gaullists but they use his tactics of control of the levers of power and the money bags.
Politicians have long shed any pretence of following the legal criteria and conditions for selecting the Commission. These Politburo candidates are proud to assert that they are doing exactly the OPPOSITE to what the treaties say. The whole idea of Spitzenkandidat is that the person is a delegate of a political party, literally a Party Apparatchik — exactly what the treaties have always forbidden. They must be mentally defective or ethically contrarian. Perhaps they are just blinded by their overwhelming talents. You can’t be so openly partisan and expect the public to consider you non-partisan as the treaties require.
The treaties up to and including the politicians’ own Lisbon Treaty repeat the criteria given in the original Treaty of Paris, 1951. So politicians have no excuse for not knowing the law.
They say the criteria for a Commissioner must be competence and experience, and totally independent of any relevant interest under consideration.
The same goes for a Judge in the European Court of Justice. The Commissioners have to swear an oath of impartiality just like the Judges in the Court and before the same Judges.
It is also obviously a very, very serious matter. Compare this to the United States or even an oath of office in any of the European democracies. In the USA the oath of office is taken in public on Inauguration Day as the major event and the culmination of the election process. It is followed by the President’s speech, before huge crowds in Washington and broadcast nationwide and worldwide.
Have you heard European politicians proclaiming about how this European oath is the central feature of full and legal inauguration of the Commission? Have you heard Commissioners proclaiming before and after the inauguration how they will fully adhere to all the conditions of impartiality they have promised on oath?
Has any of the Commissioners or would-be Commissioners made any speech about how they will faithfully and scrupulously adhere to this oath of office? Like renouncing party membership?
Obviously not. They would be shown to be hypocrites and fraudsters. They are active attendees of party gatherings before the ‘European Summits’. Why? To get instructions and policy.
There is a difference however with the oath that the Judges in the European Court of Justice take and that which the Commissioners are obliged to take.
The oath of office of Commissioners is far more strict. But it is ignored with vigour.

The Commissioners dole out money (one trillion euros worth). They give subsidies to untold number of entities. They take people, companies and countries to Court for non-compliance to Treaty law.
Isn’t it vital that their “independence is beyond doubt”? Does the public think they are impartial? They don’t take criticism lying down. Why is everyone who opposes them called a populist or a nationalist and excluded? Should Commissioners be opposing their opponents? Should they and their friends in Council be raising their salaries? Should they be paying tax money for political campaigns to these same friends?
Why are these would-be Commissioners nominated by Governments and not the people? Why are they members of political parties at all? Is a political party an “institution, body, office or entity”?
Without a shadow of doubt.
So shouldn’t the rascals appear before the European Court of Justice to answer charges about a conspiracy to destroy real democracy? Aren’t they turning Europe into a fraudulent People’s Democracy just like Stalin?
After all, Mr Juncker considers that the greatest political thinker of modern times was not Robert Schuman who brought Europe its unprecedented peace and his salary. It was the revolutionary who imposed the dictatorship of the proletariatand millions of deaths on the world, Karl Marx!