You will find hereunder an update of the ratification procedures of the Maastricht Treaty in the Twelve Member States of the EC. A first dossier was published in the April issue of our Newsletter. We shall follow carefully these procedures until the coming into force of the Treaty. The readers who wish, through our Newsletter, to tell their views on the Maastricht Treaty can send us an article: it will be read in all Parliaments of Europe. We thank the competent services of the European Parliament for their informations which made the publication of our dossier possible.

The ratification progress has started almost everywhere in the EC Member States and the established timetable confirms the commitment to ensure the implementation of the new Treaty by 1 January 1993. The constitutional reforms necessary in some countries are likely to delay this process, as the changes deriving from the Maastricht Treaty become entangled with internal political issues. In most cases, the grant to EC citizens living in any of the 12 Member Countries of the right to vote and to stand at local and European elections is the main topic of constitutional reform; the adoption of the Maastricht Treaty has wider consequences within countries such as France and Germany. The vast majority of political parties considers that the Maastricht Treaty must be ratified, whilst at the same time stresses its insufficiencies and the need of further progress on the question of the democratic deficit before the next European elections (1994) and before any enlargment. In some Member States, the ratifica

tion of the new treaty merges with debates on internal "federal"reforms, as for example the inter-community dispute in Belgium (Flemish - French - German ) the weakenning of German federalism and the strengthening of regionalism in Spain and Italy.

Belgium

The draft bill of ratification, presented by the government to the State Council, should be examined by the Chamber of Representatives before the end of the parliamentary session in July and by the Senate in autumn. The Treaty should equally be presented to the Council of the Communities - Flemish, French and German - for those issues that belong to their competences (environment, education, culture). Their assent is necessary before the Treaty can be ratified. The "Consultative Committee" of the Chamber of the Representatives has already compared the Treaty with the final declaration of the Assizes and the resolution adopted by the chamber in 1991. Five reports are currently being prepared each jointly by a Belgian and European parliamentarian (Mrs. Neyts-Uyttenbroeck, Dury, André, T'Serclaes and Messrs Herman, van der Maelen, Lannoye, van Dienderen, van Peel, van Outrive). They will be voted in the plenary session before ratification. The Consultative Committee of the Senate is drafting an option (

authors: Messrs Hatry and Stroobant) that will be transmitted to the external affairs committee, which is competent for the presentation of the report in plenary. Constitutional modifications, if any, were reviewed by the State Council whose advice is mandatory but not binding. The State Council had to determine if art. 25bis of the Constitution (the exercise of certain powers can be entrusted by a treaty or by a law to organisations of public international law )covers the transfer of powers implied by the treaty and concerning the voting right in European and district elections if a constitutional review of art.4 is necessary. A favourable answer of the State Council on this second issue was not followed by the Dehaene government, which chose the less risky way of an "a posteriori" constitutional modification.

Danemark

The government presented the draft bill containing a positive stand of the Treaty to the Folketing on 10 February. This draft was adopted in plenary on 12 May 1992, with a favourable vote from the Conservatives and Liberals (who support together the minority government of Mr. Schuluter) and from the Social-Democrats; only the Socialist Popular Party (which is a member of the pro-Europe of the Group for the European United Left in the EP), the extreme right wing Progress Party and the small Center Party voted against. This vote precedes the referendum foreseen for 2 June 1992, the results of which are still uncertain, because the "Yes" and the "No" are split 40% each with 12-20% undecided according to the polls. In voting in the ratification bill, the Folketing introduced on the initiative of the Social-Democrats - the possibility of organising other referenda on "partial" issues such as the Community immigration policy, frontier controls, the fight against drug traffickry and criminality, and police

cooperation. After the referendum of 2 June 1992 and the already announced referendum on EMU in 1996, this decision risks producing a "Swiss"situation and further difficulties for the implementation of the Maastricht Teaty.

Germany

The Treaty calls for the intervention of the bodies competent for federal legislation, by means of a federal law. In view of the ratification of the Treaty, the government intends to trasmit to the Bundestag and Bundesrat two bill drafts: the ratification law and the constitutional review concerning Art. 28 (voting right for local elections) and Art. 88 ( implementation of the European Central Bank). The bill drafts concerning ratification and constitutional review are first submitted to the Bundesrat, that has the right to state its views within six weeks. After that, the government transmits the bills to the Bundestag, which adopts the ratification law after two readings with a simple majority and the law concerning the constitutional review law after three readings with a two thirds majority. After the adoption by the Bundestag, the two bills are submitted again to the Bundesrat, that should give its approval by simple majority or a two thirds majority, as in the Bundestag. On request of SPD, ot

her constitutional modifications must be examined within the committee formed by Bundestag-Bundesrat members, instructed to prepare the constitutional review. It concerns basically Art. 24 of the constitution, stating the transfer of sovereignty to international institutions and the role of the Länder. If the timetable is respected, both Bundesrat and Bundestag proceedings could start before the summer and be completed by the end of the autumn. Given the composition of the two Chambers, the vote of the SPD opposition is necessary. "We want the federal government to commit itself - the SPD declared - in calling for an improvement of EP powers on the occasion of the next European Summit and notably on the occasion of the negotiations concerning the financing of the Community, the future number of the members of the Commission and members of the EP and the enlargment of the Community. The date starting from which the European Parliament will have a real co-decision power at the same level as the Council

, will have to be fixed before the next European Elections in 1994. We want federalism to become the political base of Europe, in order to allow the European citizens to recognise themselves in the identities shaped by the political history of Europe and avoid burocratic centralism shaping the face of Europe".

Spain

From the political point of view there should be no problems, at the Congress and Senate, as the political parties are all favourable to ratification. Nevertheless some links are being established between the adoption of the Delors II Package and the Treaty ratification and there are some doubts related to the timetable. Some uncertainity still remains as to the constitutional consequences because certain lawyers consider it indispensable to modify the constitution and, in particular Art 13, concerning the voting right of non-Spanish citizens. The government, the State Council and the President of the Senate think anyway that it is enough to modify the electoral law and, on top of this, fear that a constituional review could lead to other claims coming from the autonomous communities. The Constitutional Court could be asked to state on the bases of Art. 95 of the Constitution to decide whether there is a contradiction between the Treaty and the Constitution itself. The Treaty ratification can onl

y come after having solved this legal question and, in case of a constitutional review, after the agreement of the two Chambers with a two-fifths majority.