Membership - World Affairs Council Of Maine: Fill & Download for Free

Government of India act 1919 is known as a consequence of Montague Chelmsford Reforms.On 17 July 1917 Edwin Samuel Montagu was made secretary of state for Government of India. Lord Chelmsford became Viceroy of India on 4 April 1916. This was the era of World War I and our country witnessed a rapid growth of revolutionaries.During the First World War, Gandhi Ji had requested the country to help the allies in war. Indian public was expecting that they would also get democratic reforms.Samuel Montagu is known to have put a statement in the British Cabinet which asked for “gradual development of free institutions in India with a view to ultimate self-government” however, later the words “ultimate self government” were removed from his statement and He declared what is now known as Montagu Declaration.The Montagu declaration reads as:“Increasing association of Indians in every branch of the administration and the gradual development of self-governing institutions with a view to the progressive realization of responsible government in India as an integral part of the British Empire“.The key phrase “ultimate self-government” was removed but, still the another key phrase “responsible government” in this statement gave the inference for the first time that rulers are answerable to the public.The declaration made the moderates happy and they said “It is Magna Carta of India”. However extremists expressed that it fell short for legitimate expectations of India. After all, total independence was what they wanted.The date was 20 August 1917 and it is also known as “August Declaration”The Government of India act 1919 was passed on the basis of recommendations of Lord Chelmsford and Samuel Montagu to introduce self-governing institutions gradually to India. This act covered 10 years from 1919 to 1929.Salient Features:The Government of India act 1919 had a separate Preamble. This Preamble declared that Objective of the British Government is the gradual introduction of responsible government in India.The beginning was made.The beginning was introduction of Diarchy. Preamble suggested for a decentralized unitary form of government.Diarchy means a dual set of governments one is accountable another is not accountable.The Government of India Act of 1919, made a provision for classification of the central and provincial subjects.The provincial subjects were divided into two groups:One was reserved and another was transferred. The reserved subjects were kept with the Governor and transferred subjects were kept with the Indian Ministers. This division of subjects was basically what they meant by introducing the Diarchy.The reserved subjects were the essential areas of law enforcement such as justice, police, revenue. The transferred subjects were such as public health, public works, education etc.The Indian executive comprised of the Governor General and his council.No bill of the legislature could be deemed to have been passed unless assented to by the governor general. The later could however enact a Bill without the assent of the legislature.This act made the central legislature bicameral. The first house which was central legislature, with 145 members (out of which 104 elected and 41 nominated) was called central Legislative Assembly and second called with 60 members (out of which 33 elected and 27 nominated) was called Council of States. The term of the assembly was fixed 3 years and council 5 years.The central legislature can be called a primitive model of today’s Lok Sabha & council of states can be called a primitive model of Today’s Rajya Sabha.The act provided for the establishment of a Public Service Commission in India for the first time.This act also made a provision in its part V, that a statutory commission would be set up at the end of 10 years after the act was passed which shall inquire into the working into the system of the government.The Simon commission of 1927 was an outcome of this provision.The communal representation was extended and Sikhs, Europeans and Anglo Indians were included. The Franchise (Right of voting) was granted to the limited number of only those who paid certain minimum “Tax” to the government.The tenure of the central legislature was 3 yearsThe seats were distributed among the provinces not upon the basis of the population but upon the basis of their importance in the eyes of the government, on the basis of communities, and property was one of the main basis to determine a franchisee. Those people who had a property, taxable income & paid land revenue of Rs. 3000 were entitled to vote.The central legislature was empowered to consider, pass or reject legislation on any of the subjects enumerated in the Central list. But, the Governor-General had the last word on any Bill passed by the Legislature.He possessed the power to prevent the consideration of a Bill or any of its part, on the plea that it was injurious to the peace and tranquility of the country. He could disallow a question in the legislature. He had the power to withhold his assent to any Bill passed by the legislature without which it could not become an Act. He also had the power to disallow an adjournment motion or debate on any matter. He could enact a law, which he considered essential for the safety and tranquility of the empire even if the legislature had refused to pass it.The financial powers of the central legislature were also very much limited. The budget was to be divided into two categories, votable and non-votable. The votable items covered only one third of the total expenditure. Even in this sphere the Governor-General was empowered to restore any grant refused or reduced by the legislature, if in his opinion the demand was essential for the discharge of his responsibilities.Government of India Act 1935 was passed by British Parliament in August 1935. With 321 sections and 10 schedules, this was the longest act passed by British Parliament so far and was later split into two parts viz. Government of India Act 1935 and Government of Burma Act 1935.The Government of India Act 1935 derived material from four key sources viz. Report of the Simon Commission, discussions at the Third Round Table Conference, the White Paper of 1933 and the reports of the Joint select committees. This act ended the system of dyarchy introduced by GOI Act 1919 and provided for establishment of a Federation of India to be made up of provinces of British India and some or all of the Princely states. However, the federation never came into being as the required number of princely states did not join it.Salient FeaturesSalient Features of the Government of India Act 1935 were as follows:Abolition of provincial dyarchy and introduction of dyarchy at centre.Abolition of Indian Council and introduction of an advisory body in its place.Provision for an All India Federation with British India territories and princely states.Elaborate safeguards and protective instruments for minorities.Supremacy of British Parliament.Increase in size of legislatures, extension of franchise, division of subjects into three lists and retention of communal electorate.Separation of Burma from IndiaAll India FederationThe proposed all India federation included 11 provinces of British India, 6 Chief Commissioners Provinces and those princely states who might accede to the federation. For princely states, the accession to the Federation was voluntary. The federation could not be established until:A number of states, the rulers whereof were entitled to choose not less than half of the 104 seats of the council of state , andThe aggregate population whereof amounted to be at least one half of the total population of all the Indian stales had acceded to the federation.The term on which a state joined the Federation were to be laid down in the Instrument of Accession. Joining the federation was compulsory for the British Provinces and chief commissioners provinces.Dyarchy at CentreUnder this act, the executive authority of the centre was vested in the GovernorGeneral on behalf of the Crown. The federal subjects were divided into two fold categories of Reserved and Transferred subjects. The Reserved list comprised of subjects such as administration of defence, external affairs, ecclesiastical affairs and matters related to tribal areas. These subjects were to administered by Governor General in his discretion with the help of three counsellors appointed by him. They were not responsible to legislative.The administration of the transferred subjects was to be done by Governor General on advice of the Council of Ministers whose number could not exceed 10. The council of ministers had to command the confidence of legislature. However, the Governor General could act on contrary to the advice of the Council of Ministers if any of his ‘special responsibilities’ was involved in such act. However, in that case {when an act involved special responsibilities}, the Governor General would work under the control and direction of the Secretary of State.Further, the Governor General was also responsible for the coordination of work between the two wings and for encouraging joint deliberations between the counsellors and the ministers.Federal LegislatureThe bicameral federal legislature would be consisted of two houses viz. Council of states and Federal Assembly.Council of StatesThe Council of States was to be upper house and a permanent body with one third of its membership retiring every 3rd year. It was to be composed of 260 members of which 156 were to be representatives of British India while 101 of the Indian states.Representatives of British IndiaThe 150 out of 156 representatives of British India were to be elected on communal basis while six were to be nominated by Governor General from amongst women, minorities and depressed classes. Further, the seats which were reserved for Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs had to be filled via direct election while those reserved for Europeans, Anglo-Indians, Indian Christians and Depressed Classes were to be filled by Indirect election.Representatives of Princely statesThe distribution of the seats among states was on their relative importance and not population. The representatives of the princely states would be nominated by rulers.Federal AssemblyThe Federal Assembly was the lower house with a tenure of five years. It was to be made of 375 members who which 250 representatives of British India and not more than 125 members from princely states. While the seats reserved for princely states were to be filled by nominated members, the provinces were given different numbers of seats. Election to the Federal assembly was to be indirect. The term of the assembly was five years but it could be dissolved earlier also.Provincial AutonomyThe most remarkable feature of the Act was the provincial autonomy. With the abolition of Dyarchy at provinces, the entire provincial administration was instructed to the responsible ministers who were controlled and removed by the provincial legislatures.The provincial autonomy means two things. First, the Provincial Governments were wholly, responsible to the provincial legislatures and secondly, provinces, were free from outside control and interference in a large number of matters. Thus, in the provincial sphere, the Act of 1935 made a fundamental departure from the act of 1919.The act divided the powers between the Centre and provinces in terms of three list-Federal List (for Centre, with 59 items), Provincial List (for Provinces, with 54 items), and Concurrent list (for both, with 36 items). Residuary powers were given to the Viceroy.The degree of autonomy introduced at the provincial level was subject to important limitations: the provincial Governors retained important reserve powers, and the British authorities also retained a right to suspend responsible government.Safeguards and ReservationsA controversial feature of the Government of India Act, 1935 was the safeguards and reservations provided in the Act, would serve as checks and limitations on such undesirable tendencies which might lead to the failure of the responsible government in India. A plea was given that those safeguards and reservations were necessary for the interests of the country. They were imposed either on the exercise of powers by the Government of India on of the states.Establishment of Federal CourtThe Government of India Act, 1935 provided for the establishment of Federal Court to interpret the Act and adjudicate disputes relating to the federal matters. It provided that the Federal Courts should consist of one Chief justice and not more than six judges.The Federal Court was given exclusive original jurisdiction to decide disputes between the Centre and constituent Units. The provision was made for filing of appeals from High Courts to the Federal Court and from Federal Court to the Privy Council. The Federal Court also had jurisdiction to grant Special Leave to Appeal and for such appeals a certificate of the High Court was essential.Abolition of Indian CouncilIt abolished the council of India, established by the Government of India Act of 1858. The secretary of state for India was provided with a team of advisors in its place.Extension of FranchiseThe act extended the franchise. This act introduced for the first time the direct elections. About 10% of the total population got the voting rights.Federal Railway AuthorityThe GOI act 1935 vested the control of Railway in a new authority called Federal Railway Authority, which had seven members and was free from control of ministers and councillors. The members of this authority reported directly to Governor General. The idea was to assure the British Stakeholders of the railways that their investment was safe.Reorganization of the provincesThe partial reorganization of the provinces included separation of Sind from Bombay, Splitting Bihar and Orissa into separate provinces, Complete separation of Burma from India, detachment of Aden from India and establishing as a separate colony.Separation of BurmaThe Government of India Act 1935 contemplated the Federation of the British Indian Provinces and Indian States. But for Burma, there was a separate set of Events. Burma was proposed to be separated in pursuance of the recommendation of the Indian Statutory (Simon Commission) whose proposal was accepted in principle by the Government. Consequently a Burma Round Table Conference was held in London in 1932. In 1935, Burma Act was passed and separation of Burma actually took place in 1937. The Government of India Act 1935 also provided a new Burma Office, in preparation for the establishment of Burma as a separate colony, but the same Secretary of State headed both Departments and was styled the Secretary of State for India and Burma. The first secretary of state for India and Burma was Lord Dundas.

Allow the missing major countries, like Germany, Japan, India, Brazil, Israel, Australia, Italy, etc. to become permanent members with veto power This is a council that is supposed to deal with major world affairs. There should also be a way of choosing the nonpermanent members that allows for adequate representation based on geographic location.The current Security Council doesn’t reflect the economic reality of the 21st century. France and Great Britain have clearly lost their position among the most powerful nations and their role was long ago taken over by Germany and Japan. These two countries are the second and third largest contributors to the UN budget and deserve a permanent seat in the Council. Moreover, as permanent members pay an extra share for their seat, Japan and Germany’s contributions would bring considerable amounts to the UN budget.The representative of Singapore called for a re-examination of the role of permanent members of the Council. Some of the current permanent members no longer had significant global power status, he said, and what they had was mainly because they were already permanent members.The representative of India said developing countries needed equitable representation in the Council's permanent membership, otherwise its actions would be seen as less representative at a time when it was increasingly being called on to act on behalf of the world community. Expanding both permanent and non-permanent seats would strengthen the Council.The representative of Brazil said a proposal to ascribe full permanent seats to two industrialized countries and rotating seats to the developing world was unacceptable. He said Brazil was willing to accept permanent membership and carry out the role as the representative of Latin America and the Caribbean.The representative of the United Kingdom said most Member States did not want temporary, half-hearted reform in one category of Council membership but a durable, significant reform in both permanent and non-permanent categories, and one that increased developing country membership in both.4/5ths of the world's population lives in the developing world, but their voices have not been represented in the UNSC. 4 out of 5 members of UNSC permanent seats are industrialized countries, 3 out of 5 are European. By enlarging UNSC, adding emerging economies from Africa, Asia and Latin America in UNSC, there will be a considerable step towards north-south imbalance.

The Treaty of Lisbon (initially known as the Reform Treaty) is an international agreement that amends the two treaties which form the constitutional basis of the European Union (EU). The Treaty of Lisbon was signed by the EU member states on 13 December 2007, and entered into force on 1 January 2009.It amends the Maastricht Treaty (1992), known in updated form as the Treaty on European Union (2007) or TEU, and the Treaty of Rome (1957), known in updated form as the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (2007) or TFEU.It also amends the attached treaty protocols as well as the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community (EURATOM).Prominent changes included the move from unanimity to qualified majority voting in at least 45 policy areas in the Council of Ministers, a change in calculating such a majority to a new double majority, a more powerful European Parliament forming a bicameral legislature alongside the Council of Ministers under the ordinary legislative procedure, a consolidated legal personality for the EU and the creation of a long-term President of the European Council and a High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. The Treaty also made the Union's bill of rights, the Charter of Fundamental Rights, legally binding. The Treaty for the first time gave member states the explicit legal right to leave the EU, and established a procedure by which to do so.The stated aim of the treaty was to "complete the process started by the Treaty of Amsterdam [1997] and by the Treaty of Nice [2001] with a view to enhancing the efficiency and democratic legitimacy of the Union and to improving the coherence of its action".Opponents of the Treaty of Lisbon, such as former Danish Member of the European Parliament (MEP) Jens-Peter Bonde, argued that it would centralize the EU,and weaken democracy by "moving power away" from national electorates.Supporters argue that it brings more checks and balances into the EU system, with stronger powers for the European Parliament and a new role for national parliaments.Negotiations to modify EU institutions began in 2001, resulting first in the proposed Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, which would have repealed the existing European treaties and replaced them with a "constitution". Although ratified by a majority of member states, this was abandoned after being rejected by 55% of French voters on 29 May 2005 and then by 61% of Dutch voters on 1 June 2005.After a "period of reflection", member states agreed instead to maintain the existing treaties and amend them, to bring into law a number of the reforms that had been envisaged in the abandoned constitution. An amending "reform" treaty was drawn up and signed in Lisbon in 2007. It was originally intended to have been ratified by all member states by the end of 2008. This timetable failed, primarily due to the initial rejection of the Treaty in June 2008 by the Irish electorate, a decision which was reversed in a second referendum in October 2009 after Ireland secured a number of concessions related to the treaty.The need to review the EU's constitutional framework, particularly in light of the accession of ten new Member States in 2004, was highlighted in a declaration annexed to the Treaty of Nice in 2001. The agreements at Nice had paved the way for further enlargement of the Union by reforming voting procedures. The Laeken declaration of December 2001 committed the EU to improving democracy, transparency and efficiency, and set out the process by which a constitution aiming to achieve these goals could be created. The European Convention was established, presided over by former French President Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, and was given the task of consulting as widely as possible across Europe with the aim of producing a first draft of the Constitution. The final text of the proposed Constitution was agreed upon at the summit meeting on 18–19 June 2004 under the presidency of Ireland.The Constitution, having been agreed by heads of government from the 25 Member States, was signed at a ceremony in Rome on 29 October 2004. Before it could enter into force, however, it had to be ratified by each member state. Ratification took different forms in each country, depending on the traditions, constitutional arrangements, and political processes of each country. In 2005, referendums held in France and the Netherlands rejected the European Constitution. While the majority of the Member States already had ratified the European Constitution (mostly through parliamentary ratification, although Spain and Luxembourg held referendums), due to the requirement of unanimity to amend the treaties of the EU, it became clear that it could not enter into force. This led to a "period of reflection" and the political end of the proposed European Constitution.In 2007, Germany took over the rotating EU Presidency and declared the period of reflection over. By March, the 50th anniversary of the Treaties of Rome, the Berlin Declaration was adopted by all Member States. This declaration outlined the intention of all Member States to agree on a new treaty in time for the 2009 Parliamentary elections, that is to have a ratified treaty before mid-2009.Already before the Berlin Declaration, the Amato Group (officially the Action Committee for European Democracy, ACED) – a group of European politicians, backed by the Barroso Commission with two representatives in the group – worked unofficially on rewriting the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (EU Constitution). On 4 June 2007, the group released their text in French – cut from 63,000 words in 448 articles in the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe to 12,800 words in 70 articles.In the Berlin Declaration, the EU leaders unofficially set a new timeline for the new treaty:21–23 June 2007: European Council meeting in Brussels, mandate for Intergovernmental Conference (IGC)23 July 2007: IGC in Lisbon, text of Reform Treaty7–8 September 2007: Foreign Ministers’ meeting18–19 October 2007: European Council in Lisbon, final agreement on Reform Treaty13 December 2007: Signing in Lisbon1 January 2009: Intended date of entry into forceDraftingJune European Council (2007)On 21 June 2007, the European Council of heads of states or governments met in Brussels to agree upon the foundation of a new treaty to replace the rejected Constitution. The meeting took place under the German Presidency of the EU, with Chancellor Angela Merkel leading the negotiations as President-in-Office of the European Council. After dealing with other issues, such as deciding on the accession of Cyprus and Malta to the Eurozone, negotiations on the Treaty took over and lasted until the morning of 23 June 2007. The hardest part of the negotiations was reported to be Poland's insistence on square root voting in the Council of Ministers.The European Round Table Of Industrialists (ERT) Members contributed to the preparation of the Lisbon Agenda, which sought to make Europe the ‘most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world’ by the year 2010. But the implementation of the Agenda was less impressive than the declarations made at its adoption by the European Council in March 2000. ERT Members constantly stressed the need for better performance by national governments towards achieving the Lisbon targets within a specified timeframe that otherwise risked remaining beyond Europe's grasp. In subsequent years, ERT regularly contributed to the debate on how to ensure better implementation of the Lisbon Agenda across all EU Member States, including on ways to foster innovation and achieve higher industry investment in Research & Development in Europe.The agreement was reached on a 16-page mandate for an Intergovernmental Conference, that proposed removing much of the constitutional terminology and many of the symbols from the old European Constitution text. In addition, it was agreed to recommend to the IGC that the provisions of the old European Constitution should be amended in certain key aspects (such as voting or foreign policy). Due to pressure from the United Kingdom and Poland, it was also decided to add a protocol to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (clarifying that it did not extend the rights of the courts to overturn domestic law in Britain or Poland). Among the specific changes were greater ability to opt out in certain areas of legislation and that the proposed new voting system that was part of the European Constitution would not be used before 2014 (see Provisions below).In the June meeting, the name 'Reform Treaty' also emerged, finally clarifying that the Constitutional approach was abandoned. Technically it was agreed that the Reform Treaty would amend both the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) to include most provisions of the European Constitution, however not to combine them into one document. It was also agreed to rename the treaty establishing the European Community, which is the main functional agreement including most of the substantive provisions of European primary law, to "Treaty on the Functioning of the Union". In addition, it was agreed, that unlike the European Constitution where a charter was part of the document, there would only be a reference to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union to make that text legally binding.After the council, Poland indicated they wished to re-open some areas. During June, Poland's Prime Minister had controversially stated that Poland would have a substantially larger population were it not for World War II.Another issue was that Dutch prime minister Jan-Peter Balkenende succeeded in obtaining a greater role for national parliaments in the EU decision-making process, as he declared this to be non-negotiable for Dutch agreement.Intergovernmental Conference (2007)Portugal had pressed and supported Germany to reach an agreement on a mandate for an Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) under their presidency. After the June negotiations and final settlement on a 16-page framework for the new Reform Treaty, the Intergovernmental conference on actually drafting the new treaty commenced on 23 July 2007. The IGC opened following a short ceremony. The Portuguese presidency presented a 145-page document (with an extra 132 pages of 12 protocols and 51 declarations) entitled the Draft Treaty amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community and made it available on the Council of Ministers website as a starting point for the drafting process.In addition to government representatives and legal scholars from each member state, the European Parliament sent three representatives. These were conservative Elmar Brok, social democratic Enrique Baron Crespo and liberal Andrew Duff.Before the opening of the IGC, the Polish government expressed a desire to renegotiate the June agreement, notably over the voting system, but relented under political pressure by most other Member States, due to a desire not to be seen as the sole trouble maker over the negotiations.October European Council (2007)The October European Council, led by Portugal's Prime Minister and then President-in-Office of the European Council, José Sócrates, consisted of legal experts from all Member States scrutinising the final drafts of the Treaty. During the council, it became clear that the Reform Treaty would be called the 'Treaty of Lisbon', because its signing would take place in Lisbon—Portugal being the holder of the presidency of the Council of the European Union at the time.At the European Council meeting on 18 and 19 October 2007 in Lisbon, a few last-minute concessions were made to ensure the signing of the treaty.That included giving Poland a slightly stronger wording for the revived Ioannina Compromise, plus a nomination for an additional Advocate General at the European Court of Justice. The creation of the permanent "Polish" Advocate General was formally permitted by an increase of the number of Advocates General from 8 to 11.Despite these concessions and alterations, Giscard d’Estaing stated that the treaty included the same institutional reforms as those in the rejected Constitution, but merely without language and symbols that suggested Europe might have ‘formal political status’. These ‘more symbolic than substantial’ concessions were designed ‘to head off any threat of referenda’ which had killed the Constitution.At the meeting of the European Council in October 2007, Portugal insisted that the Treaty (then called the 'Reform Treaty') be signed in Lisbon, the Portuguese capital. This request was granted, and the Treaty was thus to be called the Treaty of Lisbon, in line with the tradition of European Union treaties. The Portuguese presidency was appointed to the job of organising the programme for a signing ceremony.The signing of the Treaty of Lisbon took place in Lisbon, Portugal on 13 December 2007. The Government of Portugal, by virtue of holding Presidency of the Council of the European Union at the time, arranged a ceremony inside the 15th-century Jerónimos Monastery, the same place Portugal's treaty of accession to the European Union (EU) was signed in 1985.Representatives from the 27 EU member states were present, and signed the Treaty as plenipotentiaries, marking the end of treaty negotiations. In addition, for the first time an EU treaty was also signed by the presidents of the three main EU institutions.Prime Minister Gordon Brown of the United Kingdom did not take part in the main ceremony, and instead signed the treaty separately a number of hours after the other delegates. A requirement to appear before a committee of British MPs was cited as the reason for his absence.Approval by the European ParliamentEditOn 20 February 2008, the European Parliament voted in favour of a non-binding resolution endorsing the Lisbon Treaty by 525 votes in favour and 115 against, on the basis of an analysis of the treaty's implications by the Parliament's rapporteurs Richard Corbett and Inigo Mendez de Vigo. They had been the Parliament's rapporteurs on the constitutional treaty.All EU member states had to ratify the Treaty before it could enter into law. A national ratification was completed and registered when the instruments of ratification were lodged with the Government of Italy. The month following the deposition of the last national ratification saw the Treaty enter into force across the EU.Under the original timetable set by the German Presidency of the Council of the European Union in the first half of 2007, the Treaty was initially scheduled to be fully ratified by the end of 2008, thus entering into force on 1 January 2009. This plan failed however, primarily due to the initial rejection of the Treaty in 2008 by the Irish electorate in a referendum, a decision which was reversed in a second referendum in October 2009. Ireland, as required by its constitution, was the only member state to hold referendums on the Treaty. In the UK, the European Union (Amendment) Bill was debated in the House of Commons on 21 January 2008, and passed its second reading that day by a vote of 362 to 224; Prime Minister Gordon Brown was absent that day; the Bill was proposed to the Commons by David Miliband.The Czech instrument of ratification was the last to be deposited in Rome on 13 November 2009.Therefore, the Treaty of Lisbon entered into force on 1 December 2009.ImpactThe exact impact of the treaty on the functioning of the EU left many questions open (uncertainties which have led to calls for another new treaty in response to the economic crisis in the late 2000s).When its impact is assessed, the biggest winners from Lisbon have been Parliament, with its increase in power, and the European Council. The first months under Lisbon arguably saw a shift in power and leadership from the Commission, the traditional motor of integration, to the European Council with its new full-time and longer-term President.The split between the Commission and European Council presidents involved overlap, potential rivalry and unwieldy compromises, such as both presidents attending international summits, in theory each with their own responsibilities, but inevitably with a considerable grey area. There was some expectation that the posts might be merged—as permitted under the new treaty—in 2014, when their two mandates expired.Parliament has used its greater powers over legislation, but also for example over the appointment of the Commission to gain further privileges from President Barrosoand it used its budgetary powers as a veto over how the External Action Service should be set up.It also applied its new power over international agreements to rapidly block the SWIFT data sharing deal with the US and threatened to do so over a free trade agreement with South Korea.The redistribution of separated powers was affected by the ratification process. Like the Commission, the Council of Ministers has, relatively, lost power due to Treaty of Lisbon. Its dynamic has also changed as member states have lost their veto in a number of areas. Consequently, they have had to come up with stronger arguments faster in order to win a vote.The Presidency of the Council, which continues to rotate among Member States every six months, has lost influence: the prime minister of the country in question no longer chairs the European Council, and its foreign minister no longer represents the EU externally (that is now done by the High Representative).As an amending treaty, the Treaty of Lisbon is not intended to be read as an autonomous text. It consists of a number of amendments to the Treaty on European Union ("Maastricht Treaty") and the Treaty establishing the European Community ("Treaty of Rome"), the latter renamed 'Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union' in the process. As amended by the Treaty of Lisbon, the Treaty on European Union provides a reference to the EU's Charter of Fundamental Rights, making that document legally binding. The Treaty on European Union, the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and the Charter of Fundamental rights thus have equal legal value and combined constitute the European Union's legal basis.A typical amendment in Treaty of Lisbon text is:“Article 7 shall be amended as follows:(a) throughout the Article, the word "assent" shall be replaced by "consent", the reference to breach "of principles mentioned in Article 6(1)" shall be replaced by a reference to breach "of the values referred to in Article 2" and the words "of this Treaty" shall be replaced by "of the Treaties";”The Commission has published a consolidated text (in each community language) which shows the previous Treaties as revised by the Treaty of Lisbon.The fifty-five articles of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union enshrine certain political, social, and economic rights for both European Union citizens and residents, into EU law. It was drafted by the European Convention and solemnly proclaimed on 7 December 2000 by the European Parliament, the Council of Ministers and the European Commission. However its then legal status was uncertain and it did not have full legal effectuntil the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty on 1 December 2009.In the rejected Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe the charter was integrated as a part of the treaty itself. In the Lisbon Treaty, however, the charter is incorporated by reference and given legal status without forming part of the treaties. The EU must act and legislate consistently with the Charter and the EU's courts will strike down EU legislation which contravenes it. The Charter only applies to EU member states as regards their implementation of EU law and does not extend the competences of the EU beyond its competences as defined in the treaties.Central BankThe European Central Bank gained the official status of being an EU institution, and the European Council was given the right to appoint presidents of the European Central Bank through a qualified majority vote. On a related topic, the euro became the official currency of the Union (though not affecting opt-outs or the process of Eurozone enlargement).JudiciaryUnder the Treaty of Lisbon, the Court of First Instance has been renamed the General Court. The Civil Service Tribunal and the European Court of Justice (formerly named the Court of Justice of the European Communities, and formally called only Court of Justice after the Treaty of Lisbon), along with the General Court, were established as sub-courts of a new EU institution named the Court of Justice of the European Union.The jurisdiction of the courts continued to be excluded from matters of foreign policy, though new jurisdiction to review foreign policy sanction measures, as well as certain 'Area of Freedom, Security and Justice' (AFSJ) matters not concerning policing and criminal cooperation, were added.The treaty has expanded the use of qualified majority voting (QMV) in the Council of Ministers by having it replace unanimity as the standard voting procedure in almost every policy area outside taxation and foreign policy. Moreover, taking effect in 2014, the definition of a qualified majority has changed: a qualified majority is reached when at least 55% of all member states, who comprise at least 65% of EU citizens, vote in favour of a proposal. When the Council of Ministers is acting neither on a proposal of the Commission nor on one of the High Representative, QMV requires 72% of the member states while the population requirement remains the same. However, the "blocking minority" that corresponds to these figures must comprise at least 4 countries. Hence, the voting powers of the member states are based on their population, and are no longer dependent on a negotiable system of voting points. The reform of qualified majority voting (QMV) in the Council was one of the main issues in the negotiation of the Lisbon Treaty.The earlier rules for QMV, set in the Treaty of Nice and applying until 2014, required a majority of countries (50%/60%) voting weights (74%), and population (62%). Between 2014 and 2017 a transitional phase is taking place where the new QMV rules apply, but where the old Nice treaty voting weights can be applied when a member state formally requests it. Moreover, from 2014 a new version of the 1994 "Ioannina compromise" allows small minorities of EU states to call for re-examination of EU decisions.The treaty instructs that Council deliberations on legislation (that include debate and voting) will be held in public (televised), as was already the case in the European Parliament.The Presidency of the Council of Ministers, rotates among member states every six months, with a "Trio" formed by three consecutive Presidencies in order to provide more continuity to their conduct. However, the Foreign Affairs Council (one configuration of the Council of ministers), is no longer chaired by the representative of the member state holding the Presidency, but rather by the person holding the newly created post of High Representative.Additionally the Euro Group sub-unit of ECOFIN Eurozone countries was formalized.European CouncilThe European Council officially gains the status of an EU institution, thus being separated from the Council of ministers. It continues to be composed of the heads of state or government of the Union's member states along with the (nonvoting) President of the European Commission and its own president.The President of the European Council is appointed for a two and a half year term in a qualified majority vote of the European Council. A president can be reappointed once, and be removed by the same voting procedure. Unlike the post of President of the European Commission, the appointment of the President of the European Council does not have to reflect the composition of the European Parliament.The president's work involves coordinating the work of the European Council, hosting its meetings and reporting its activities to the European Parliament after each meeting. This makes the president the lynchpin of negotiations to find agreement at European Council meetings, which has become a more onerous task with successive enlargement of the EU to 28 Member States. The president also chairs informal summits of the 19 Member States which use the euro as their currency. Additionally, the president provides external representation to the Union on foreign policy and security matters when such representation is required at the level of heads of state or government (bilateral summits and G8/G20).Under the Treaty of Lisbon, the European Council is charged with setting the strategic priorities of the Union, and in practice with handling crises. It has a key role in appointments, including the Commission, the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and the members of the Board of the European Central Bank; the suspension of membership rights; changing the voting systems in the treaties bridging clauses. Under the emergency break procedure, a state may refer contentious legislation from the Council of ministers to the European Council if it is outvoted in the Council of ministers, notwithstanding that it may still be outvoted in the European Council.The legislative power of the European Parliament increases, as the codecision procedure with the Council of the EU is extended to almost all areas of policy. This procedure is slightly modified and renamed ordinary legislative procedure.In the few remaining areas, called "special legislative procedures", Parliament now has either the right of consent to a Council of the EU measure, or vice versa, except in the few cases where the old Consultation procedure still applies, wherein the Council of the EU will only need to consult the European Parliament before voting on the Commission proposal. Council is then not bound by the Parliament's position but only by the obligation to consult it. Parliament would need to be consulted again if the Council of ministers deviated too far from the initial proposal.The Commission will have to submit each proposed budget of the European Union directly to Parliament, which must approve the budget in its entirety.The Treaty changes the way in which MEP seats are apportioned among member states. Rather than setting out a precise number (as it was the case in every previous treaty), the Treaty of Lisbon gives the power to the Council of the EU, acting unanimously on the initiative of the Parliament and with its consent, to adopt a decision fixing the number of MEPs for each member state. Moreover, the treaty provides for the number of MEPs to be degressively proportional to the number of citizens of each member state. A draft decision fixing the apportionment of MEPs was annexed to the treaty itself and had Lisbon been in force at the time of 2009 European Parliament elections the apportionment would have been:In the meantime, Croatia's seats, when it joins, will be supernumerary.The number of MEPs will be limited to 750, in addition to the President of the Parliament. Additionally, the Treaty of Lisbon will reduce the maximum number of MEPs from a member state from 99 to 96 (affects Germany) and increases the minimal number from 5 to 6 (affects Malta).National ParliamentsThe Treaty of Lisbon expanded the role of Member States' parliaments in the legislative processes of the EU by giving them a prior scrutiny of legislative proposals before the Council and the Parliament can take a position. The Treaty of Lisbon provides for national parliaments "to contribute to the good functioning of the Union" through receiving draft EU legislation, seeing to it that the principle of subsidiarity is respected, taking part in the evaluation mechanisms for the implementation of the Union policies in the area of freedom, security and justice, being involved in the political monitoring of Europol and the evaluation of Eurojust's activities, being notified of applications for EU accession, taking part in the inter-parliamentary cooperation between national parliaments and with the European Parliament.The Treaty of Lisbon allows national parliaments eight weeks to study legislative proposals made by the European Commission and decide whether to send a reasoned opinion stating why the national parliament considers it to be incompatible with the principle of subsidiarity. National parliaments may vote to have the measure reviewed. If one third (or one quarter, where the proposed EU measure concerns freedom, justice and security) of national parliaments are in favour of a review, the Commission would have to review the measure and if it decides to maintain it, must give a reasoned opinion to the Union legislator as to why it considers the measure to be compatible with subsidiarity.CommissionThe Commission of the European Communities will officially be renamed European Commission.The Treaty of Lisbon stated that the size of the Commission will reduce from one per member state to one for two thirds of member states from 2014, with an equal rotation over time. This would have ended the arrangement which has existed since 1957 of having at least one Commissioner for each Member State at all times. However, the Treaty also providedthat the European Council could unanimously decide to alter this number. Following the first Irish referendum on Lisbon, the European Council decided in December 2008 to revert to one Commissioner per member state with effect from the date of entry into force of the Treaty.The person holding the new post of High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy automatically becomes also a Vice-President of the Commission.Foreign relations and securityHigh RepresentativeIn an effort to ensure greater coordination and consistency in EU foreign policy, the Treaty of Lisbon created a High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, de facto merging the post of High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy and the European Commissioner for External Relations and European Neighbourhood Policy. The High Representative is Vice-President of the Commission, the administrator of the European Defence Agency but not the Secretary-General of the Council of Ministers, which becomes a separate post. He or she has a right to propose defence or security missions. In the proposed constitution this post was called the Union Minister of Foreign Affairs.The High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy is in charge of an External Action Service also created by the Treaty of Lisbon. This is essentially a common Foreign Office or Diplomatic Corps for the Union.Under the Treaty of Lisbon, Member States should assist if a member state is subject to a terrorist attack or the victim of a natural or man-made disaster (but any joint military action is subject to the provisions of Article 31 of the consolidated Treaty of European Union, which recognises various national concerns). In addition, several provisions of the treaties have been amended to include solidarity in matters of energy supply and changes to the energy policy within the EU.The treaty foresees that the European Security and Defence Policy will lead to a common defence for the EU when the European Council resolves unanimously to do so, and provided that all member states give their approval through their usual constitutional procedures.Additionally, the area of defence has become available to enhanced co-operation, potentially allowing for a defence integration that excludes member states with policies of neutrality. Countries with significant military capabilities are envisioned to form a Permanent Structured Cooperation in Defence.Legal consolidationPrior to the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, the Union comprised a system of three legal pillars, of which only the European Communities pillar had its own legal personality. The Treaty of Lisbon abolished this pillar system, and as a consolidated entity, the European Union succeeded the legal personality of the European Communities. Therefore, the EU is now able to sign international treaties in its own name. The European Union gained for example membership of the World Trade Organization immediately after the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, since the European Communities was already a member of that organisation.Enlargement and secessionA proposal to enshrine the Copenhagen Criteria for further enlargement in the treaty was not fully accepted as there were fears it will lead to Court of Justice judges having the last word on who could join the EU, rather than political leaders.The treaty introduces an exit clause for members wanting to withdraw from the Union. This formalises the procedure by stating that a member state must inform the European Council before it can terminate its membership, and a withdrawal agreement would then be negotiated between the Union and that State, with the Treaties ceasing to be applicable to that State from the date of the agreement or, failing that, within two years of the notification unless the State and the Council both agree to extend this period. There have been several instances where a territory has ceased to be part of the Community, e.g. Greenland in 1985, though no member state had ever left at the time the Lisbon Treaty was ratified. Before the Lisbon Treaty came into force, the question of whether a member state had a legal right to leave the union was unclear. On 30 March 2017, the United Kingdom gave notice of Britain's intention to leave the European Union.After negotiating a Brexit withdrawal agreement, UK left the Union on 31 January 2020.A new provision in the Treaty of Lisbon is that the status of French, Dutch and Danish overseas territories can be changed more easily, by no longer requiring a full treaty revision. Instead, the European Council may, on the initiative of the member state concerned, change the status of an overseas country or territory (OCT) to an outermost region (OMR) or vice versa.This provision was included on a proposal by the Netherlands, which was investigating the future of the Netherlands Antilles and Aruba in the European Union as part of an institutional reform process that was taking place in the Netherlands Antilles.Revision proceduresThe Lisbon Treaty creates two different ways for further amendments of the European Union treaties: an ordinary revision procedure which is broadly similar to the present process in that it involves convening an intergovernmental conference, and a simplified revision procedure whereby Part three of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which deals with Union policies and internal actions, could be amended by a unanimous decision of the European Council subject to ratification by all member states in the usual manner.The Treaty also provides for the Passerelle Clause which allows the European Council to unanimously decide to move from unanimous voting to qualified majority voting, and move from a special legislative procedure to the ordinary legislative procedure.Ordinary revision procedureProposals to amend the treaties are submitted by a Member State, the European Parliament or the European Commission to the Council of Ministers who, in turn, submit them to the European Council and notify member states. There are no limits on what kind of amendments can be proposed.The European Council, after consulting the European Parliament and the Commission, votes to consider the proposals on the basis of a simple majority, and then either:The President of the European Council convenes a convention containing representatives of national parliaments, governments, the European Parliament and the European Commission, to further consider the proposals. In due course, the convention submits its final recommendation to the European Council.Or the European Council decides, with the consent of the European Parliament, not to convene a convention, and set the terms of reference for the inter-governmental conference itself.The President of the European Council convenes an inter-governmental conference consisting of representatives of each member-state's government. The conference drafts and finalises a treaty based on the convention's recommendation or on the European Council's terms of reference.EU leaders sign the treaty.All member states must then ratify the treaty "in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements", if it is to come into force.Simplified revision procedureProposals to amend Part three of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union are submitted by a Member State, the European Parliament or the European Commission to the Council of Ministers who, in turn, submit them to the European Council and notify member states. Proposed amendments cannot increase the competences of the Union.The European Council, after consulting the European Parliament and the Commission, votes to adopt a decision amending Part three on the basis of the proposals by unanimity.All member states must approve the decision "in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements", if it is to come into force.The Passerelle ClauseThe treaty also allows for the changing of voting procedures without amending the EU treaties. Under this clause the European Council can, after receiving the consent of the European Parliament, vote unanimously to:allow the Council of Ministers to act on the basis of qualified majority in areas where they previously had to act on the basis of unanimity. (This is not available for decisions with defence or military implications.)allow for legislation to be adopted on the basis of the ordinary legislative procedure where it previously was to be adopted on the basis of a special legislative procedure.A decision of the European Council to use either of these provisions can only come into effect if, six months after all national parliaments had been given notice of the decision, none object to it.United Kingdom opt-out for justice and home affairsUnder the former third pillar, the Council of Ministers could adopt measures relating to justice and home affairs. These laws did not come within the body of European Community law, and had only the optional jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. The Commission could not bring enforcement action against any member state for failing to implement or for failing to correctly implement third pillar measures.The UK and Ireland had a flexible opt-out from justice and home affairs measures and could choose to participate in them on a case-by-case basis.Under the Treaty of Lisbon, the limitations on the powers of the Court of Justice and the Commission would be lifted after a transitional period of five years which expired on 30 November 2014.In order to avoid submitting to the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice and to enforcement actions by the Commission, the UK negotiated an opt-out which allowed them the option of a block withdrawal from all third pillar measures they had previously chosen to participate in.In October 2012 the UK government announced that it intended to exercise this opt-out and then selectively opt back into certain measures.The use of this opt-out by the UK did not affect the UK's flexible opt-out from justice and home affairs measures, or Ireland's identical opt-out.