The Polish discourse about the European Constitution has one feature in common with the discourses of other member states: it deals with everything but the text of the Constitution Treaty itself. At its core it oscillates between the Polish striving for power in the EU and the toleration for cultural difference in Europe. The opposite of the latter has been particularly significant during the referendum debates in France and the Netherlands, which let to the rejection of the constitutional treaty.

The authors argue that the public opinion and the discourse of political elites differ significantly within the Franco-German debate on the Constitutional Treaty of the EU. Moreover, the article shows that the discussion reflects different conceptions of European politics. These differences lead to the claim that the co-operation and the leading role of Germany and France in the EU have to be re-defined. This has to occur in the context of a politicisation of European politics, which is crucial for the future of the enlarged European Union.

This thesis takes up the mantle of studying the Constitutional Treaty in the context of European Integration. This work examines how constitutionalization affected the process of European integration in relation to the democratic legitimacy of the European Union. Albert O. Hirschman&#039 / s Exit, Voice and Loyalty paradigm is used to assess and define the process of constitutionalization in the context of the supranational and intergovernmental tendencies of the European construct which birthed the democratic deficit in its foundational period. Special focus is allotted to the role of the European elites in drafting the Constitutional Treaty which was the culmination of their attempts to compensate for the foundational lack of democratic legitimacy. In order to make this assessment this thesis delineates the history of European integration. Furthermore, this work examines the European constitutional drive and evaluates the implications of the failed ratification process in correlation to the aforementioned issues. In conclusion this thesis maintains that the future feasibility of the constitutional project is directly related to the degree of democratic legitimacy achieved by the whole of the European Union.

This thesis analyzes the evolution of European social policy via focusing on the unfolding contentions between two different notions that disagree over Europe&rsquo / s direction regarding the best social-economic system in Europe. Taking its point of departure in the ratification crisis and the impasse surrounding the Constitutional Treaty, the thesis argues that the contrasting interpretations of the Treaty and the attendant cleavages in the European polity are illustrations of such ongoing ideological struggles among alternative paradigms and approaches. Naming these contending approaches as &ldquo / project of neoliberalism&rdquo / and &ldquo / project of regulated capitalism&rdquo / , the evolution of European social policy is investigated with a focus on interplays between these projects / the self-transformation of the projects in the course of integration / and the relations between economic and social governance in the construction of an &ldquo / ever closer Union&rdquo / . To this purpose, the thesis theoretically employs Polanyian conceptual framework of &ldquo / double movement&rdquo / alongside theoretical approaches of Streeck, Hooghe&amp / Marks, and Pochet that view the evolution of European social policy in conflictual encounters between two opposing notions. Against this theoretical background, the thesis surveys the integration history from the Treaty of Rome until the Lisbon Treaty of 2007. It concludes that the European social policy has evolved within interplays among projects of neoliberalism and regulated capitalism and there has always been an asymmetric relationship between the economic and social governance in Europe as the social governance has always had a secondary and even a subservient position with regard to economic governance in the European polity.

Diese Anfang 2006 fertiggestellte, nunmehr postum veröffentlichte Publikation untersucht und bewertet detailliert die Positionen zum Vertrag über eine Verfassung für Europa jener Parteien, die im Europäischen Parlament der "Konföderalen Fraktion der Vereinten Europäischen Linken/Nordische Grüne Linke" (GUE/NGL) angehören. Die Debatte zum europäischen Verfassungsvertrag zwang alle linken Parteien in einer erstmalig geführten transnationalen Debatte, ihre Haltung zur EU-Mitgliedschaft des eigenen Landes, ihre Position zum Verfassungsvertrag als solchem sowie ihre generelle Bereitschaft zu verdeutlichen, einem „anderen“ oder „besseren“ Vertrag zuzustimmen. Die Arbeit zeigt eine sehr hohe Fragmentierung der Haltung der linken Parteien zum Verfassungsvertrag und zur Mitgliedschaft ihrer Länder in der EU. / This at the beginning of 2006 finished, now posthumously published publication examines and evaluates in detail the positions of the parties that belong to the European Parliament of the "Confederal Group of the European United Left / Nordic Green Left" (GUE / NGL) about the European constitutional treaty. The respective debate forced them in a transnational debate to define their positions on the EU membership of their country, their position on the Constitutional treaty as such, as well as their overall readiness for agreeing with an "other" or "better" treaty. The work shows a very high level of fragmentation of the attitude of the left parties on the constitutional treaty and the EU membership of their countries.

The author discusses the failure of the EU-Constitution plebiscite in France and focuses on the different arguments brought forward in the French debate over the EU-Constitution. The draft of the Convent was a complex volume full of compromises. However, in comparison with the Treaty of Nice, it would have been a starting point for achieving a direct trans-national democracy. According to the author, the referendum only failed due to some unique plebiscite elements that were instrumentalised by governments which had overestimated themselves.

L'Europe est à l'heure actuelle en pleine mutation. D'une part, elle s'est élargie en acceptant de nouveaux États passant ainsi de quinze à vingt-cinq membres. D'autre part, elle s'est dotée d'un traité constitutionnel appelé Projet de traité établissant une Constitution pour l'Europe. Celui-ci a été approuvé en juin 2004. Il sera au coeur de notre recherche. Doter l'Union européenne d'un nouvel acte conduit incontestablement à se poser une multitude de questions concernant l'acte lui-même mais également ses conséquences. Que faut-il entendre par « traité établissant une Constitution pour l'Europe » ? Quels serontles effets d'un tel acte au regard du droit communautaire existant et des législations nationales ? Cette recherche répondra à ces questions et offrira un éclairage particulier du traité. Elle sera plus particulièrement axée sur la Cour de justice qui assure le respect du droit dans l'interprétation et l'application de la Constitution (article 28 du projet). Comment les juges devront-ils se comporter par rapport au traité ? Leur action sera-t-elle légitime ? Le débat sera ouvert sur l'interprétation que les juges feront de cette nouvelle norme. / Europe is at current major transformation. On one side, new countries joined the European Union so the number of member States has grown from fifteen to twenty-five. On the other side, a Draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe was approved on June 2004. And which will be at the heart of this research. Providing The European Union with a new Act drives conclusively to raise a multitude of questions concerning the Act itself on the surface, but equally its consequences. What should be understood with "Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe"? Which will be the effects on the existing Community Law and the National Legislations? This research will try to answer these questions and will offer a special lighting on The Treaty. More particularly it will be focused on the Court of Justice that shall ensure respect for the law in the interpretation and application of the constitution (Article 1-28 of the Draft Treaty). And how judges will react towards it? Is their actions are going to be legitimate? In fact, the debate will be based on the judicial review that the judges will give, and which will set the new norm. / "Mémoire présenté à la Faculté des études supérieures en vue de l'obtention du grade de Maîtrise en droit (L.L.M.)" / Texte du mémoire également publié dans Lex Electronica, vol. 12 n°3, Hiver 2008.

"Mémoire présenté à la Faculté des études supérieures en vue de l'obtention du grade de Maîtrise en droit (L.L.M.)" / Texte du mémoire également publié dans Lex Electronica, vol. 12 n°3, Hiver 2008. / [À l'origine dans / Was originally part of : CRDP - Droit et nouveaux rapports sociaux] / L'Europe est à l'heure actuelle en pleine mutation. D'une part, elle s'est élargie en acceptant de nouveaux États passant ainsi de quinze à vingt-cinq membres. D'autre part, elle s'est dotée d'un traité constitutionnel appelé Projet de traité établissant une Constitution pour l'Europe. Celui-ci a été approuvé en juin 2004. Il sera au coeur de notre recherche. Doter l'Union européenne d'un nouvel acte conduit incontestablement à se poser une multitude de questions concernant l'acte lui-même mais également ses conséquences. Que faut-il entendre par « traité établissant une Constitution pour l'Europe » ? Quels serontles effets d'un tel acte au regard du droit communautaire existant et des législations nationales ? Cette recherche répondra à ces questions et offrira un éclairage particulier du traité. Elle sera plus particulièrement axée sur la Cour de justice qui assure le respect du droit dans l'interprétation et l'application de la Constitution (article 28 du projet). Comment les juges devront-ils se comporter par rapport au traité ? Leur action sera-t-elle légitime ? Le débat sera ouvert sur l'interprétation que les juges feront de cette nouvelle norme. / Europe is at current major transformation. On one side, new countries joined the European Union so the number of member States has grown from fifteen to twenty-five. On the other side, a Draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe was approved on June 2004. And which will be at the heart of this research. Providing The European Union with a new Act drives conclusively to raise a multitude of questions concerning the Act itself on the surface, but equally its consequences. What should be understood with "Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe"? Which will be the effects on the existing Community Law and the National Legislations? This research will try to answer these questions and will offer a special lighting on The Treaty. More particularly it will be focused on the Court of Justice that shall ensure respect for the law in the interpretation and application of the constitution (Article 1-28 of the Draft Treaty). And how judges will react towards it? Is their actions are going to be legitimate? In fact, the debate will be based on the judicial review that the judges will give, and which will set the new norm.

Les Communautés européennes et l'Union européenne ont toujours exprimé leur engagement à respecter les droits de l'homme. Depuis la première Convention intergouvernementale chargée de la rédaction du projet de Charte des Droits Fondamentaux (1999-2001), une deuxième Convention a été organisée. La dernière a proposé le projet de Constitution pour l'Union européenne qui par la suite a été rejeté dans deux referenda nationaux et a soulevé de nombreuses questions sur la légitimité de l'Union et son avenir. Récemment, le Conseil de l'Union Européenne a décidé d'abandonner le projet de Constitution pour l'Union européenne et a ouvert la voie vers le traité modificatif. À part la légitimité de l'Union en tant que organisation internationale ou ordre juridique international et tous les problèmes auxiliaires que la constitutionnalisation implique, ce processus est inextricablement lié au sujet très controversé de la politique des droits de l'homme. Conformément au traité constitutionnel, la Charte d'un côté et la Convention européenne des droits de l'Homme de l'autre seraient devenu parties intégrantes du système constitutionnel européen. Par contre, le nouveau traité modificatif comprendra juste un renvoi à la Charte. Néanmoins, le problème de l'Union européenne demeure l'absence d'une politique cohérente avec toutes ses éléments - des instruments écrits contraignants, l'efficacité des voies de recours, une agence des droits de l'homme, un budget et un plan horizontal. Tandis que le traité constitutionnel sans pour autant résoudre tous ces problèmes a représenté un grand pas en avant dans cette direction, le nouveau traité semble être un compromis. / The European Communities and the Union have always expressed their commitment to the respect of Human Rights. Since the first EU Convention drafted the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights in 1999/2001 a second Convention has been and gone proposing a Constitution to the Union which was subsequently rejected during the ratification phase in two national referenda raising a number of questions about the Union and its future. Recently, the European Council has decided to abandon the Constitution project and opened the way to the reform treaty. Let aside the legitimacy of the Union as international organization or legal order and all the ancillary problems that this constitutionalization entails, this whole process is genuinely and inextricably linked to another controversial point - the Human Rights policy. According to the Constitutional treaty the Charter on the one hand and the ECHR on the other hand, were to be internalized within the EU's constitutional system. As opposed to the Constitutional treaty the new reform treaty will only make reference to the Charter. Nevertheless, the real problem of the EU is the absence of a human rights policy with everything this entails, legally binding instruments assessing the fundamental rights, effective remedies, a human rights agency, a budget and a horizontal plan. While the Constitutional Treaty without entirely solving the problem marked important developments to this effect, the new reform treaty seems to be a compromise.

The thesis seeks to answer the question whether the European Union (EU) constitutional treaty offers improved protection for human rights in the EU jurisdiction. Within this context, it first seeks to find out what the incorporation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights in the constitutional treaty promises for the human rights&rsquo / field. Furthermore, it examines how the possible accession of the EU to the European Convention on Human Rights will affect this field. Then, it focuses on what the constitutional treaty offers for third countries concerning human rights. Finally, in the light of the recent developments on the treaty, the discussion enlightens the role of the constitutional treaty on protecting and developing human rights in the EU.