"On the way to a Constitutional Treaty for Europe"

Prälat Dr. Stephan Reimers

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I would like to express my sincere thanks for your invitation. It is a great pleasure for me to participate in this symposium and it is also a pleasure to recognize that so many students take an interest in this issue.

Since our church regards the European Union as a value community, we consider it to be our special plight, to support the process towards a Constitutional Treaty for Europe. The EU became evident as a value community especially when in December 2000 in Nice the Charter of Fundamental Rights was agreed on. This was followed by negotiations on the Constitutional Treaty.

From the very beginning it was our aim to contribute to both text drafts by handing in petitions and suggestions in close cooperation with other European Churches. One of our major concerns was the provision of for a reference to God in the preamble. Since the understanding of the human being and the value base of Europe is influenced mainly by Christianity. One must also understand this our position in the light of our own history. Germany after fascism and World War II accepted a reference to God and thus the horizon of transcendence in its constitution, called Grundgesetz, by wording. Therefore we had opted for this version of a reference to God to be included in a European constitution as well. We had hoped that the influence of Christianity on this continent would have equally been explicitly recognized.

But we have to accept the fact, that there are different traditions of state church relations in each Member State and that the majority of member States have no reference to God in their respective constitution and some laic states as France and Belgium are even strongly opposed to it. There was and is no unanimity, which is needed on the level of the European Council, for a reference to God or for including a reference to the Judeo-Christian inheritance.

At least the following paragraph was accepted:

“Drawing inspirations from the cultural, religious and humanist inheritance of Europe, from which have developed the universal values of the inviolable and inalienable rights, of the human person, freedom, democracy, equality and the rule of law”.This text of the constitution-draft is expected to become the second consideration of the New Reform Treaty the European heads of state agreed upon on June 23^rd. This is not what we wanted to achieve as a preamble but I do not agree, when some voices interpret the adopted reference to the “religious inheritance” as only something of the past. For me the words “drawing inspiration…” notably include a perspective which points to the future. Secondly the words “religious inheritance of Europe” can historically only be interpreted as meaning primarily the traditional religion in Europe, which is Christianity. Thirdly, we did not want to have an exclusive but an inclusive version as we have to accept that the plurality of religions is Europe’s heritage. Fourthly, this wording is a progress compared to the preamble of the Charta of Fundamental Rights, which speaks of “spiritual” inheritance as the French did not accept the word “religious”. In the run-up to the Nice convention prime minister Jospin threatened to veto in case the word religion would be mentioned in the preamble.

90 percent of the substance of the constitutional treaty will be integrated into the new reform treaty. The churches welcome gratefully that article 52, the so called “church-article”, is also part of the saved substance. Why is this article important to us?

Article I – 52 paragraphs 1 and 2 of the EU Constitution provided the incorporation of the whole content of former Declaration N° 11 of the Final Act of the Treaty of Amsterdam. According to article I – 52 paragraph 1 the European Union, when exercising its competencies, has to respect the legal status of the churches and religious communities of each Member State according to national law. The wording of Article 52, which will be integrated in the “Treaty of the Functioning of the European Union” by the reform treaty, will clarify in European primary law that the legal status may not be affected by European law, neither directly or indirectly. This provision, which is a central one for the churches, reflects the fact that the state church relations are different in all Member States having thus been developed for centuries and reflect one issue of national identity of a member State. It provides for a plurality of state church relations in the EU but does not hinder Member States to change their own national law on their state hurch relation.

Article 52 par. 3 additionally provides a legal self obligation of the Union to dialogue with churches and religious communities in a regular, transparent and open manner “recognising their identity and specific contributions”. Article I – 52 par. 3 is a new provision and its impact is of high importance. On the level of primary law we have gained an institutional recognition of churches and religious communities to contribute to public opinion building at European level parallel to the dialogue of the Union with civil society (Article I – 47). The dialogue has to be “open, transparent and regular”. Such a dialogue is self-evident from the view of Austrian or German experiences but on the European level it has not been self-evident. Therefore paragraph 3 brings in a real progress.

There is another reason of our contentment: Making the Fundamental Rights legally binding is also important to us as it strengthens the visibility of the Union as a value community. I regret that the Charta of Fundamental Rights will not be included as whole in the reform treaty, but I appreciate that it will be legally binding by way of using a cross-reference.