I suppose it would be churlish for you to mention in the letter that it was people like Mr. Greene who, because of their dark fantasies about what they thought EU might impose on Ireland, actually made abortion legal in certain circumstances (in principle if not in practice)? The fact that they continues to pursue this line of argument, given the damage they have already done to their own declared aims as a result, demonstrates a remarkable brass neck. The words "hole" and "stop digging" come to mind. I guess they are trying to distract from their own culpability in the matter.

Regarding the letter, why not simply quote the section as you do above and merely close with your challenge: "Perhaps Mr. Greene would be so good as to point out which sections he objects to". That would also probably not get published, but the wording of the text is so clear and simple that it could definitely do with more exposure.

I believe you'll find this is the section exercising him:

Prohibition of slavery and forced labour

• No one shall be held in slavery or servitude.

• No one shall be required to perform forced or compulsory labour.

• Trafficking in human beings is prohibited.

The CHARTER OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF THE EUROPEAN UNION is a very simple and well written document which does not require

You have it written as "requite" rather than "require".

Other than that, looks good.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

I thought the charter covers about the same areas as the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms which Ireland must have signed in 1950 or so. Though those rights are interpreted by the European Court of Human Rights which is a different court, so even if the areas are the same the procedure is different.

Until now I have viewed getting the EU to accept a similar set of basic rights as the member-states does as a good thing, it incorporates the respect for those rights in an earlier phase in the EU-legislative process. Though now realising that the charter and the convention differs I find one very disturbing ban in the charter:

-- the prohibition of the reproductive cloning of human beings.

No army of clones? Where is the fun in that?

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se

Madam,- You have given considerable space to correspondents on your letters and opinion pages urging us to vote NO on the Lisbon Treaty on the grounds that it makes us subject to the rulings of the European Court of Justice (EJC).  

However the Third Amendment to the Irish Constitution which ratified our membership of the EU in 1972 clearly states that

"No provision of this Constitution invalidates laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the State necessitated by the obligations of membership of the Communities or prevents laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the Communities, or institutions thereof, from having the force of law in the State."

In other words we accepted the primacy of EU law and the EJC when we joined the EU and new constitutional amendments are only required when we confer additional powers to the EU.  The recent ruling of the German Consitutional Court reaffirms the same thing, except that in Germany, a referendum is not required to transfer additional powers to the EU.

Richard Green's Opinion piece (July 14th.) - complete with picture of a baby/foetus surrounded by red tape - makes the further point that the CHARTER OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF THE EUROPEAN UNION might be interpreted by the ECJ to provide a right of abortion.  

However, nowhere does he mention which section of the Charter he is concerned about.  There is in fact no section dealing with abortion and plenty dealing with the right to life and the rights of the child

The CHARTER OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF THE EUROPEAN UNION is a very simple and well written document which does not require a lawyer's training to read and understand.  It is a clear, unambiguous and wholly positive affirmation of basic human rights and decencies which should be the basis of any civilised society.

Perhaps Mr. Greene would be so good as to point out which sections he objects to, the most relevant of which appear to be the following:

"Article 2: Right to life

1. Everyone has the right to life.

2. No one shall be condemned to the death penalty, or executed.

Article 3: Right to the integrity of the person

1. Everyone has the right to respect for his or her physical and mental integrity.

2. In the fields of medicine and biology, the following must be respected in particular:

-- the free and informed consent of the person concerned, according to the procedures laid down by
law,
-- the prohibition of eugenic practices, in particular those aiming at the selection of persons,
-- the prohibition on making the human body and its parts as such a source of financial gain,
-- the prohibition of the reproductive cloning of human beings.

Article 4: Prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment

No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Article 5: Prohibition of slavery and forced labour

1. No one shall be held in slavery or servitude.

2. No one shall be required to perform forced or compulsory labour.

3. Trafficking in human beings is prohibited.

CHAPTER II: FREEDOMS

Article 6: Right to liberty and security

Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person.

Article 7: Respect for private and family life

Everyone has the right to respect for his or her private and family life, home and communications"

Just which sections of the Charter does Mr. Greene object to, or is he just scaremongering as usual?  

And why does he not admit that opposition to the ECJ is also opposition to our membership the EU, as the ECJ is an essential and inseparable part the EU which we agreed to accept on accession in 1973 and whose jurisdiction or powers are not changed in any way by the Lisbon Treaty?

notes from no w here

Yes vote on Lisbon could open door for abortion

Oh, nooooooes, not that! That's as bad as condoms! That's a terrible threat if I ever heard one.  :D

our right to decide on abortion....
impose abortion on the Irish people.

'STFU, Greene.  I can smell the misoginy from here and the feudal/papal 'we' is awe inspiring, but with all your self-contradictions, you would drown yourself in a plate of water if you're not careful.'

Speaking of the price of beans:  Who's going to 'impose abortion' on the male half of Ireland?  Where in the EU are abortions legally 'imposed'?  

The male Greenes of this world will have the right to decide on abortion the day they get pregnant!  Full Stop.  They are perfectly free to wear a male chastity belt to protect their sacred sperm if they wish, just like the Spanish bishops group, et al.  


Our knowledge has surpassed our wisdom. -Charu Saxena.

Madam, – Andrea Pappin (July 16th) shows remarkably poor timing in making the claim that the EU is disinterested in Ireland’s abortion laws.

Just last week a Swedish MP, Birgitta Ohlsson, launched a EU-wide campaign to use the Lisbon Treaty in an attempt to get the EU Commission to pressurise Ireland to introduce abortion. This blatantly undemocratic move comes in the wake of the Catania, Sandbaek, and Von Lancker reports passed by the EU parliament, which not only funded abortion but sought to establish it as an enforceable human right. In the parliament debates on these resolutions, Ireland was sharply criticised by MEPs for outlawing abortion.

Clearly, there is a considerable and vocal cohort in other EU member-states who are far from being disinterested in our laws – and in our right to decide on important social issues.

Cóir’s position is that such parties – or any citizen of any EU state – will be free to use the Charter of Rights which would be made binding by the Lisbon Treaty to challenge Ireland’s pro-life laws in the European Court of Justice. Since the court has never had this legally-binding Charter before, they have simply not had the right to decide our social laws. All that will change utterly if we pass the Lisbon Treaty.

Those are the facts that Cóir will be explaining to as many voters as possible before October 2nd. We will also explain to them something Niall Blaney ( July 16th) does not seem to understand. Any protocol on abortion is legally binding but may be challenged successfully in the future in the EU courts using the Charter of Rights attached to the Lisbon Treaty.

Until such a time as this proposed protocol is ratified however, the so-called guarantees on Lisbon are not legally binding in EU law and, as such, are little more than political promises. – Yours, etc,

RICHARD GREENE,

Cóir,

Capel Street,

Dublin 1.

Madam, – Contrary to what many of your letter writers would like to believe there is indeed a threat to Irish abortion laws from the Lisbon treaty.

The threat is that the EU is pushing to have abortion declared a universal human right (most recently at the UN Geneva meeting this week).

If abortion is upheld as a universal human right under the EU fundamental Charter of Human Rights, which will be legally binding if Lisbon is passed, then Ireland’s laws against abortion will fall.

No EU state will be allowed to deny a European citizen a so-called “universal human right” as determined by the European court of Justice regardless of local law. As for the legal guarantees made by politicians they can and will be overturned by a court of law if they are found to be in breach of the fundamental charter much the same way as Irish laws may be legally binding until found to be repugnant to our constitution. – Yours, etc,

JOHN LACKEN,

notes from no w here

Apologies that I haven't been following up on active controversy on this issue.  My Broadband has been down for almost a week with no sign of returning...!!!

Lots of good stories I should be blogging:  See

fake Bring back Ganley popular petition website

drastic Friedmandite public servive cuts

notes from no w here