Read on Twitter
Not sure people are noticing the gravity of what is happening here. https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/1275039777620996097
Some voices asking me to explain in more detail, so I will try my best. On a fundamental level, it is now not at all clear that Germany hasn’t broken the EU. (I’m going to try a thread)
The first stage was the ruling of the German court (FCC) that the ECJ was acting outside its powers. Please don’t underestimate that. That was exceptional. It is like the highest state court in a US state declaring SCOTUS had no power over them on questions of federal law.
The ECJ is the court which says what EU law is. That has always been the position between the Members and that makes sense between Members – if you and I sign a contract then you would not let me then make myself the Judge of any dispute about the terms.
But, in an unprecedented move, Germany has unilaterally declared that it is the final arbiter of EU law. That causes huge difficulties for the EU negotiating team which wants the ECJ to be sovereign on EU law in the UK FTA …
… because David Frost is more than clever enough to point out that … er .. that would make the German Court sovereign https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-german-courts-have-just-made-brexit-talks-easier
Dr von der Leyen then responded correctly in EU terms and no doubt the Commission will act in a few months. But the further oddity yesterday was the ECB agreeing it will submit to the German central bank (that it will do as it is told)
The ECB states it will only do so if that preserves its independence. But it is clear, I think, that if I agree to do as you tell me then the suggestion that I am still independent falls away. We do not yet know the views of the other Eurozone countries
This is the biggest constitutional crisis the EU has faced and it is not at all clear how the ECB submitting itself to German rules is consistent with the Commission’s (I think correct) position that EU law is sovereign over Members, which has been uncontroversial for some time.
The traditional response is ‘but Steven we will fudge this as usual’ – but that is rather like watching a subsidence event cause a large crack in a bridge and promising to plaster over it. Any of the other 26 Members could do this – who wants to walk on that bridge?
I have written that the UK should support the EU https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/britain-must-back-the-eu-in-its-fight-with-german-judges A strong EU and respect for International law is in our interests
Increasingly we see a rather unattractive counter argument that it is OK if rules are broken by the ‘right sort of people’. That is no defence when the wrong sort of people then chose to copy the precedent you just made – and these precedents are extremely worrying
