German Unification and the European Community

Conclusion

For quite understandable political reasons, Member States have preferred to do without treaty revision. However, they have not clearly opted for either the rule of extension of the area of territorial application of the treaty or the theory of succession in the event of union of States. This uncertainty might have caused difficulties. It has to be stated that, for the moment, the arrangements set up allow adequate adaptation of Community law to the situation, while placing the mechanism under the control of the Court. Additionally, the rapidity with which the process has come about would not have been compatible with revision, which would have implied ratification by the twelve Member States. As concerns relations with third parties, the absence of explicit reference to a principle of succession could have been prejudicial to legal certainty, but both the provisions of the inter-German Treaty and the Commission's position offer third parties the necessary legal security. At the political level, the absence of treaty revision leaves the question of representation for the population of the ex-GDR in the European Parliament unanswered. To be sure, according to basic constitutional law principles, with unification the present FRG members will represent the whole people of Germany; but is this solution politically acceptable? Short of an early election of German representatives (which would entail amendment of the Treaty or of the Act on the elections of Parliament) the only possible solution, which was eventually adopted by Parliament, was to provide for a consultative participation of representatives of the former GDR territory in parliamentary debates.

Finally, at political level, it is regrettable that the formula chosen has never at any time allowed the peoples or their representatives to express their opinion on such a fundamental question for the Community's future. The only intervention will have been the European Parliament's. On its own initiative it set up an ad hoc committee to follow developments, but was able merely to express its opinion on the principle of unification.³⁵ However, Parliament has been and will be broadly associated with adoption, then implementation, of the provisional and transitional measures. Finally, it is satisfying to note, that here the Community's decision-making process, about whose slowness some like to complain of, functioned with outstanding effectiveness.

35 Session of 12 July 1990, interim Report on The impact of the process of German Unification on the European Community, Doc. A3. 183/90 of 9 July 1990 and final report, Doc. A3. 203/90 of 10 September 1990 by Mr A.J. Donnelly.

© 1990-2004 European Journal of International Law
All comments and suggestions should be sent to webmaster
This site is part of the Academy of European Law online, a joint partnership of the Jean Monnet Center at NYU School of Law and the Academy of European Law at the European University Institute.
This file was last modified: Wednesday, July 28, 1999 04:10PM