Luxemburg's EU-Referendum Disputed
From the desk of Filip van Laenen on Fri, 2005-08-19 18:31
On July 10, 56.5% of the Luxemburgians voted in favour of the European Constitution in a closely fought referendum. This week, the Luxemburg lawyer Roy Reding filed a lawsuit at the Administrative Court in Luxemburg City to have the referendum and its results annulled.
According to the lawyer, who campaigned against the EU Constitution, the government of Prime Minister Jean-Claude Juncker has violated article 10 of the Luxemburg Constitution. This article says that the state must treat all citizens equally. While the Juncker government refused to provide public funding for the "No"-campaign to argue its case with the public, it actively participated in the "Yes"-campaign with ads on radio and television and in the papers. Reding has asked the court to hear testimonies of employees from the ad agency.
Reding stresses that he does not question the principle of holding a referendum on the EU Constitution, but he wants the results cancelled because of the "anti-democratic attitude of a government" that has used taxpayers' money for a "psychological manipulation of the voter." In its defence of the "Yes"-vote the government resorted to scare tactics and intimidations instead of debating the content of the EU Constitution, Reding says.
According to the lawyer, who campaigned against the EU Constitution, the government of Prime Minister Jean-Claude Juncker has violated article 10 of the Luxemburg Constitution. This article says that the state must treat all citizens equally. While the Juncker government refused to provide public funding for the "No"-campaign to argue its case with the public, it actively participated in the "Yes"-campaign with ads on radio and television and in the papers. Reding has asked the court to hear testimonies of employees from the ad agency.
Reding stresses that he does not question the principle of holding a referendum on the EU Constitution, but he wants the results cancelled because of the "anti-democratic attitude of a government" that has used taxpayers' money for a "psychological manipulation of the voter." In its defence of the "Yes"-vote the government resorted to scare tactics and intimidations instead of debating the content of the EU Constitution, Reding says.