The principle of l
The application of this principle implies the installation of Exclusive competences and, ideally, of mechanisms making it possible to avoid the conflicts of competence and interests between federate entities and Federal state.
Belgium
The step of the Belgian federalism consisted in imbricating the Régions and the Communautés at the existing institutions, that is to say old the Belgian State unit, which devoted three poles between which competences were distributed, in accordance with the double logic of lThe paternity of this provision is in particular allotted to Jean-Maurice Dehousse. The équipollence of the standards was wanted by the Walloon federalists and this équipollence does not exist in Switzerland. The “problem” that they had to solve was to escape a State where they had never had the numerical majority, and where a preeminence of federal could have called into question gained autonomy. Thus, the texts are numerous where Walloon leaders are delighted by this provision like Philippe Swinnen.
It will be noted that the European federalists announce a provision different within the framework from the European Union by opposing it to the Belgian system, to declare that Europe is an political organization of the federal type (by contrast thus with Belgium, it is what says implicitly this opinion). It is the case of Michele Ciavarini Azzi, President of the UEF which writes At the European level, in accordance with the jurisprudence of the European Court of justice, the Community legislation takes precedence over the right of the States whereas it there often équipollence of the standards within a Federal state. In Belgium for example, the law (national) and the decree (regional or Community) are on an equal footing. It as should be recalled as the Court of Luxembourg incarnates not only the functions of international jurisdiction, but which it is also the guarantor of the unit of interpretation of the Community legislation (like the Courts of appeal in the majority of the States), of the legality of the payments (like the Council of State in Belgium), and of the respect of the Constitution by the legislators (Constitutional courts or, in Belgium, Court of arbitration).
It is this double characteristic of l
Corsica France and
Philippe Moureaux raised, at the time of an intervention to the Senate on the subject, the fact that within the framework of the relative debate in France in the future of Corsica, a big part of the debate relates to the question of knowing if one can allot at a Corsican assembly the équipollence of standards.Indeed, the Constitutional council was opposed to the granting of legislative powers in Corsica in the name of the indivisibility of the Republic.
Limit of the équipollence of the standards
The principle of lThis principle was indeed introduced in Belgium for the first time at large scales and without envisaging mechanism of payment of the conflicts other than the negotiation between entities.
The conflicts of competence are theoretically excluded because competences at the federal, regional and Community level are supposed to be exclusive, but one quickly realized owing to the fact that was only one theoretical vision which did not consider the files recovering of multiple competences. With these conflicts of competences trans-entities are added the conflicts of interests between entities for which there does not exist solution of arbitration.
These problems for the last time appeared within the framework of the file of the airport of Zaventem, where each entity had enacted its own standards (noise and others) for the overflight of the planes. These standards are at this point conflict, without an entity exceeding its competences, that various opposite legal decisions were made on the basis of these standard. The problems raised by these conflicts of standard cannot, under the mode of the équipollence of the standards, and in the absence of mechanism of payment of the conflicts, the federate entities concerned tried to negotiate a solution without succeeding. This question is juridically, politically, institutionnellement thorny.
Obligatory cooperation agreements and confederalism
In a certain number of fields, the special Law (cest-with-to say a law voted to the federal Parliament, but which in fact asks for the agreement of parliamentary majorities higher than those of the constitutional revisions - is the majority of the 2/3, but also majority in each community of language), obliges so much the Areas between them, which the Communities between them, or the Federal state and areas to cooperate closely. For the Areas, for example, with regard to the roads which are trans-regional or the ground water etc For the Federal state and the Areas, the application of the European rules with regard to the accidents of industrial activities), the use of foreign workers, the information exchange as regards taxations, the foreign trade , etc Paradoxalement the Belgian federalism organizes a great “independence” of the entities, but the constrained one to collaborate. This brings a constitutionnalist like E.C. Lagasse to speaking on this subject about confederal system , at least on two matters. It there with the coordination of the policies of foreign trade: one can see in the law obliging the Areas to collaborate an invitation made in the contracting parties issue the standard in this field. Or also on the division of the national Botanical garden of Belgium: the agreement between Communautés on the division of this institution conditioned the decision of the Federal state to strip control of this institution. Lagasse adds: the confederalism is not far . One could express the seemingly contradictory and sometimes paradoxical aspects of this system in this way: Belgian public space has produced a singular Fédéralisme, but filled of confederal features like the absence of primacy of the federal standard, the international action of the federated entities, the recourse to allocate and exclusive responsibilities etc If this system has complexity specific well to the federal modes, it is firmly padlocked by the permanent recourse to the consensus between its entities. What concretely makes it possible those to manage, in their respective territorial framework, their competences with a quasi total autonomy and a freedom. .
See too
- Corsica
- Exclusive competences
| Random links: | Vaulx-in-vellum | Just of Alexandria | Federation of Macao of football | Tony Dombre | Bill Bennett |