The president of the European Parliament has been granted arbitrary power to halt parliamentary motions when he deems they are aimed at disrupting the procedures of the House.

The Telegraphreports that on January 24, a number of European parliamentary members (meps) called for the right to vote electronically and to then be allowed to give a one-minute speech explaining the rationale behind their voting. The meps called for both of these rights in protest of the fact that many European nations were being denied a referendum on whether or not to ratify the Lisbon Treaty.

Both of the requests were illegally denied.

European Parliament President Hans-Gert Pöttering wrote the following to the chairman of the Constitutional Affairs Committee concerning the issue:

In the course of the current part session, Parliament was confronted on several occasions with procedural requests which were formally based on and fulfilled the requirements of a provision of the Rules of Procedure, but which according to the full conviction of myself and of other members of the House were moved with the intention of obstructing the procedures of the House.I take the view that my overall responsibility for the implementation of the Rules of Procedure and the powers conferred on me by Rule 19 include the power not to allow such practices.I should therefore be grateful if, pursuant to Rule 201(1), you could submit to the Committee on Constitutional Affairs the following question for urgent consideration:”Can Rule 19(1) be interpreted as meaning that the powers conferred by this rule include the power to call an end to excessive use of motions such as points of order, procedural motions, explanations of vote and excessive, indiscriminate requests for separate, split or roll call votes where these appear to the president to be aimed at deliberately disrupting the procedures of the House or the rights of other members.”I would appreciate it if I could have your committee’s interpretation before the opening of the next part session.

Permission was granted to Pöttering to silence the “protest” and continue pushing through the parliamentary agenda.

Pöttering admitted in his letter that the meps’ demands were perfectly legal according to the Parliament’s Rules of Procedures. Knowing this, he never asked for the rules to be changed, but instead asked for the law to be reinterpreted to fit the EU agenda.

The refusal of European leaders to give the people a say concerning the Lisbon Treaty is revealing just how undemocratic the European Union really is. In this most recent event, even the protests of dissenting voices within the European Parliament are being silenced.

For more information about the EU threat to European democracy, read “EU Ignores Public, Expands Powers.”