![[Return to Contents Arrow]](ltarrw.gif){kind=small} |
Return to Contents |
In 1949, countries seeking to join NATO followed their respective constitutional provisions for ratifying a treaty in order to join the alliance. Some states do not follow the same provisions for revision of a treaty. For the most part, however, the practice is similar to that of the United States: when a new member is to be admitted, the treaty is viewed as a "new" instrument because the addition of a state not only reconfigures NATO's geography, but its political and strategic make-up, requiring new obligations. In the United States, a two-thirds vote of those present in the Senate chamber is required to consent to ratification and admit a new member, and most other allied states require some form of legislative approval, with the notable exceptions of Britain and Canada. Some NATO members, however, have not yet decided upon the procedures to be followed.43 In the past expansions of the alliance, the protocols have specified that all current member states must approve candidate states before they may join the alliance.
Belgium has a bicameral legislature. Usually, a simple majority in both the Chamber of Representatives and in the Senate is necessary to revise a treaty. The Belgian government has devolved considerable power to the country's regions over the past decade, and some observers contend that regional assemblies must also approve treaty revisions. Officials of the Dehaene government, however, believe that because the North Atlantic Treaty addresses primarily matters of defense, only the parliament in Brussels need express approval.
The executive in the form of the cabinet ratifies the revision of treaties in the United Kingdom. Only EU treaties must be laid before parliament. However, a government normally ensures that parliament debates important foreign policy issues raised by a treaty. Due to the significance of NATO enlargement, British officials believe that the government will seek such a debate. The parliamentary debate will have no procedural effect upon ratification.44
As in Britain, the cabinet alone has the authority to ratify a treaty. Parliament may wish to debate the issue, and is reportedly likely to address the costs of enlargement above all.
Denmark has a unicameral parliament, the Folketing. The cabinet prepares a bill to approve a treaty or a treaty revision and sends it to the Folketing, where it is read once and referred to the appropriate committee, which then issues a report. The instrument is then sent again to the floor, where a majority vote is necessary for ratification.
The government prepares a report on the treaty revision for the Council of State, which provides advice on legislation. The cabinet then prepares a draft law for approval for the National Assembly. The relevant committees study the draft law, and may issue reports. There must be a simple majority in the Assembly to pass the law, followed by a simple majority in the Senate as well.
The Ministry of Foreign affairs prepares a bill to approve revision of the Treaty. The government must then approve the bill, and submit it to parliament. Germany has a bicameral legislature, and views currently differ over the procedures to be followed to ratify the amended the treaty. Some observers believe that only a simple majority in the lower house, the Bundestag, is necessary. Others believe that it must then be sent to the upper house, the Bundesrat, where a simple majority would also be needed for ratification.
The government prepares draft legislation to amend the Treaty, and sends it to the unicameral parliament. An absolute majority is necessary for ratification.
The cabinet prepares draft legislation to amend the Treaty, and submits it to the President, who must approve it. The legislation is then sent to the unicameral legislature, the Althing, where a majority vote is necessary for ratification.
The cabinet prepares draft legislation, and submits it to the bicameral legislature, where each house has equal authority in approving a treaty or revision of a treaty. Each house may send the legislation to a committee, which would then issue reports. After the reports are studied, a simple majority of those present in the chamber in both the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate is necessary for ratification.
The cabinet prepares draft legislation, and submits it to both the Council of State, which examines the constitutionality of legal instruments, and the Chamber of Deputies. A two-thirds vote of approval in both the Council of State and the Chamber of Deputies is then necessary.
The Netherlands has an extensive process for ratification of treaties and revisions of treaties that may require one year or more. The Dutch cabinet, upon receiving the Protocol from NATO for revising the Treaty to admit new members, prepares a document of explanation. This document provides a general analysis of why the Protocol, in the government's view, should be ratified. A more concrete section of this document examines closely the strategic and financial implications of enlargement for the Netherlands and for NATO. Both this document and the Protocol will then be submitted to the Council of State, a government organ that reviews instruments for their constitutionality.
The Council of State provides advice to the cabinet on the document and on the Protocol. This procedure is not pro forma; for example, the Council of State provided a sharply critical commentary on the Maastricht Treaty of 1991, which the Council viewed as too vague on important points. After several months of study, the Council of State will give its opinion on the constitutionality of the Protocol on NATO enlargement to the cabinet, which, where appropriate, will act to revise the document assessing the policy implications of alliance expansion. That revised document is then sent for study and debate to the Binnenhof (second chamber, or States General).
The Binnenhof's foreign affairs and perhaps finance committees reviews the cabinet's document that assesses the Protocol, and sends reports on the document to the plenary for debate in the chamber. A majority of those present in the second chamber must vote in favor of the Protocol in order to move to the next step in the process, which is review by the first chamber, or upper house. The first chamber follows the same process as the second chamber. If a majority of those present in the first chamber vote in favor of the Protocol, it is then sent to the Queen for her signature. The Queen then returns the signed Protocol to the cabinet for implementation.
Norway has a unicameral legislature, the Storting. A majority of those present in the chamber must vote in favor of the Protocol in order to amend the Treaty.
The cabinet examines the Protocol and prepares a draft resolution of approval of the Protocol. The cabinet then sends the resolution to the unicameral legislature. The legislature refers the resolution to the appropriate committees, which make a recommendation to the plenary. A simple majority vote is necessary to approve the resolution. The legislature sends the approved resolution to the President of the republic. His signature is necessary to ratify the amended Treaty.
The government prepares a draft resolution on the Protocol, which it sends to the Council of State, an organ that reviews the constitutionality of laws and treaties. After review, the Council of State sends the resolution to the two houses of the legislature, the Cortes Generales. The two houses, the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate, must pass by simple majority the resolution on the Protocol. The two houses then send the resolution to the king. His signature ratifies the amended Treaty.
The cabinet prepares a draft law on the Protocol, and sends it to the National Assembly. The appropriate committees review the draft law, and issue reports that evaluate it. A simply majority in the Assembly will ratify the amended Treaty.
|
Return to Contents |