text_body: --- DIVISION TITLE ---
  
  Lisbon Treaty - Exclude European Court of Justice from regulating on police and justice matters - rejected
  
  --- MOTION EFFECT ---
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  The majority No voters rejected an amendment[1] to the [http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2007-08/europeanunionamendment.html European Union (Amendment) Bill] which aimed to limit the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_court_of_justice
  European Court of Justice] (ECJ) from increasing its powers over police and justice matters. 
  
  In the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maastricht_Treaty Maastricht Treaty] it was set out that the ECJ could not decide on affairs relating to criminal justice. However, in the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Lisbon Lisbon Treaty this changed so that the ECJ] could regulate on these matters but member states would have to "opt into" these arrangements.
  
  Mark Francois MP explains his reason for tabling the amendment[2]:
  
  :'Over time we would see current and future EU measures subject to interpretation by the European Court of Justice in this area [criminal justice]. We believe that it would not be long before important parts of our criminal law were potentially superseded by a body of European law.'
  
  Jim Murphy MP argues against the amendment as follows[3]:
  
  :'Justice and home affairs in general and police and judicial co-operation on criminal matters in particular are subjects of great sensitivity. The UK has therefore negotiated a comprehensive opt-out arrangement, under which we have a choice, as the UK Government. First, we can choose whether to opt into new justice and home affairs proposals. Secondly, we can choose whether to accept European Court of Justice jurisdiction over existing third pillar measures at the end of the transitional period.'
  
  ----
  
  * [1] [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debate/?id=2008-01-29c.239.5 Mark Francois MP], House of Commons, 29 January 2008
  * [2] [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debate/?id=2008-01-29c.241.0 Mark Francois MP], House of Commons, 29 January 2008
  * [3] [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debate/?id=2008-01-29c.271.0 Jim Murphy MP], House of Commons, 29 January 2008
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  --- COMMENTS AND NOTES ---
  
  (put thoughts and notes for other researchers here)
  