|
|
|
|
|
by vidarh
5112 days ago
|
|
Exactly. He's not doing anything that isn't done regularly by any executive branch that actually believes the laws they're trying to pass are necessary. He's saying: 1) They want to find a way to make ACTA work. Because of that, even if the EU Parliament does not agree with its current form, it makes sense for the Commission to move forward with the ECJ, because if the ECJ says its incompatible with EU law, it will need to be changed regardless if it is to be passed, and it makes no sense for them to negotiate a solution with parliament only to find out after that that the ECJ would strike down the whole thing on fundamental questions afterwards. 2) They'll try to find a solution that addresses whatever reasons MEP's give for voting it down (assuming they do). Trying to reach a compromise is hardly an evil fascist dictator method, but standard operating practice. At least it is in Europe, where we're used to having governments that actually cooperate to pass things. |
|