The European constitutional text agreed in 2004 was ambitious and far-reaching but to the shock of its framers, fell at the first hurdle, writes Jamie Smyth, European Correspondent
When EU leaders gathered at Rome's Capitolino museum in October 2004 to sign the EU constitution, hopes were high that Europe's institutional future had been decided.
Sitting underneath the magnificent 17th century fresco, The Battle between Horatii and Curiatii, 54 political leaders (two from each member state) gladly attached their name to an EU treaty drawn up in a uniquely democratic and transparent way.
The European Convention, which included 72 directly elected members among its 105 members, had been toiling away for more than a year to prepare a single readable text to replace all the existing EU treaties. This text was finessed and agreed by EU states at an intergovernmental conference held under Ireland's EU presidency in June 2004.
The final text is divided into four parts. The first part defines the values, objectives, powers and decision-making procedures of the EU. It also describes the symbols, citizenship, democratic life and finances of the union.
Part two contains the "Charter of Fundamental Rights", which confers new rights on European citizens. Part three describes the policies and functioning of the union, such as the internal market and common foreign and security policy.
Part four is a miscellaneous section containing procedures for adopting and revising the constitution and various other annexes.
One of the biggest changes in the draft constitution was the creation of a permanent EU president to replace the current system of six-month rotating presidencies. He/she would be elected by qualified majority, for a term of 2½ years, renewable once. British prime minister Tony Blair is already touted as a candidate, and if he got the post would chair the European Council and represent the EU abroad.
A new post of EU foreign minister would be created and the union would get a single legal personality so it could sign international treaties - a provision causing problems for the British and Dutch.
The number of commissioners would be cut to 18 from 2014 (two-thirds of the number of states) with members chosen from member states in equal rotation. More areas of legislation would also be subject to majority voting rather than unanimity, particularly in the sensitive and increasingly important field of justice affairs.
This would also give the European Court of Justice jurisdiction over decisions in the area. The constitution also beefed up democratic accountability of the EU by forcing the Council of Ministers and European Parliament to meet in public when considering legislation. Freedom of information would also be formally introduced at EU level.
However, to the shock of the framers of the constitution, the grand text fell at the first hurdle when on May 29th, 2005, French voters rejected it in a referendum by 55 per cent to 45 per cent. A Dutch No followed three days later, propelling the EU into a political crisis.
EU leaders announced a period of reflection to decide how to continue and finally it was decided that German chancellor Angela Merkel should try to find a compromise during the German presidency.
Over the past six months, German officials have met secretly with officials from other member states to try to agree a revised treaty. They hope all 27 EU leaders will be able to agree the outline of a "simplified treaty" this week that can be drawn up during the summer.