Why could implementing the EU Association Agreement cause Andorra to lose its Customs Union Agreement forever?

The debate surrounding the Association Agreement between Andorra and the European Union has largely overlooked one of the most important legal questions concerning the Principality's future: the existing Customs Union Agreement does not automatically disappear if Andorra rejects the Association Agreement.

As previously reported by La Veu Lliure, the risk of losing the current customs framework arises precisely when the new treaty enters into application and replaces the existing arrangements.

This distinction is essential in light of the European timetable currently under consideration, particularly after European Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič opened the door to the provisional application of the Association Agreement while the remaining ratification procedures are completed.

The concern is that Andorra could begin implementing parts of the new treaty before its citizens have had the opportunity to vote in a referendum.

If such provisional application results in the effective replacement of the 1990 Customs Union Agreement, a subsequent rejection of the Association Agreement would not automatically restore the previous treaty.

The central question, therefore, is not simply whether Andorrans should vote "yes" or "no" to the European agreement, but whether the Government will allow the country's existing commercial and legal framework to be modified before consulting its citizens.

Article 112(2) of the Association Agreement provides for the possibility of provisional application while European ratification procedures are completed, an approach supported by former European Commission President José Manuel Barroso and French Co-Prince Emmanuel Macron.

This possibility has become particularly significant after the Andorran Government acknowledged that the referendum will not take place during the current parliamentary term.

However, Andorra's legislation on international treaties prevents provisional application before ratification by the General Council, meaning that the existing legal framework would first have to be amended to proceed in this direction.

Rejecting the Association Agreement does not mean losing the Customs Union Agreement

The 1990 Customs Union Agreement between Andorra and the European Economic Community remains a legal instrument independent of the proposed Association Agreement.

Article 21 of the existing agreement establishes that either party may terminate it by giving six months' notice.

This means that rejecting the Association Agreement does not automatically terminate the current Customs Union Agreement.

For the existing agreement to cease being in force without being replaced by another instrument, one of the parties would have to activate the relevant termination mechanism.

There is no provision requiring Brussels to terminate the 1990 agreement simply because Andorra decides not to approve the Association Agreement.

Furthermore, the existing customs framework has governed commercial relations between Andorra and Europe for more than three decades without requiring an Association Agreement.

Why, then, is voting "no" presented as a threat to an agreement that already exists and would otherwise remain in force?

This is one of the central contradictions that should be addressed in the public debate.

The risks surrounding provisional application proposed by Šefčovič

European Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič has raised the possibility of provisionally applying the Association Agreement while the procedures required for its definitive ratification are completed.

This proposal is particularly significant because the agreement is considered a mixed agreement, requiring the involvement of the European Parliament and EU member states in the relevant ratification procedures.

Provisional application would allow certain provisions of the agreement to take effect without waiting for every national parliament to complete its respective process.

El vicepresident executiu de la Comissió Europea, Maroš Šefčovič: «Ens comprometem a completar amb celeritat els nostres procediments interns per avançar cap a l’aplicació provisional» https://t.co/uuepKWHjr8

— La Veu Lliure (@laveulliure) October 19, 2026

However, the decisive question is whether those provisions include the arrangements that would effectively replace the 1990 Customs Union Agreement.

If they do, Andorra could become subject to a new commercial and legal framework before the referendum promised to its citizens has taken place.

This is precisely the issue the Government should clarify publicly, providing concrete legal guarantees rather than relying on general political statements.

The Andorran Government has indicated that the referendum on the Association Agreement will take place after the relevant European procedures, and the vote is no longer expected during the current parliamentary term.

This timetable creates a potential contradiction with significant consequences.

On the one hand, Brussels is considering the provisional application of certain parts of the agreement while ratification continues.

On the other, the Andorran Government has linked the referendum to the progress of European procedures.

If provisional application moves forward before the referendum, citizens could ultimately be asked to vote on a treaty that is already producing legal effects in the Principality.

And there is another unresolved question.

Because the agreement is mixed, its definitive ratification could take several years. If the Government maintains its position of waiting for all European procedures to be completed, the referendum could be delayed considerably.

This could create a politically contradictory situation: the authorities might argue that citizens cannot yet be consulted because ratification remains incomplete, while certain provisions of the treaty are already being applied provisionally.

The risk is that the referendum would no longer serve as a genuine opportunity to decide whether Andorra should enter a new legal framework, but instead become a consultation on a system that has already been operating for years.

It cannot be claimed that this scenario is inevitable or that the referendum will not take place.

Nevertheless, the announced timetable makes it essential to establish clear guarantees regarding when citizens will vote and which provisions, if any, could enter into application beforehand.

Bartumeu warns about voting "no" but does not explain what would happen after provisional application

Former Andorran Head of Government Jaume Bartumeu warned on Tuesday that the European Union could terminate the existing Customs Union Agreement if Andorra rejects the Association Agreement.

He also argued that any attempt to renegotiate the current commercial arrangements could force the Principality to make concessions detrimental to its interests.

"If we renegotiate it, I can already tell you that we will probably come out worse off," he warned.

However, this argument presents a hypothetical decision by Brussels as a consequence of voting "no", without addressing what would happen if the new Association Agreement had already entered into application and replaced the 1990 customs framework.

The distinction is fundamental.

If Andorra rejects the Association Agreement before the new treaty replaces the existing customs arrangements, the current agreement remains in force unless one of the parties independently terminates it.

By contrast, if the new framework has already legally replaced the previous agreement, a subsequent rejection would not guarantee that Andorra could recover the same commercial arrangements.

In other words, voting "no" before replacement would preserve the existing treaty, while voting "no" after replacement could require a new legal solution.

This does not necessarily mean that the former framework could never be restored. It means that its restoration would not be automatic and could depend on further negotiations and legal decisions.

Bartumeu, who has extensive experience in institutional relations between Andorra and the European Union, did not address this distinction in the statements reported from his interview.

Could Andorra lose the 1990 Customs Union Agreement permanently?

The most significant risk is not that Andorra would automatically lose its existing customs arrangements simply by rejecting the Association Agreement.

The real concern is that the 1990 agreement could be replaced before Andorran citizens have voted on the new treaty.

If the existing agreement were legally terminated or superseded as part of the new framework, rejecting the Association Agreement at a later stage would not necessarily revive the previous treaty.

Restoring the former customs arrangements could then require a new agreement between Andorra and the European Union, potentially involving fresh negotiations and different conditions.

However, this outcome would depend on the precise legal effects of provisional application, the provisions governing the relationship between the two treaties and the mechanisms established for terminating or suspending the new agreement.

Provisional application alone does not automatically establish that the 1990 Customs Union Agreement has been permanently terminated.

The decisive issue is whether the relevant provisions would merely suspend or temporarily replace the existing arrangements, or whether they would bring about their legal termination.

That distinction has not been sufficiently clarified in the political debate.

The Government must clarify what happens to the Customs Union Agreement before the referendum

The controversy raises an important question about the relationship between democratic consultation, treaty ratification and the preservation of Andorra's existing commercial framework.

The Government has repeatedly defended the Association Agreement as an essential instrument for the Principality's future relationship with the European Union.

However, the possibility of provisional application introduces a further dimension that cannot be ignored.

What legal guarantees would prevent the 1990 Customs Union Agreement from being irreversibly replaced before Andorran citizens have voted?

And if the referendum ultimately produces a majority against the Association Agreement, what mechanism would allow Andorra to recover its previous customs arrangements?

These questions are particularly relevant because the referendum is consultative in legal terms, although the Government has repeatedly presented its result as politically binding.

The timing of the vote therefore matters.

A referendum held before the new treaty produces effects would allow citizens to express their position while the current legal framework remains intact.

A referendum held after provisional application could take place under substantially different circumstances, especially if parts of the existing customs arrangements had already been replaced.

The Government must explain not only when the referendum will take place, but also what legal framework Andorra would retain if citizens rejected the Association Agreement after provisional application had begun.

Ultimately, the debate is not simply about whether the Association Agreement offers economic opportunities or legal risks.

It is also about ensuring that Andorrans can make their decision before the country's existing relationship with the European Union undergoes changes that may be difficult, or potentially impossible, to reverse without fresh negotiations.

Until these questions are answered with concrete legal guarantees, the possibility of provisional application will remain one of the most consequential unresolved issues surrounding Andorra's European future.