Write your abstract here.This left Britain in a quandary, They were caught between a rock and a hard place, and just like the Greek Tragedy of the Odyssey, caught between the Scylla and Charybdis of indecision and raw haste could do neither. Britain could,nt either, appease the Europeans, or placate the Americans and entertain their Commonwealth, under one issue or heading. The European Human Rights Act was full of contradictions from it conception.The one Law that proved unworkable was the Law of extradition,as it conflicted with the Human Rights Act. Europe needed Britain, America needed Britain, The Commonwealth needed Britain,and Britain needed all three! but found itself with only one leg to stand on.Consequently the harmonizing of Laws will take at least another generation to come to fruition, and then, theres the serious contention of the Independent Constitutions of Member States, Eire, France, Germany,Greece,Austria, in fact the Republics.All this was before enlargement. If European Law does,nt conflict with Independent Constitutional Laws, then by Default it will conflict with Monarchistic Sovereign Laws, of The Netherlands, Denmark,Britain, etc This is a far cry from harmonizing the Laws of Europe, without which there can be no European Constitution,However it,s worded ,or well intentioned. The reason is this; one cannot impose a Law on a Sovereign State, and one cannot impose a Law on a Republic, without changing the Constitution of that Republic, it is a Contradiction in Terms! That is the Gordian Knot of the European Constitutional LAW. contin ........