Book Review: Constitutionalizing the External Dimensions of EU Migration Policies in Times of Crisis – Legality, Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights Reconsidered

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 402-403
Author(s):  
João Carlos Jarochinski Silva
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Human Mobility ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Migration Policies ◽  
The Face ◽  
Community People ◽  
The University

Constitutionalising the External Dimensions of EU Migration Policies in Times of Crisis, Legality, Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights Reconsidered, Edited by Sergio Carrera, Juan Santos Vara and Tineke Strik, London, 2019, 336 p. ISBN: PB: 978 1 78897 247 5. Reviewed by João Carlos Jarochinski Silva. The book edited by Sergio Carrera, Juan Santos Vara and Tineke Strik brings essential contributions to two of the most critical challenges of the European Union today: the decrease in integration and the breakdown of institutionalism in the face of human mobility of extra-community people. Stemming from a workshop held in 2017 at the University of Salamanca, it is divided into two parts. The first, EU External Migration Policies: New and old dynamics, which has six articles; and the second, EU crisis-led patterns of cooperation in light of the EU rule of law, which is composed of nine articles. In addition to these fifteen articles, the editors wrote an introductory chapter.

scholarly journals Rights and Powers in the European Union: Towards a Charter that is Fully Applicable to the Member States?

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-22
Author(s):  
Aida TORRES PÉREZ
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
Judicial Protection ◽  
Eu Fundamental Rights ◽  
The Eu

Abstract This contribution will tackle a central question for the architecture of fundamental rights protection in the EU: can we envision a Charter that fully applies to the Member States, even beyond the limits of its scope of application? To improve our understanding of the boundaries of the Charter and the potential for further expansion, I will examine the legal avenues through which the CJEU has extended the scope of application of EU fundamental rights in fields of state powers. While the latent pull of citizenship towards a more expansive application of the Charter has not been fully realized, the principle of effective judicial protection (Article 19(1) TEU) has recently shown potential for protection under EU law beyond the boundaries of the Charter. As will be argued, effective judicial protection may well become a doorway for full application of the Charter to the Member States. While such an outcome might currently seem politically unsound, I contend that a progressive case-by-case expansion of the applicability of the Charter to the Member States would be welcome from the standpoint of a robust notion of the rule of law in the EU.

scholarly journals The Responsibility of Courts in Maintaining the Rule of Law: Two Tales of Consequential Judicial Self-Restraint

2021 ◽  
pp. 155-181
Author(s):  
Pál Sonnevend
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Constitutional Courts ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Legislative Power ◽  
The Face ◽  
The Law

AbstractModern constitutionalism is based on the paradigm that courts are inherently entitled and obliged to enforce the constitution of the respective polity. This responsibility of courts also applies in the context of the European Union to both the CJEU and national constitutional courts. The present chapter argues that in the face of constitutional crises the CJEU and the Hungarian Constitutional Court shy away from applying the law as it is to the full. The reasons behind this unwarranted judicial self-restraint are most different: the CJEU aims to avoid conflicts with national constitutional courts whereas the Hungarian Constitutional Court has been facing a legislative power also acting as constitution making power willing to amend the constitution to achieve specific legislative purposes or to undo previous constitutional court decisions. Yet both courts respond to expediencies that do not follow from the law they are called upon to apply. It is argued that rule of law backsliding requires these courts to abandon the unnecessary self-restraint and exploit the means already available.

scholarly journals Introduction: Pluralism, Contestation, and the Rule of Law

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith Cherry
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Colonial State ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Indigenous Nations ◽  
The World ◽  
The Face ◽  
Democratic Election

Around the world, the current political conjuncture is one of profound challenges for constitutionalism and the rule of law. In the United States, the executive has willfully engaged in a prolonged attempt to weaponize the machinery of the state and radicalize public opinion in order to undermine a democratic election. In the European Union, the increasingly authoritarian relationship between the executive and the judiciary in Poland and Hungary is posing the most profound threat to European constitutionalism in decades. In Hong Kong, the Chinese state is actively seeking to undermine legislative and judicial independence in the face of unprecedented pro-democracy mobilizations. In India, Lebanon, Bolivia, and elsewhere mass mobilizations are challenging, and being suppressed in the name of, the rule of law. Here in Canada, the Wet’suwet’en and their supporters, as well as the Tsleil Waututh, Haudenosaunee, L’nu (Mi’kmaq), Inuit, and members of countless other Indigenous nations are contesting the very nature of the rule of law, as they assert Indigenous laws against the law enforcement of the colonial state. Around the world, the use of emergency powers in response to the COVID-19 pandemic is also raising profound constitutional concerns.

scholarly journals Values and objectives of the EU in light of Opinion 1/17: ‘Trade for all’, above all

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivana Damjanovic ◽  
Nicolas de Sadeleer
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Equal Treatment ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Court System ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
The Eu

In Opinion 1/17 the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) ruled that the new Investment Court System (ICS) in the Canada–EU Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) is compatible with the EU constitutional framework. This article examines the CJEU’s analysis of the ICS in its Opinion through the prism of EU values and objectives. Given the judicial nature of the ICS, the article unfolds around the concept of the rule of law. The scope and the content of this core EU value are considered under both EU law and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). In particular, the ICS is analysed in light of the two core rule-of-law requirements: equal treatment and the independence of courts, enshrined in Articles 20 and 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights (CFR). Importantly, in Opinion 1/17 the CJEU for the first time applied Article 47 CFR to a court outside the EU judicial system. While the CJEU ruled that the ICS complies with the CFR rule-of-law criteria, this article argues that it nevertheless falls short of the rule-of-law standards required for judicial bodies under EU law. The article demonstrates that the CJEU prioritises free and fair trade as the CETA’s core objective, rather than the rule of law, and endorses the ICS as the conditio sine qua non of guaranteeing such trade. The Court’s findings have wider consequences for the rule of law in international law as the EU continues to pursue the establishment of a Multilateral Investment Court (MIC).

scholarly journals Hungary and the Indirect Protection of EU Fundamental Rights and the Rule of Law

2013 ◽  
Vol 14 (10) ◽  
pp. 1959-1979 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Dawson ◽  
Elise Muir
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Central Place ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Far Right ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Fundamental Values ◽  
Eu Fundamental Rights ◽  
The Eu

According to Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union, the European Union is a political and economic union founded on a respect for fundamental rights and the rule of law, referred to hereafter as EU fundamental values. The central place of this commitment in the EU Treaties suggests a founding assumption: That the EU is a Union of states who themselves see human rights and the rule of law as irrevocable parts of their political and legal order. Reminiscent of the entry of Jorg Haider's far-right Freedom Party into the Austrian government in 2000, the events of 2012 have done much to shake that assumption; questioning both how interwoven the rule of law tradition is across the present-day EU, and the role the EU ought to play in policing potential violations of fundamental rights carried out via the constitutional frameworks of its Member States. Much attention in this field, much like the focus of this paper, has been placed on events in one state in particular: Hungary.

The Road not Taken: The European Union as a Global Human Rights Actor

2011 ◽  
Vol 105 (4) ◽  
pp. 649-693 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gráinne de Búrca
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Road ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Face ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
The Eu

For many, the enactment of the European Union’s Treaty of Lisbon, with its range of significant human rights provisions, marks the EU’s coming of age as a human rights actor. The Lisbon Treaty inaugurated the legally binding character of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (EU Charter), enshrined a commitment to accede to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), and, in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), identified human rights as a foundational value. These changes have already drawn comment as developments that “will change the face of the Union fundamentally,” that take the protection of rights in the EU “to a new level,” and that indicate that “the arguments for improving the status of human rights in EU law… have finally been heard. There is general agreement, in other words, that the EU has reached the high point of its engagement with human rights.

scholarly journals An Old Procedure with new Solutions for the Rule of Law Crisis

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-19
Author(s):  
Franziska-Marie Laura Hilpert
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Enforcement Mechanism ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Strategic Approach ◽  
Small Things ◽  
The Eu

Suggested citation:  Franziska-Marie Laura Hilpert, 'An Old Procedure with new Solutions for the Rule of Law Crisis' (2019) 2(2) NJEL 1. While commentators for the past years, have highlighted that there is no effective enforcement mechanism after accession for the values of the European Union which are enshrined in Article 2 TEU, the Juncker Commission has announced in 2017 that it will be ‘bigger and more ambitious on big things, and smaller and more modest on small things’ thus applying a more strategic approach to enforcement in terms of handling infringements. This Article thus analyses two cases brought by the Juncker Commission after 2017 and on their bases seeks to show that the infringement procedure, when applied strategically, is and remains an effective enforcement mechanism even for the values enshrined in Article 2 TEU in the ‘rule of law crisis’. Thus, by way of analysis of the case C-619/18 Commission v Poland and its comparison with similar cases which have not been as effective, it is shown how the infringement procedure can prevent the enforcement of the most controversial provisions regarding the judiciary in Hungary and Poland and ensure the separation of powers, which is essential for the rule of law. Moreover, by comparison of the Commission’s request and the decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union in C-235/17 Commission v Hungary it is shown how the Charter could become a significant legal instrument in the Commissions infringement policy towards Member States that are undermining fundamental rights and the rule of law. This Article thereby aims to contribute to the discussion on how to effectively enforce the values of the EU enshrined in Article 2 TEU through an existing enforcement mechanism.

scholarly journals SEGRO and its Aftermath

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 69-88
Author(s):  
Xavier Groussot ◽  
Niels Kirst ◽  
Patrick Leisure
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Case Note ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Functional Perspective ◽  
National Courts ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Legislative Reforms ◽  
The Eu

The Court ofJustice ofthe European Union’s (CJEU, Court) SEGRO judgment is more than just a recent addition to the debate on the so-called rule of law crisis in the European Union. As this case note shows, SEGRO touches on the most fundamental aspects of the European Union and its relation to the Member States. From an economic perspective, the Court in SEGRO’s treatment ofproperty rights and the ability ofeconomic actors to rely on their lawfully concluded contracts forms the undercurrent of economic investment in the Union. From a functional perspective, the case is perhaps indicative of a wider change in the role of the Court with respect to national courts’ margin of discretion. From a normative perspective, SEGRO gives rise to an important discussion on the difference between fundamental rights and economic freedoms in the EU since the entering into force of the Lisbon Treaty in 2009, as well as ‘constitutional homogeneity’ in the EU after Hungary’s legislative reforms. Finally, from an evolutionary perspective, SEGRO marks another iteration in perhaps a wider shift in the trajectory of the Court with respect to questions that menace the integrity of the functioning of the European Union. This case note first examines the background (I) and facts of the case (II). Then it analyses the Opinion of the Advocate General (III) and the findings of the Court (IV). It concludes with a discussion based not only on an analysis of the SEGRO case (V), but also going beyond the case by analysing the most recent jurisprudential developments concerning Hungary and the issue of the (non-respect) of the Rule of Law in the European Union(VI).

scholarly journals Dislocations on understanding the rule of law

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-9
Author(s):  
J.J. Gomes Canotilho
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Economic Crisis ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Legal Standards ◽  
Constitutional Discourse

This paper analyses the problems of the rule of law in today’s legal and constitutional discourse. The criticisms the rule of law principle is subjected to, which contribute to its downgrading and to changes in the legal standards that had been progressively achieved, are especially examined, namely, the so-called hyper-protection of fundamental rights and the difficult harmonization with the idea of efficiency. Furthermore, the author identifies the de facto conditions that accentuate the identified problems, such as the systemic deficit of the European Union and the jurisdictional deficit that has become evident since the economic crisis.

The EU’s (strategic) use of human rights tools and instruments

2020 ◽  
pp. 542-568
Author(s):  
Manfred Nowak ◽  
Karolina Podstawa
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Action Plans ◽  
The European Union ◽  
External Trade ◽  
Double Standards ◽  
Policy Setting ◽  
The Eu

The European Union (EU) disposes of a comprehensive toolbox of instruments allowing it to implement its human rights commitments in internal and external policies. And yet, in this contentious policy setting, the use of human and fundamental rights tools gives rise to criticism ranging from allegations of double standards to its lack of effectiveness and the sham commitment to the use of these tools. The question arises as to the design of the overall architecture for the use of these tools, and whether their use collectively brings the EU closer to its goal of promoting and protecting human rights worldwide. This chapter attempts to uncover the existing practices, and challenges the strategic and organised manner of the pursuit of EU human and fundamental rights objectives within the limits of the existing toolbox and with the due exploitation of opportunities it offers. To this end, we will present a comprehensive oversight and typology of the human rights-related tools but also challenge their use. Finally, the contribution engages in the discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of the toolbox, in particular in the context of their implementation, coherence, and effectiveness. The chapter draws from the broad range of experiences of the EU and Member States’ internal and external policies. In particular, it focuses on the 2015–19 rule of law crisis, the implementation of human rights strategies, and action plans in a variety of settings, and the gradual changes in the external trade-human rights nexus.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document