scholarly journals The Rule of Law Framework in the European Union: Its Rationale, Origins, Role and International Ramifications

Author(s):  
Artur Nowak-Far

AbstractAt present, the European rule of law enforcement framework under Article 7 TEU (RLF) is vulnerable to unguaranteed, discretionary influences of the Member States. This vulnerability arises from its procedural format which requires high thresholds in decision-making with the effect that this procedure is prone to be terminated by the EU Member States likely to be scrutinized under it, if only they collude. Yet, the Framework may prove effective to correct serious breaches against human rights (in the context of ineffective rule of law standards). The European Commission is bound to pursue the RLF effectiveness for the sake of achieving relative uniformity of application of EU law (at large), and making the European Union a credible actor and co-creator of international legal order. The RLF is an important tool for the maintenance of relative stability of human rights and the rule of law in the EU despite natural divergence propensity resulting from the procedural autonomy of the EU Member States. By achieving this stability, the EU achieves significant political weight in international dialogue concerning human rights and the rule of law and preserves a high level of its global credibility in this context. Thus, RLF increases the EU’s effectiveness in promoting the European model of their identification and enforcement.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claus Dieter Classen

The book presents the constitutional systems of the 27 EU member states in an integrated form. Basic principles such as democracy and the rule of law, constitutionalismincluding constitutional jurisdiction, state organs (parliament, government, head of state) and state functions (legislation, administration, jurisdiction, foreign policy) are dealt with. Thus, common European basic principles are elaborated, but above all, the different manifestations of many constitutional principles are clarified. The book is aimed at all those who wish to inform themselves in a clear form about the constitutional systems of the EU member states on which the European Union is based.


Author(s):  
Aleksandar-Andrija Pejović

In recent years, the rule of law and, especially, its “proper” implementation has become one of the most debated topics in Europe in recent years. The “Big Bang Enlargement” marked the beginning of dilemmas whether the new EU Member States fulfil the necessary rule of law criteria and opened the way for divergent views on how to implement TEU Article 2 values in practice. Furthermore, constant problems and difficulty of the candidate countries to fulfil the necessary rule of law criteria added to the complexity of the problem. In turn, the European institutions have tried to introduce a series of mechanisms and procedures to improve the oversight and make the states follow the rules - starting from the famous Treaty on the European Union (TEU) Article 7, the Rule of Law Mechanism, annual reports on the rule of law and the most recent Conditionality Regulation. The Conditionality Regulation was finally adopted in December 2020 after much discussion and opposition from certain EU Member States. It calls for the suspension of payments, commitments and disbursement of instalments, and a reduction of funding in the cases of general deficiencies with the rule of law. On the other hand, similar provisions were laid out in the February 2020 enlargement negotiation methodology specifying that in the cases of no progress, imbalance of the overall negotiations or regression, the scope and intensity of pre-accession assistance can be adjusted downward thus descaling financial assistance to candidate countries. The similarities between the two mechanisms, one for the Member States, the other for candidate countries shows an increased sharing of experiences and approaches to dealing with possible deficiencies or breaches of the rule of law through economic sanctioning, in order to resolve challenges to the unity of the European union. The Covid-19 pandemic and the crisis it has provoked on many fronts has turned the attention of the Member States (i.e. the Council) away from the long running problematic issues. Consequently, the procedures against Poland and Hungary based on the Rule of Law Mechanism have slowed down or become fully stalled, while certain measures taken up by some European states have created concerns about the limitations of human rights and liberties. This paper, therefore, analyses the efforts the EU is making in protecting the rule of law in its Member States and the candidate countries. It also analyses the new focus of the EU in the financial area where it has started to develop novel mechanisms that would affect one of the most influential EU tools – the funding of member and candidate countries through its structural and enlargement policy. Finally, it attempts to determine and provide conclusions on the efficiency of new instruments with better regulated criteria and timing of activities will be and how much they would affect the EU and its current and future member states.


2020 ◽  
pp. 27-37
Author(s):  
Stanislav Kuvaldin ◽  

Article 7 of the Treaty on the European Union provides for a mechanism for responding to violations by member states of the values of democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights proclaimed by the Union, as well as the introduction of sanctions against the violating state. Nevertheless, the EU structures are extremely cautious about this mechanism, despite the reasons for its use. The article analyzes the history of the appearance of Article 7 in European legislation and the first attempts of a pan-European influence on dubious decisions of the member states. Based on the example of Poland and Hungary in respect of which the possibility of applying sanctions under the Article 7 procedure is now being discussed, it is concluded that such an outcome is unlikely. It is shown that Article 7 was deliberately created in such a way as to limit the actions of pan-European structures, to leave decisions in the hands of national governments and to provide an opportunity to solve the problem through negotiations. It also shows the process of searching for alternative ways of influencing the violating states.


2014 ◽  
Vol 66 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 35-50
Author(s):  
Nikola Jokanovic

This paper will discuss the economic relations between the European Union and the People?s Republic of China. The introductory part will make an insight into the position of China in the contemporary global economy. The following part of the paper will analyze China-EU trade relations. The topics included will be a general overview of these relations since their establishing in 1975 as well as the European Union?s attitude towards the Chinese WTO membership. The Sino-EU partnership and competition will also be described and it will be followed by an overview of the Sino-EU High Level Economic and Trade Dialogue (HED). The concluding topics in this part of the paper will include Sino-EU trade flows, perceived obstacles to trade and investment as well as recent trade disputes between two trading partners. The third part of the paper will deal with Sino-EU investment flows (with an emphasis on Chinese investments in EU member states). After the introductory remarks concerning the EU investments originating from China, the paper will shed light on particular EU member states which are preferred for Chinese investment as well as the industries in which Chinese companies are willing to invest. The concluding part of this paper will offer possible development of relations between the EU and China in the near future.


2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 85-92
Author(s):  
Gábor Kemény ◽  
Michal Vít

The aim of the paper is to introduce the legal misfits between the standards of human rights as stated by the European Union and the Council of Europe and practical day to day experience related to EU member states. For this purpose, the article focuses on political and legal assessment of the so-called pushbacks at the Greek-Turkish external border and introduces the influencing factors, such as the various interpretation of the legislation, differences in the organisational structure and values. Authors concluded that these factors are endangering the fulfilment of the fundamental rights and the efficiency of the border protection thus the security of the EU and its member states.


2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 157-171
Author(s):  
Adnan Mahmutovic ◽  
Helza Nova Lita

This paper discusses the distinctiveness of the European Union with focus on the Rule of Law and its importance for the EU integration process. Rule of Law is a notion that is very frequently used, but at the same time quite controversial as it is not so easy always to reach generally accepted meaning. Therefore, this paper provides a analysis of the EU Rule of Law  as multidimensional legal principle gravitating between values and principles. The paper acknowledges that a concept of the EU rule of law can be the subject of diverse interpretations and implementation. High-ranking government officials of a two EU member states, Poland and Hungary, have argued recently that a concept of the EU rule of law lacks well-defined rules and remains the subject of much debate. Therefore, the paper provides for better understanding of the concept itself within the specific supranational legal environment. Also, the paper argues that the future of the EU and its integrations depends largely on the respect of the rule of law that remains to be a core and the element of unity within Europe’s legal space. The relationship between the principles and values upon which the EU is founded remain close and interrelated. The EU Rule of law with all its distinctiveness can be concluded with certainty that it reflects a specific character and nature of the EU legal system.


2020 ◽  
Vol 59 (3) ◽  
pp. 487-494
Author(s):  
David Lewis

This Resolution was adopted in October 2019 following a report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights. It has to be seen in the context of previous Council of Europe activity on this topic as well as the European Union (EU) Directive on the protection of persons who report breaches of Union law. The content of the EU Directive was agreed earlier in 2019 and EU Member States are obliged to transpose it into national legislation by December 2021.


2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-17
Author(s):  
Juha Raitio

The concept of the rule of law has lately become a topical and controversial issue. For example, the existence of effective judicial review is an inseparable part of the rule of law and some problems in this respect have been analysed. This article advocates for a thick concept of the rule of law. This refers to the idea that the rule of law has both material and formal content. The controversial part seems to be the question of material content and whether it obscures the essential meaning of the rule of law as a requirement of legality. However, the material aspect of the rule of law can be linked to the value-base of the European Union. For example, during its EU Presidency, Finland strongly emphasized the significance of the value base and the rule of law in Article 2 teu for the development of the EU. Democracy, the rule of law, and the actualisation of fundamental and human rights in particular are connected together, combined in a trinity where all the components form preconditions for the others. This stance is not a novelty in Finland, since Jyränki, for one, two decades ago already maintained that human rights protect the individual’s position and thus belong to the sphere of the material concept of the rule of law. I have employed the metaphor of a musical triangle. A triangle can only make a sound if all three of its corners are connected to each other, thereby connecting the sides of the triangle. Observance of the core values of the EU is a precondition for mutual trust between Member States, which in turn is necessary for a well-functioning European Union and good governance.


2014 ◽  
Vol 1 (33) ◽  
pp. 99
Author(s):  
Antonio Bar Cendón

La UE se fundamenta en un conjunto de valores que son enunciados en el Art. 2 del TUE de manera explícita: el respeto de la dignidad humana, la libertad, la democracia, la igualdad, el Estado de Derecho y el respeto de los derechos humanos. Valores que el mismo precepto considera que son comunes a todos los Estados miembros. Hasta ahora, la protección de estos valores fundamentales se encuentra en el mecanismo previsto en el Art. 7 del TUE. La existencia de este mecanismo no ha logrado, sin embargo, evitar la vulneración de los valores fundamentales de la UE por parte de varios de sus Estados miembros. En este sentido, este trabajo propone la formulación de un nuevo mecanismo —«mecanismo de Copenhague»— que sea capaz de hacer un seguimiento permanente de la actuación de los Estados para evitar que se produzcan esas vulneraciones, pero que sea capaz también de imponer las sanciones más graves a las vulneraciones de estos valores fundamentales, incluida la expulsión de la UE.The UE is founded on a set of values which are mentioned in an explicit manner in Art. 2 of the TEU: respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights. Values which the same article states that are common to the Member States. Until now, the protection of these fundamental values is based on the mechanism foreseen in Art. 7 of the TEU. The existence of this mechanism though has not prevented the violation of these fundamental values by several of the Member States from taking place. This is why this article proposes the establishing of a new mechanism - the «Copenhagen mechanism» - which would be able to monitor the performance of the Member States on a permanent basis in order to prevent the violations from taking place, but which would also be able to impose the most serious penalties to the most serious violations of these fundamental values, including the expulsion of the UE.


2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 339-382 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Wischmeyer

For a long time, EU institutions have emphasized the connection between one of the most important concepts of the integration method, mutual recognition, and the presence of mutual trust between EU Member States. Only recently, the ECJ reaffirmed in its Opinion 2/13 that mutual trust is at the heart of the EU and a “fundamental premiss” of the European legal structure. But can law really restore, advance or even govern by trust? This question is crucial for the EU of today, which finds itself in the midst of a severe crisis of trust. For the EU as a community “based on the rule of law” generating trust through law might seem the natural, maybe the only politically viable response to a crisis of trust. Nevertheless, even if one agrees that the rule of law requires people to place trust in legal rules, and that courts and administrative agencies need to trust each other in order to work efficiently and consistently, how would legal rules be able to generate or promote trust? Moreover, isn't it deeply rooted in our ideas about constitutional government that democratic law must institutionalize mutual distrust rather than govern by trust? These conceptual and normative objections did not stop the European Union from pursuing the project of trust-building through law in one of the most sensitive areas of EU law, judicial cooperation in civil and criminal matters. This Article will ask whether the project to promote trust through law is a promising one, and, eventually, how to reinterpret statutory provisions and legal principles that purport to generate trust amongst their addressees.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document