Constitutional Preparation for Eu Accession in the New Central and Eastern European Member States: Is The Rule of Law Better Than the Rule of Politics?

2004 ◽  
pp. 269-283
Author(s):  
Jenő Czuczai
2015 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 369-391
Author(s):  
Nina Peršak

Recent European events have revealed that some eu Member States, including some South Eastern European (see) States, still struggle with the rule of law. While certain rule of law challenges may be due to past legacies and insufficient (or insufficiently successful) transitions, others may be the result of the transition itself and of contemporary socio-economic problems that are experienced across Europe. This article will address the state of the rule of law in see, reflecting first on some pre-, mid-, and post-transition problems relevant for the rule of law in these countries. Next, it will address the legal and socio-psychological impact of the challenges posed by the mentioned problems, connecting the (mis)trust that can be observed on several levels (internally and externally) with the rule of law, thus demonstrating that mistrust as such has social as well as legal consequences. If trust (e.g. in the effectiveness of the rule of law safeguards or in those who are entrusted with safeguarding it) is lacking, this represents a problem not only for the Member State (e.g. for the functioning and perceived legitimacy of its judicial system) in question, but also for the eu (e.g. for the judicial cooperation in criminal matters). Lastly, the article will examine the eu’s perspective on rule of law, drawing on the recent eu Framework to Strengthen the Rule of Law, which aims to ensure an effective and coherent protection of the rule of law in all Member States, as well as on some other eu documents that may, in our view, help address the current challenges in European rule of law.


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 139-150
Author(s):  
GIANLUIGI PALOMBELLA

AbstractCan citizens’ interest in non-domination be satisfied by the principle of legality and the guarantee of non-arbitrariness? This comment argues that the rule of law requires an internal organization of law that entails an additional positive law, through conventions, common law, judicial precedents or constitutions, which the sovereign cannot legally override. In the supranational context, the rule of law requires an equilibrium of consideration and respect between different legalities by avoiding a legal monopoly of a supreme authority and fostering the interaction among orders based on content-dependent reasons. The same applies to the relations between the ECtHR and member states. The margin of appreciation, taken as a reminder of the complexities of international institutional relationships, embodies a non-domination caveat to consider (the reasons from) the ‘normativities’ of different orders. Nonetheless, as an argumentative tool of the Court, it allows for an often-disputed discretion. Accordingly, better refined guidelines and justifications are required.


Author(s):  
Aida TORRES PÉREZ

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.


Author(s):  
T. Romanova ◽  
E. Pavlova

The article examines how the normative power, which the EU puts forward as an ideological basis of its actions in the world, manifests itself in the national partnerships for modernization between Russia and EU member states. The authors demonstrate the influence of the EU’s normativity on its approach to modernization as well as the difference in the positions of its member countries. It is concluded that there is no unity in the EU’s approach to democracy, human rights and the rule of law, and the new classification of EU member states, which is based on their readiness to act in accordance with the Union’s concept of normative power, is offered.


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.


Author(s):  
Wojciech Sadowski

AbstractInvestment treaty law and EU law began to develop in the same era and share some important philosophical and axiological foundations. The pressure on the CEE countries to enter into numerous bilateral investment treaties in late 80s and early 90s, in the context of the EU accession aspirations of the former communist countries, was likely to result, eventually, in a conflict between EU law and investment treaty law. The conflict could have been managed in three different ways, yet the CJEU decided in Achmea to declare an undefined volume of intra-EU arbitrations to be incompatible with EU law. This important judgment, which delivered an outcome desired by the European Commission and a number of Member States, is based on questionable legal reasoning that creates high uncertainty in this area of law. The doubts include the scope of application of Achmea, which is now a highly debatable issue. The CJEU itself saw it necessary to limit the scope of Achmea by declaring in Opinion 1/17 (CETA) that the legal reasoning of Achmea did not apply to investment protection treaties with third countries. The Member States of the EU remain politically divided in their views as to whether Achmea applies to the Energy Charter Treaty. And while the problems with the rule of law and independence of the judiciary in certain Member States continue to grow, Achmea has left an important gap for which there is no substitute in the current architecture of the EU legal system.


Significance Rama’s remarks followed the arrest of Lushnja Mayor Fatos Tushe, accused of abuse of office regarding public procurement. A more proactive policy against corruption and organised crime, reflecting judicial reform, has prompted the Dutch parliament to remove its veto on Albania’s EU accession talks. Impacts Consolidation of the rule of law, while sluggish, has gained its own momentum and will result in more prominent politicians facing justice. A vigorous corruption crackdown could disrupt public services if corrupt but experienced officials are replaced and others become fearful. A more stable and predictable legal environment could encourage increased foreign direct investment in the medium term.


2020 ◽  
pp. 162-181
Author(s):  
Ireneusz Paweł Karolewski

This chapter focuses on Central and Eastern European (CEE) member states of the EU, and how they positioned themselves in the new constellation of conflicts within the EU in the aftermath of the multiple crisis. It deals mainly with the Visegrad Group (V4) and explores its ‘repositioning’ in regard to two crisis-ridden policy fields of the EU: controversies about the rule of law and the refugee crisis. With regard to the former issue, the chapter discusses Poland as the most prominent case among the CEE countries. Against this background, it highlights two specific aspects of domestic politics: the memory games that the V4 countries play with their past and the Euroscepticism of government circles as well as a broader public.


Author(s):  
Marcus Klamert

The EU is founded on ‘the Treaties’, i.e. the TEU and the TFEU (Article 1(2) TEU). It has been referred to as a ‘community of law’, and a ‘Community based on the rule of law, in as much as neither its Member States nor its institutions can avoid a review of the question whether the measures adopted by them are in conformity with the basic constitutional charter, the Treaty’.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document