The status of English in the European Union after Brexit. Is there a way to fit English in the EU context?

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Vasiliki Karamerou
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Eu

scholarly journals Den Stier das Tanzen lehren?

2012 ◽  
Vol 42 (168) ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas Fisahn
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Financial Market ◽  
Debt Crisis ◽  
Social Benefits ◽  
The European Union ◽  
German Government ◽  
Capital Movements ◽  
Authoritarian State ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Eu

The crisis of the European Union cannot be solved by austerity programs. Therefore a closer look at the reasons of the crisis seems to be reasonable, which includes a description of the development of the EU from 1951 to present times. The Union started as a tariff union and evolved through different steps to an order of competitive states. The main fields of competition between the states are taxes and social costs, which leads to tax dumping and a race to the bottom in social benefits. Starting in 1990 the EU achieved the status of an open financial market, with the duty of deregulation of capital movements being stipulated in Treaties. In the end the problem is not a debt crisis but a crisis of the structure of the European Union. The solution – which especially the German government prefers – may be the first step on the way to an authoritarian state.

9. European Union law and institutions

2021 ◽  
pp. 124-141
Author(s):  
Colin Faragher
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Cooperation Agreement ◽  
The Status ◽  
Fundamental Rights And Freedoms ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter discusses the Treaty framework and sources of EU law as well as the institutions of the EU. It covers the legal background to the UK’s departure from the EU, the legal process through which the UK left the EU, the key provisions of the EU–UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement (2020), and the European Union (Future Relationship) Act 2020. This chapter also discusses the effect of the UK’s departure from the EU on the status of the sources of EU law and the effect of leaving the EU on the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms as well as failure to transpose a Directive into national law and the effect of leaving the EU on the Francovich principle.

Remarks on Art. I-52 of the Constitutional Treaty: New Aspects of the European Ecclesiastical Law?

2005 ◽  
Vol 6 (11) ◽  
pp. 1719-1729 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michał Rynkowski
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Religious Communities ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Constitutional Treaty ◽  
Ecclesiastical Law ◽  
Religious Associations ◽  
The Status ◽  
Ec Law ◽  
First Time ◽  
The Eu

The question of churches and religious communities in the EU/EC law arose for the first time in 1997, when Declaration No. 11 on the status of churches and non-confessional organisations was attached to the Amsterdam Treaty. According to this Declaration, “The European Union will respect and does not prejudice the status under national law of churches and religious associations or communities in the Member States. The European Union will equally respect the status of philosophical and non-confessional organisations.” The content of this Declaration was commented on many times by distinguished experts of the European ecclesiastical law. Art. I-52 of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (Constitutional Treaty/CT) repeats in paragraph one and two Declaration No. 11, and introduces in paragraph three a provision on dialogue between the EU and religious bodies: “Recognising their identity and their specific contribution, the Union shall maintain an open, transparent and regular dialogue with these churches and organisations.”

scholarly journals Why withdrawal from the European Union is undemocratic

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 436-465 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tore Vincents Olsen ◽  
Christian F. Rostbøll
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Member State ◽  
Individual Member ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Status ◽  
Political Units ◽  
Article 50 ◽  
The Eu

The Lisbon Treaty from 2009 introduced the possibility for individual member states to withdraw from the European Union (EU) on the basis of a unilateral decision. In June 2016 the United Kingdom decided to leave the EU invoking article 50 of the treaty. But is withdrawal democratically legitimate? In fact, the all-affected principle suggests that it is undemocratic for subunits to leave larger political units when it adversely affects other citizens without including them in the decision. However, it is unclear what the currency of this affectedness is and, hence, why withdrawal would be undemocratic. We argue that it is the effect of withdrawal on the status of citizens as free and equal that is decisive and that explains why unilateral withdrawal of subunits from larger units is democratically illegitimate. Moreover, on the ‘all-affected status principle’ that we develop, even multilaterally agreed withdrawal is undemocratic because the latter diminishes the future ability of citizens to make decisions together regarding issues that affect their status as free and equal. On this basis, we conclude that it is undemocratic for a member state such as the United Kingdom to withdraw from the EU.

scholarly journals THE CONCEPT OF “THIRD SAFE COUNTRY” IN THE EUROPEAN UNION LAW

2018 ◽  
pp. 90-98
Author(s):  
N. Mushak
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Geneva Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Political Group ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Eu

The article investigates the concept of "safe third country" in the law of the European Union. The article analyzes a number of international legal instruments that define the content of the concept of "safe third country". The research provides the definition of "safe third country". In particular, the safe third country should be determined as the country whose territory a person is crossing through the territory of the state where such person is seeking for the asylum, with the ability of that person to apply for asylum and use proper and relevant procedures. In fact, the concept of "safe third country" is applied by the EU Member States only when it is safe to guarantee that foreigners will be able to use the fair asylum procedures on the territory through they passed, and such persons shall be provided the effective protection of their rights. The article also determines the cases of the concept application by the EU Member States. In particular, the competent authorities of the EU Member States are confident that the third country the following aspects should be guaranted: the life and liberty of the applicant are not at risk due to race, religion, nationality, membership to a particular social or political group; the principle of prohibition of expulsion under the Geneva Convention on the Status of Refugees, 1951 shall be observed; the principle of prohibition of expulsion in case of violation of the right to be subjected to torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment envisaged by international law is been respected; there is the possibility to apply for a refugee status and to receive protection under the Geneva Convention on the Status of Refugees 1951.

scholarly journals Commissaire Général Aux Réfugiés et Aux Apatrides v. Mostafa Lounani (C.J.E.U.)

2018 ◽  
Vol 57 (6) ◽  
pp. 1080-1096
Author(s):  
Sarah Progin-Theuerkauf
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Geneva Convention ◽  
United Nations Security Council ◽  
The European Union ◽  
International Protection ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Status ◽  
Grand Chamber ◽  
The Eu

On January 31, 2017, the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union rendered its judgment in the case Commissaire général aux réfugiés et aux apatrides v. Mostafa Lounani. In the judgment, the Court had to interpret the exclusion grounds of the EU Qualification Directive of 2004 that in its Article 12(2) has literally duplicated Article 1F of the 1951 Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees. It had to answer the question of whether an applicant for international protection can be excluded from being a refugee even though it is not established that he himself committed, attempted to commit, or threatened to commit a terrorist act as defined by the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council, but has “just” been convicted of participation in the activities of a terrorist group.

scholarly journals The Three Levels of Citizenship within the European Union

2014 ◽  
Vol 15 (5) ◽  
pp. 751-763 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rainer Bauböck
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Member State ◽  
Basic Feature ◽  
Democratic Legitimacy ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Union Citizenship ◽  
The Status ◽  
Level Model ◽  
Standard Of Comparison ◽  
The Eu

European Union citizenship is derived from Member State nationality. This fact often has been considered a “birth defect” to be overcome by either disconnecting EU citizenship from Member State citizenship or by reversing the relationship in a federal model so that Member State citizenship would be derived from that of the Union. I argue in this essay that derivative citizenship in a union of states can be defended as a potentially stable and democratically attractive basic feature of the architecture of the EU polity where EU citizenship is perceived of as one layer in a multi-level model of democratic membership in a union of states such as the EU. This perspective is not a defense of the status quo, but rather allows for—or even requires—a series of reforms addressing a number of inconsistencies and democratic deficiencies in the current citizenship regime.Most academics writing about Union citizenship tend to compare it to that which they know best: Nation State citizenship. It then comes as no surprise when they conclude that the current construction of EU citizenship is internally incoherent, externally not sufficiently inclusive, and also lacking in democratic legitimacy. To a certain degree, I agree with this criticism; however, such authors often apply the wrong standard of comparison and therefore are likely to promote faulty solutions. As the EU Treaties clearly have spelled out since the 1997 Treaty of Amsterdam, EU citizenship is complementary or additional to Member State nationality without replacing it. National citizenship is a constitutive element of EU citizenship and therefore cannot serve as an external standard of comparison.

A geography of debauchery

Focaal ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 2008 (51) ◽  
pp. 113-131 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gustav Peebles
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Spatial Organization ◽  
Ethnographic Research ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Migrant Laborers ◽  
The Status ◽  
Transnational City ◽  
Spatial Imagination ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

By comparing the spatial organization of Swedish labor and leisure practices today with the movements and stereotypes tied to previous generations of Sweden's sizeable population of so-called "vagrants," this article studies the impact of state policy on the spatial imagination of both citizens and other sojourners within its bounds. Because the ethnographic research for the article took place in a new transnational city that is being created by the European Union and various local proponents, the article then considers the same issue at the EU level, to pursue the question of the EU's "state-ness" and the status of migrant laborers within that emerging polity.

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 Cultures in Dialogue. Institutional and Individual Challenges for EU Institutions and EU Citizens from the Perspective of Legal Linguistics

2017 ◽  
Vol 24 (46) ◽  
pp. 25
Author(s):  
Karin Luttermann
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Language Model ◽  
Language Models ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Native Languages ◽  
The Status ◽  
Rules Of Procedure ◽  
Global Language ◽  
The Eu

In the European Union, numerous cultures have entered into dialogue. Currently, there are 23 official languages (EU languages) and therefore 506 possible language combinations for translation. This makes demands on the EU institutions and on EU citizens as well. Linguistic divergence makes legal certainty a rather shaky matter. There are also divergences from the EU linguistic regime regarding the official and the working languages. For reasons of efficiency, the institutions of the Union communicate internally in merely a small number of working languages, for the most part without any basis for this in the Rules of Procedure. The Court of Justice of the European Union traditionally uses French. All documents are translated from the language of the case into the working language. Although the decision, formulated in French, is re-translated into the language of the case, this translated version is classified as the original version and not as a translation. This is of importance for the status of authenticity because the decision only has full legal effect in the language of the case.Traditional language models favour a reduction of the EU languages. Their representatives argue either with regard to the practice of the use of three languages in the EU institutions, or they advocate English as a global language, or they call for neutral languages. In contrast, the European Reference Language Model, which is developed along the lines of legal linguistics, suggests a concept of reference and native languages. It would lead to a reduction in the translation load in Brussels and Luxembourg. But first and foremost, it would be able to improve the linguistic quality of legal documents (e.g., directives, regulations) and therefore also their application to legal practice (e.g. legal certainty, comprehensibility of legal texts). At the same time, the model respects the dignity of each EU Member State in the form of its language.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document