The European Commission: Ami Fidèle or Faux Ami? Exploring the Commission’s Role as Amicus Curiae in ICSID Proceedings

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 70-91
Author(s):  
Alexander G. Leventhal ◽  
Akshay Shreedhar

ICSID’S Rule 37(2) introduced into the ICSID system a process by which a nondisputing party may make submissions as an amicus curiae. While amicus submissions have existed in the ICSID system for nearly 20 years, the majority of Rule 37(2) applications have been filed only recently by one party – the EU Commission – on one issue – the applicability of the arbitration agreements in intra- EU BIT S. In this article, we explore how tribunals and ad hoc committees have addressed these applications, which do not seek to provide insight on a particular issue in relation to the merits (as past amicus have), but to strip the ICSID process of jurisdiction over all intra- EU BIT disputes.

Author(s):  
Eulalia Rubio ◽  
Matthias Thiemann

This chapter traces the emergence and expansion of the use of EU budgetary means for financial instruments inside the EU from the 1980s onwards and its implications for the field of European development banking. It details how an initial focus on cooperation between the EIB and the EU Commission gave way to a diversification of cooperation partners for the implementation of financial instruments, now including national development banks. As financial instruments grew both in size and number, their attractiveness and importance for these development banks increased. The chapter details the tensions between the EIB and the national development banks in their lobbying attempts to structure access to these funds. These tensions came to the fore in the negotiations of the InvestEU fund in 2018, when the European Commission stripped the EIB of its unique access to the direct EU guarantee, instead opening up 25 percent of it to NDBs.


2021 ◽  
Vol 66 (05) ◽  
pp. 160-163
Author(s):  
Sevil Aliheydar Damirli ◽  

As in any community, coexistence and cooperation only works if it is well organized. In the EU, there are EU bodies for this purpose. We all know that living together of different members can often lead to a dispute. In the European Union, the subject of dispute can not only be the violation of primary law, but also the violation of secondary community law. In order to better understand the important role of the Commission in the EU, we examine in this paper its composition and Tasks. We know that the European Union is based on the rule of law. This means that every EU activity is based on treaties that have been accepted by all EU Member States on a voluntary and democratic basis. A contract is a binding agreement between the EU member states. It sets out the objectives of the EU, the rules governing the EU institutions, the decision-making process and relations between the EU and its Member States. Therefore it is important to adhere to these treaties to carry out community policy. According to Art. 258 and 259 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU, actions for breach of contract can be filed against a Member State by the EU Commission or another Member State (1, Art.258-259). For the European Commission, as the «Guardian of the Treaties», this option is a particularly important instrument of power politics that it can use against member states' governments that do not recognize or do not comply with the norms of Community law. In practice, the infringement procedures requested by the Commission are of particular importance for ensuring compliance with Community law by the Member States. In no other area does the Commission have so much power and independence against the Member States. Now we should take a closer look at the EU institution and especially the EU Commission.


2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-51
Author(s):  
Valentina Guidi

The transposition of the 2014 Directives on public procurement into the Italian law represented a unique opportunity to introduce an ambitious reform of the Italian public procurement system. A strategic document, issued in 2015 by the Italian Government with the support of the European Commission, provided the main objectives, as pointed out in the EU Directives, and the guidelines of the reform which were first transposed by the Italian institutions into the new legislation on public procurement, the Code of public contracts, in 2016 and are currently being implemented by the different actors involved.


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 103-122
Author(s):  
Ewa Kaczan-Winiarska

The Austrian government is extremely sceptical about the accession negotiations which are conducted by the European Commission on behalf of the European Union with Turkey and calls for the negotiation process to end. Serious reservations of Vienna have been raised by the current political situation in Turkey under the rule of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, as well as by the standards of democracy in Turkey, which differ greatly from European standards. Serious deficiencies in rule of law, freedom of speech and independence of the judiciary, confirmed in the latest European Commission report on Turkey, do not justify, from Vienna’s point of view, the continuation of talks with Ankara on EU membership. In fact, Austria’s scepticism about the European perspective for Turkey has a longer tradition. This was marked previously in 2005 when the accession negotiations began. Until now, Austria’s position has not had enough clout within the European arena. Pragmatic cooperation with Turkey as a strategic partner of the EU, both in the context of the migration crisis and security policy, proved to be a key factor. The question is whether Austria, which took over the EU presidency from 1.7.2018, will be able to more strongly accentuate its reservations about Turkey and even build an alliance of Member States strong enough to block Turkey’s accession process.


2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 55-63
Author(s):  
EKATERINA A. KOPYLOVA ◽  

The article considers the international legal regime of immunities and privileges of amicus curiae prosecutors of international criminal courts which are intended to ensure independent and unhindered performance of their functions in prosecuting crimes against the administration of justice. Due to the lack of doctrinal research in this field, whether in the domestic or foreign science of international law, the study is characterized by scientific novelty. Its empirical basis is constituted of the provisions of international treaties governing the immunities and privileges of staff of the ad hoc international criminal tribunals and the International Criminal Court. It is noted that today the state of international legal regulation of immunities and privileges of amicus curiae prosecutors is not quite satisfactory as it contains significant gaps. Two possible approaches to determining the scope of the immunities and privileges of amicus curiae prosecutors are identified: the first based on their status and the second – on the functions they perform. Their critical analysis leads to the conclusion that the functional approach is more in line with the principle of equality of arms in international criminal proceedings. As a result of its application, the scope of the immunities and privileges of amicus curiae prosecutors coincides with the scope of the immunities and privileges granted to staff of the Offices of Prosecutors at the international criminal tribunals.


2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 284-301
Author(s):  
Salvatore Fabio Nicolosi ◽  
Lisette Mustert

In a resolution adopted on 1 February 2018, the European Committee of the Regions noted that a legislative proposal of the European Commission concerning a Regulation that changes the rules governing the EU regional funds for 2014-2020 did not comply with the principle of subsidiarity. Accordingly, the Committee considered challenging the legislative proposal before the Court of Justice if the proposal was formally agreed upon. Although at a later stage the European Commission decided to take into account the Committee’s argument and amended the proposal accordingly, such a context offers the chance to investigate more in detail the role of the Committee of the Regions in the legislative process of the EU and, more in particular, its role as a watchdog of the principle of subsidiarity. This paper aims to shed light on a rather neglected aspect of the EU constitutional practice, such as the potential of the Committee of the Regions to contribute to the legislative process, and answer the question of whether this Committee is the right body to guarantee compliance with the principle of subsidiarity.


2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 80
Author(s):  
Eva Eckert ◽  
Oleksandra Kovalevska

In the European Union, the concern for sustainability has been legitimized by its politically and ecologically motivated discourse disseminated through recent policies of the European Commission and the local as well as international media. In the article, we question the very meaning of sustainability and examine the European Green Deal, the major political document issued by the EC in 2019. The main question pursued in the study is whether expectations verbalized in the Green Deal’s plans, programs, strategies, and developments hold up to the scrutiny of critical discourse analysis. We compare the Green Deal’s treatment of sustainability to how sustainability is presented in environmental and social science scholarship and point out that research, on the one hand, and the politically motivated discourse, on the other, do not correlate and often actually contradict each other. We conclude that sustainability discourse and its keywords, lexicon, and phraseology have become a channel through which political institutions in the EU such as the European Commission sideline crucial environmental issues and endorse their own presence. The Green Deal discourse shapes political and institutional power of the Commission and the EU.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document