scholarly journals Free movement of persons as a component of the value system in the European Union

2019 ◽  
pp. 6-14
Author(s):  
Iryna Habro
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Value System ◽  
Association Agreement ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Freedom Of Movement ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

The article deals with topical issues of regulating the freedom of movement of individuals as a component of the value system and the key right of citizens in the European Union. After all, freedom of movement itself includes a whole set of rights, which are both a guarantee of other natural rights and a sign of the rule of law. At the core of European values are liberal fundamental rights and freedoms, democratic principles of government, as well as the rule of law and social state. With the creation and development of the European Communities, the regulation of the right of nationals of Member States to move and reside freely has acquired not only national significance, but also a regional (cross–border) scale, which is an example for other integration entities. The European Union is trying to regulate the freedom of movement of individuals in a unified and at the same time as individualized way as possible. This is what is relevant for Ukraine in the context of European integration, because in Ukraine, some of the society has some fears over the loss of sovereignty through accession to the EU. Attention is drawn to the freedom of movement of all categories of EU and third–country nationals. Freedom of movement for individuals within the European Union covers the complex of rights of EU citizens, as well as their family members, for free movement, residence, employment, economic activity and enjoyment of all social rights in each Member State of the European Union, regardless of their nationality. The specific features of the exercise of the right of free movement within the EU for Ukrainian citizens in the context of the Association Agreement with the EU and the Visa–free Agreement between the EU and Ukraine are also identified. The provisions on working conditions apply only to citizens of Ukraine or EU Member States who work legally on the territory of the other party to the Agreement. The Association Agreement is not about freedom of movement for workers.

scholarly journals DYNAMICS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN UKRAINE AND THE EU: PROSPECTS AND NEW CHALLENGES

2020 ◽  
pp. 17-27
Author(s):  
I. Berezovska
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Integration ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Integration Policy ◽  
Association Agreement ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Main Challenge ◽  
The Eu

The entry into force of the Association Agreement with the European Union was a fateful event for the contemporary history of Ukraine. Currently, both components of the association: political one, which consists in spreading European values to Ukraine, and economic one, which involves Ukraine's integration into the EU internal market in exchange for legislation approximation, are without exaggeration fundamental factors for further development of Ukraine. The results of the previous years of the Association Agreement implementation testify to both significant achievements and a number of problems in Ukraine's fulfillment of its association with the EU “homework”. The article is devoted to the analysis of dynamics and the recent trends in the process of the Agreement implementation. As a result of the political changes that took place in Ukraine in 2019, including the election of a new president, parliament and government, European integration work on the implementation of the Association Agreement began in the new conditions. The improvement of the national institutional mechanism designed to ensure better coordination of work on the implementation of the Agreement between the competent authorities is among the positive trends in the process of its implementation. The fundamental legal principles and basic directions of work on Agreement updating are analyzed. It is proved that the prospect of updating has become an effective impetus to improve implementation processes. By initiating such an update, in order to strengthen its position in the negotiations with the EU, the Ukrainian side is forced to objectively assess the effectiveness of the Agreement implementation in certain areas and to intensify the completion of processes that are significantly behind. A new challenge in the process of implementing the Association Agreement was the emergence of the pandemic factor in 2020. The introduction of national quarantine and the incidence rate have significantly shifted priorities and affected European integration processes, both within Ukraine and at the EU level. At the same time, it was stressed that the situation to ensure the Rule of law, in particular, the fight against corruption is the main challenge not only to obligations fulfillment under the agreement, but also to the entire European integration policy of Ukraine. It is noted that the decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine to repeal a significant part of anti-corruption legislation threatens the further integration of Ukraine with the EU. It was stressed that the future of not only Ukraine but also the region as a whole depends on whether the Association Agreement with the European Union will continue to serve as a transformational force capable of overcoming the weakness of the Rule of law within the country.

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

2021 ◽  
pp. 305-331
Author(s):  
Artur Nowak-Far
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
International Legal Order ◽  
High Level ◽  
The Eu

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.

Free Movement and Discrimination: Evidence from Europe, the United States, and Canada

2013 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Willem Maas
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
International Migration ◽  
Mutual Recognition ◽  
The United States ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Good Test ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

Abstract This article surveys some general lessons to be drawn from the tension between the promise of citizenship to deliver equality and the particularistic drive to maintain diversity. Democratic states tend to guarantee free movement within their territory to all citizens, as a core right of citizenship. Similarly, the European Union guarantees (as the core right of EU citizenship) the right to live and the right to work anywhere within EU territory to EU citizens and members of their families. Such rights reflect the project of equality and undifferentiated individual rights for all who have the status of citizen. But they are not uncontested. Within the EU, several member states propose to reintroduce border controls and to restrict access for EU citizens who claim social assistance. Similar tensions and attempts to discourage freedom of movement also exist in other political systems, and the article gives examples from the United States and Canada. Within democratic states, particularly federal ones and others where decentralized jurisdictions are responsible for social welfare provision, it thus appears that some citizens can be more equal than others. Principles such as benefit portability, prohibition of residence requirements for access to programs or rights, and mutual recognition of qualifications and credentials facilitate the free flow of people within states and reflect the attempt to eliminate internal borders. Within the growing field of migration studies, most research focuses on international migration, movement between states, involving international borders. But migration across jurisdictional boundaries within states is at least as important as international migration. Within the European Union, free movement often means changing residence across jurisdictional boundaries within a political system with a common citizenship, even though EU citizenship is not traditional national citizenship. The EU is thus a good test of the tension between the equality promised by common citizenship and the diversity institutionalized by borders.

6. Free movement of persons

2020 ◽  
pp. 121-153
Author(s):  
Matthew J. Homewood
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Member State ◽  
General Principle ◽  
Internal Market ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
Free Movement Of Persons ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

This chapter discusses the law on the free movement of persons in the EU. Free movement of persons is one of the four ‘freedoms’ of the internal market. Original EC Treaty provisions granted free movement rights to the economically active—workers, persons exercising the right of establishment, and persons providing services in another Member State. The Treaty also set out the general principle of non-discrimination on grounds of nationality, ‘within the scope of application of the Treaty’. All these provisions are now contained in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). Early secondary legislation granted rights to family members, students, retired persons, and persons of independent means. The Citizenship Directive 2004/38 consolidated this legislation.

Calls of Duty: Romanian Politicians’ Deontological Discursive Strategies for Securing Free Movement in the European Union

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 43-66
Author(s):  
Saila Heinikoski
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Prime Ministers ◽  
Discursive Strategies ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Different Types ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

This article discusses how the right to free movement within the European Union is presented as a matter of obligation, a duty of the other EU member states, in the discourse of Romanian Presidents and Prime Ministers (2005–2015). An examination of speeches and other statements from these politicians illuminates Romanian political reactions during the period when Romania became an EU member state, and reflects perceptions of Europeanness and European agreements. These issues take on an additional contemporary significance in the context of the Brexit negotiations, and they also add to the broader debate on whether EU norms and obligations are seen as being both just and equally applied. By analysing different types of argumentative topoi, I examine the deontological (obligation-based) argumentation employed in the free movement context. Furthermore, I examine to what extent these arguments are invoked in support of the right to free movement and who this right applies to. I argue that for Romanian politicians, deontological free movement arguments are connected to other states’ compliance with European treaties and to demands for equal application of European rules without discrimination, or the delegation of responsibility to others. This manifested itself most frequently in the calls for the EU and its member states to do their duty by treating Romanians equally to other EU citizens.

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 EUROPEAN UNION DISTINCTIVENESS: A CONCEPT OF THE RULE OF LAW

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 157-171
Author(s):  
Adnan Mahmutovic ◽  
Helza Nova Lita
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Government Officials ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Eu Integration ◽  
Legal Principle ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Eu

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.

Saving Judicial Independence: A Threat to the Preliminary Ruling Mechanism?

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-27
Author(s):  
Charlotte Reyns
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Judicial Independence ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Eu

Admissibility of questions for preliminary ruling – Independence of courts and tribunals in the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union as Dorsch Consult criterion under Article 267 TFEU – Independence of courts and tribunals in the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union as element of the Rule of Law value under Article 19 TEU – Structural inadmissibility of questions for preliminary ruling as perverse consequence of the attempts to safeguard independence of the EU judiciary

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 The “Thick” Rule of Law and Mutual Trust in the European Union

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-17
Author(s):  
Juha Raitio
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Good Governance ◽  
Mutual Trust ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Material Concept ◽  
The Eu

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document