scholarly journals Exploring Correspondence of Discursive Configuration behind Common EU Immigration Policy: Comparative Studies on Multi-level Policy Discourses of the EU and its Three Major Member States

2016 ◽  
Vol null (44) ◽  
pp. 67-104
Author(s):  
Lee, Hun-Young ◽  
Sae Won Chung
Keyword(s):  
Immigration Policy ◽  
Comparative Studies ◽  
Member States ◽  
Multi Level ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Policy Discourses

Wspólnotowy wymiar polityki imigracyjnej Unii Europejskiej w obliczu wyzwań związanych ze zwiększonym napływem imigrantów w 2015 r.

2017 ◽  
pp. 82-107
Author(s):  
Michał Skorzycki
Keyword(s):  
Immigration Policy ◽  
Refugee Crisis ◽  
Member States ◽  
European Immigration ◽  
New System ◽  
Selection Of ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Crisis Situations

The article comprises the overview of the essential legal, administrative and financial means that the EU has at its disposal in case of rapid influx of immigrants, as well as a selection of major obstacles to the use of these tools, based on observation of the activities of the EU and its member states taken up to deal with the aforementioned situation which took place in 2015. Using the abovementioned observation and an analysis of relevant documents, it is argued that the refugee crisis of 2015 has revealed the necessity of a profound institutionalisation of the European immigration policy as the most effective way to overcome difficulties in response to such situations. The analysis leads also to the conclusion that the EU is caught in a dilemma of either suspending the Dublin system in crisis situations or creating a new system of intensive support for border member states.

Labour Immigration Policy in the European Union: How to Overcome the Tension between Further Europeanisation and the Protection of National Interests?

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 198-223
Author(s):  
Jean-Baptiste Farcy
Keyword(s):  
Immigration Policy ◽  
Added Value ◽  
The European Union ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Labour Immigration ◽  
Eu Directives ◽  
The Eu

Abstract This article critically assesses EU harmonisation in the field of labour immigration. It argues that EU directives are limited both in scope and intensity which explains their relatively low effectiveness and added value. Given the current political and institutional context, the article claims that a truly common labour immigration policy is unrealistic. Labour immigration remains a predominantly national prerogative and EU rules have done little to overcome normative competition between EU Member States. Looking forward, the EU should adopt complementary measures to Member States’ policies. The role of the EU in this sensitive policy area should be better defined and justified, in particular in relation to the principle of subsidiarity.

EU immigration policy prospects dim further on crisis

2015 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Immigration Policy ◽  
Economic Effects ◽  
Individual Member ◽  
Current Crisis ◽  
Demographic Ageing ◽  
Member States ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Economic Developments ◽  
National Governments ◽  
The Eu

Subject EU immigration policy. Significance The EU has previously legislated to encourage the immigration of workers into the bloc, to counter the negative economic effects of demographic ageing. However, immigration policy is largely determined by individual member states. The results of EU pro-immigration schemes have been weak. National responses to the current influx of refugees and migrants have highlighted underlying member states differences over immigration, driven by economic, demographic and cultural divergences. Consequently, impetus for further EU pro-immigration action had largely stalled even before the current crisis. Impacts Asymmetric economic developments across the continent will continue to impede a common immigration strategy. Any opening of more legal avenues to convert asylum-seekers into economic immigrants will remain a matter for national governments. The current crisis will increase distrust and frictions among member states, while boosting populist forces. The crisis will bring into sharp relief the distinction between extra- and intra-EU immigration as a way of filling labour market gaps.

Proportionality in EU Law: A Balancing Act?

2013 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
pp. 439-466 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wolf Sauter
Keyword(s):  
Individual Rights ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Constitutional Review ◽  
Multi Level ◽  
Proportionality Principle ◽  
The Eu

AbstractThe proportionality principle plays a key role in constitutional review of public acts. Its use legitimises the constitutional claims of EU law in the context of a multi-level polity system. The application of proportionality in the EU differs based on whether legal acts of the EU or of its Member States are concerned. In the former case, a manifestly disproportionate test is usually applied, while in the latter case, a least restrictive means test (LRM) is normally used. Both are conditioned by the degree of integration achieved. In future, the use of the principle may involve increasing attention being paid to individual rights.

scholarly journals Europeanisation effects in the court jurisprudence

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 261-275
Author(s):  
Katalin Gombos
Keyword(s):  
Civil Law ◽  
Comparative Law ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
European Law ◽  
Legal Practice ◽  
Member States ◽  
Basic Premise ◽  
Main Area ◽  
Multi Level ◽  
The Eu

Summary Nowadays, the notion of Europeanisation, which has formerly been used as a description for multi-level governance, prevails also in the area of law. Legal Europeanisation is a process that appears in the interactions of legal systems of the Member States between one another, as well as between European law and the laws of the Member States. Its main area is the appearance of European legal elements in the legal practice of Member States. At some point, the court practice of Member States may affect European law, as well. Due to the occurrence of comparative law elements, interactions can be observed between courts in the EU. According to our basic premise, the interactions can be best observed through the practice of different courts. This article aims to prove this premise by establishing different guiding principles through further Hungarian court decisions in the field of civil law.

scholarly journals The challenge of comparing EU Member States judicial data

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alina Onţanu ◽  
Marco Velicogna
Keyword(s):  
Case Definitions ◽  
Member States ◽  
Extreme Caution ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Justice Systems ◽  
Key Indicators ◽  
Case Number ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Policy Discourses

The number of cases is measured through a broad range of quantitative variables used in various studies and policy papers as key indicators of the volume of activity of national courts. Additionally, these variables, together with other data (e.g. time needed to resolve a case, number of judges, etc.) are part of a broader discourse on the efficiency of justice systems. However, such discourse can be problematic when data is not actually comparable. To raise the attention on this very relevant but poorly explored topic, this paper analyses the comparability of the caseload data by focusing on apparently simple categories like civil and commercial litigious or non-litigious cases and administrative cases. The EU Justice Scoreboard and CEPEJ data and national case definitions in France, Italy, and Romania are used to assess the most relevant justice EU datasets. The findings point towards significant differences between analysed systems that suggest extreme caution should be exercised when using such data for scholarly, legislative or policy discourses.

scholarly journals FORMATION OF THE MODERN CONCEPT OF EUROPE IN THE CONTEXT OF SOCIAL NEO-INSTITUTIONALISM

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 221
Author(s):  
Andrii Falkovskyi ◽  
Olga Dzhezhik
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Future Development ◽  
Scientific Discourse ◽  
Modern Concept ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Multi Level ◽  
Modern Europe ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

In the scientific discourse of the XXI century, the concept of modern Europe is being reformed under the influence of reforming the activities of the European Union. Scientific publications and research are conducted based on a study of the policies of the European Union countries, EU institutions and structural elements, and the problems that arise in the process of activity and development. The concept of modern Europe is a general term that embraces European values, the European standard of living, European policy, and European priorities, giving the concept of European studies a stable association with the European Union. In this context, the main causes and consequences for the scientific discourse, political practice, and future development of European countries must be considered. Neoinstitutionalists have attempted to analyse institutions based on atomistic methodology. Institutional transformations, processes of intra-European integration and enlargement of the EU, discussions on membership and exit from the EU raise issues of identity and development of governance in Europe. Europeanisation can be seen as a discourse, governance, and institutionalisation. The first interpretation emphasizes that modern Europe is a discourse, not only ideological but also administrative. In this sense, Europeanisation can be a means of expression of institutional globalization through domestic policy. In the article, the hypothesis is put forward and proved that the interpretation of the concept of modern Europe directly correlates with the future development of the European Union and its members. The dissemination of exclusive practices will help to spread the ideas of radical “Eurosceptics”, which could lead to the collapse of the European Union. The inclusive aspect of the concept of Europe is represented by the ideas of “Europeists” who, based on the common history, culture, mentality of the peoples of Europe, substantiate the positive influence on the state development of integration, non-state cooperation, and extrapolation of EU norms and principles into the new territories of Europe. There are three main reasons for shaping the concept of Europe as the boundaries of EU policy: The consolidation of political positions of the European Union and its growing role as an actor in world politics; Essence of the EU enlargement concepts; Features of development within the European community. The modern concept of Europe is considered in the context of a modern multi-level governance model. Therefore, Europeanisation is the interaction of different layers of interests, including structures of regional, multi-level governance, legitimacy of domestic and foreign policy. The impact of the multi-level governance system on the functioning of public administration systems in the Member States and neighbouring countries is considered. Four approaches are identified based on the analysis of relationships between different levels of governance. The necessity of formulating new theoretical paradigms defining the relations between the Member States and the technocratic institutions of the EU, as well as between the Europeanised system of national agencies and the ministries overseeing their activities, has been proved.

Doubtful it Stood…: Competence and Power in European Monetary and Constitutional Law in the Aftermath of the CJEU's OMT Judgment

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 971-1002 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heiko Sauer
Keyword(s):  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Assistance Programs ◽  
German Constitution ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
Multi Level ◽  
Constitutional Identity ◽  
The Eu

Quite unsurprisingly, the CJEU has held that the ECB's OMT program does not violate EU law. In accordance with this holding, I argue in the first part of this note that the OMT program does not transgress the ECB's mandate under the Treaty, which is often interpreted too narrowly, in particular by German legal scholars. Furthermore, I argue that a violation of the prohibition of monetary financing of the member States as enshrined in article 123, para 1 TFEU cannot be inferred from the ECB's announcement of a program, which has never been implemented. In any case, there is clearly no manifest and grave transgression of EU competences which, according to the German Federal Constitutional Court's (FCC)Honeywelldoctrine, is required for an ultra vires finding. The second part of this note shows that the FCC's doctrine regarding transgressions of competences by EU organs (ultra vires review) is not only unconvincing as a matter of principle but also and worse (as on premises we can always reasonably disagree) not consistently applied to the OMT program. The note also objects to the Court's somewhat trendy blending of ultra vires and constitutional identity review of EU law through which it increasingly conceals its approach of applying the so-called constitutional constraints of European integration to the EU organs' conduct. The forthcoming FCC judgment is therefore less important as regards the quite foreseeable finding on the lawfulness of the OMT program but – hopefully – of vital importance as it might embody a more coherent relaunch of the FCC's standards of judicial review with regard to EU law.The judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on the European Central Bank's (ECB) 2012 announcement of future Outright Monetary Transactions (OMT) comes as no surprise. It had not been expected that the CJEU would interpret the European Economic and Monetary Union's (EMU) Treaty provisions the way the FCC had “suggested.” Neither had it seemed conceivable that the CJEU would reject the FCC's request for a preliminary ruling holding that a legally non-binding assessment of the EU action's lawfulness could not be requested under Article 267 TFEU. The judgment had nevertheless been awaited for with tension for two reasons: First, in the vigorous and in part very critical debate about the ECB's competences under the TFEU and its alleged ultra vires action a judgment by the CJEU was necessary to settle the fundamental European law issues at stake. This is all the more important with regard to the ECB's current Expanded Asset Purchase Program (EAPP) as well as its interconnection with the European Stability Mechanism's (ESM) financial assistance programs. The CJEU's holdings on the ECB's competences within the EMU framework are discussed in the first part of this note regarding the distinction between monetary and economic policy (infra section A.I.) and the interpretation of Article 123, paragraph 1 TFEU which prohibits monetary financing of the member States by the ECB (infra section A.II.). Second, it was clear that the judgment would shape the new stage in the changing and sometimes explosive on-off relationship between the CJEU and the FCC, the stage entered into by Karlsruhe's first ever request for a preliminary ruling. The FCC had fortified its ultra vires doctrine and clearly indicated its readiness not to follow the CJEU but to insist on the notorious “last word” of the German Constitution instead. Thus, the second part of this note discusses the constitutional legal premises of the FCC's approach and the procedural and substantial manner in which the FCC tries to scrutinize the ECB's OMT program (infra sections B.I. and B.II.). In this context, possible scenarios for the upcoming judgment (infra section C.I.) and consequences for European multi-level constitutionalism (infra section C.II.) will be discussed.

scholarly journals Multilevel Governance of Maritime Border Surveillance in the EU and Accountability

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-86
Author(s):  
Åsa Gustafsson
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
Coast Guard ◽  
Multilevel System ◽  
Member States ◽  
Baltic Sea Region ◽  
Multi Level ◽  
The Baltic ◽  
Individual Accountability ◽  
Border Surveillance ◽  
The Eu

The article strives to examine the accountability of the Swedish Coast Guard in the field of maritime border surveillance. Border management, including border surveillance, lies close to states’ core interests, such as sovereignty and security, and are inherently sensitive to human rights violations. This has affected the developments of the regulatory framework at the EU level in different ways. The question is posed how EU law, and the instruments that are directly applicable in the member states, impact on the accountability of the Swedish Coast Guard in the field of maritime border surveillance. The member state in focus is Sweden and in that sense it deals with maritime border surveillance in the Baltic Sea region, and not the Mediterranean Sea region, which has often been the debated issue due to the migration pressure in that region. However, it is of interest to examine also an actor in a Nordic EU member state, taking into account inter alia the vast fragmentation regarding authorities with responsibilities in border management in the EU. Also the multilevel system of rules as well as of actors – Frontex and the member states’ authorities – makes it relevant to make such an investigation. Whether multi-level regulation promotes or undermines accountability is to some extent dependent on which concept of accountability one holds. When applying a concept of individual accountability, the existence of a range of accountability avenues regarding the Coast Guard’s activities transpires as quite satisfactory. However, if more actors would be involved in the Coast Guard’s maritime border surveillance activities based on the existing multilevel system of actors and rules, this would negatively impact the possibilities to hold the different actors accountable, for instance since different ‘accountability rules’ apply to different actors.

Administrative Law and Multi-Level Administration: An EU and US Comparison

2009 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 211-246
Author(s):  
Catherine Donnelly
Keyword(s):  
The United States ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Us States ◽  
The Us ◽  
Multi Level ◽  
Eu And Us ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

AbstractThe aim of this chapter is to assess what, if anything, administrative law can demonstrate about multi-level administration in the European Union and the United States. The particular focus of the examination is not on the content of administrative law in each legal order, but rather on the impact of EU and US federal administrative law on the Member States and US States respectively. It will be seen that, while US federal administrative law has primarily only influential effect on US States, EU administrative law is often binding on Member States. This observation challenges presumptions often made, particularly in political science, as to the degrees of inter-penetration in administration in the EU and the US. It will be argued that the cause of divergence is largely derived from differing judicial attitudes as to the fundamental tenets of the co-operation between the different levels of administration, and indeed, more general understandings of federalism in the two jurisdictions. In this way, this study also provides a useful prism through which to consider integration in the EU and US more broadly.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document