scholarly journals The dialectic relation between the national and the European constitutional identity in the framework of European Constitutional Law

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 10-24
Author(s):  
Francisco Balaguer Callejón

This article intends to reflect on the concept of constitutional identities of states in the frame of the dialectic relationship between the legal order of the European Union and the national legal orders. Both the conflictual dimension of the constitutional identity and the relations of confluence that that can maximize are explored. It concludes with an open and flexible understanding of the concept of constitutional identity which can benefit the evolution of the national constitutional law in an Europeist sense and the progressive transformation of the European legal system in aconstitutional sense.

Author(s):  
Javier Tajadura Tejada

Este artículo analiza en primer lugar el significado de la secesión en el Derecho Internacional y en el Derecho Constitucional. Asimismo, examina cómo se aborda el fenómeno de la secesión en el Derecho comunitario europeo. Esto obliga a estudiar dos tipos de problemas: por un lado, el de la secesión de un Estado miembro respecto de la propia Unión; por otro, el de la fragmentación de un Estado miembro por la secesión de una parte de su territorio. La conclusión es que la conservación o fragmentación de un Estado miembro de la Unión Europea no es un asunto interno: la secesión de partes de un territorio afecta al sistema político europeo en su conjunto, en la medida en que es una forma de integración federal donde no caben actos unilaterales que quebranten el principio de lealtad federal de la Unión y la ciudadanía europea que ha ido conformándose en las últimas décadas.This article analyzes the meaning of secession in international and constitutional law. It also examines the phenomenon of secession in European law. This requires studying two types of problems: the secession of a member state of the European Union and the fragmentation of a Member State for the secession of part of its territory. The conclusion is that conservation or fragmentation of a Member State of the European Union is not an internal matter. In our opinión, the political and legal system of the Union can be characterized also federally, which prevents the national and regional authorities to carry out unilateral acts that go against the principle of Community federal loyalty and European citizenship.


2016 ◽  
pp. 91-107
Author(s):  
TUDOREL TOADER ◽  
MARIETA SAFTA

The Constitutional Court has ruled that, by adhering to the legal order of the European Union, Romania agreed that, in those areas where exclusive jurisdiction is conferred on the European Union, regardless of the international treaties priorly signed, implementation of its obligations arising therefrom is subject to the rules of the European Union. Otherwise, this would result in the undesirable situation where, through bi or multilateral internationally assumed obligations, Member State would seriously affect the Union’s competence and, in practice, would act in its place in the aforementioned areas. For this reason, in the field of competition, any State aid falls within the competence of the European Commission and appeal proceedings fall within the jurisdiction of the European Union. Therefore, pursuant to Article 11 para. (1) and Article 148 para. (2) and (4) of the Constitution, Romania applies in good faith the obligations resulting from the Accession Instrument, without interfering with the exclusive competence of the European Union and, by virtue of the compliance clause contained in the text of Article 148 of the Constitution, Romania cannot adopt a legislative act contrary to the obligations assumed as a Member State. All those already highlighted are subject to certain limitations, expressed in what the Court described as “national constitutional identity”.


Author(s):  
Paul Kalinichenko

This chapter presents the findings of the author on the impact of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on the Russian legal system. To start with, this chapter includes a brief description of the background to the modern Russian legal system and, in particular, the structure of the Russian judiciary. The contribution goes on to describe the Russian model for approximating its legal order with EU rules and standards, as well as adding some remarks on the application of EU law by the Russian courts. Then follows an explanation of the specifics of the database used, together with a description and analysis of citation of CJEU decisions by Russian courts in the period 2006–18. Conclusions and recommendations are presented in the final section of the chapter.


1999 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 87-123
Author(s):  
Steve Peers

It must be considered that there is nothing more difficult to carry out, nor more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to handle, than to initiate a new order of things. Niccolò Machiavelli, The Prince It was born, with much rejoicing, at a party near a quiet Luxembourg village; it died, alone and unlamented, on a desk in a non-descript Brussels office. On May 1, 1999, the fourteen-year old Schengen legal order finally breathed its last; but nothing quite became its life as the ending of it. For it was immediately reincarnated, with much confusion, into a legal system born in Rome over forty years ago. Long a byword for obsessive secrecy, unaccountability and complexity, the Schengen legal system has with one stroke moved from the “black market” of European integration into the mainstream.


2019 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 35-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacek Barcik

The aim of the article is to analyse the application of fundamental rights in the complex political and legal system of the European Union, which can be described as a multilevel constitutionalism. Because the standards of individual protection are created both at the level of national constitutions as well as at the supranational, EU level, it is possible that individual fundamental rights will be understood differently in the Member States. The article tries to answer the question how to solve such an interpretation conflict. A way out is suggested in the form of the need to conduct a constitutional dialogue on the understanding of fundamental rights. The conditions necessary to conduct such a dialogue are also identified. It will lead to achieving the European constitutional consensus. The article puts forward a thesis that the development of a European consensus as to the understanding of fundamental rights leads irrevocably to the formation of a European constitutional identity.


2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (34) ◽  
pp. 361-378
Author(s):  
Vitalii Gutnyk ◽  
Ivan Bratsuk ◽  
Stepan Burak ◽  
Antonina Zubareva

The objective of this article is to analyze the concept of constitutional pluralism as a methodological basis for the construction of the legal system of the European Union. In particular, attention is paid to investigating the particularities of the interaction and operation of the different constitutional legal systems within the legal sphere of the European Union, studying the constitutional collisions derived from the interaction of European Union law and the law national of the Member States. Dialectical, comparative legal, historical, systemic-structural and formal dogmatic methods were used in the research. The article concluded that the national constitutional courts of the Member States of the European Union can give priority to their constitutional rules only if those rules are clear and reflect substantial constitutional obligations. However, in any case, in order to maintain the coherence of the legislation of the European Union and the national legislation of the Member States, it is necessary to amend the national Constitutions of the Member States of the European Union.


2021 ◽  
pp. 3-40
Author(s):  
Robert Schütze

This introductory chapter assesses whether there is a European constitution. When examined in the light of the broader historical tradition, the European Union has a constitution. And this view firmly corresponds to the self-understanding of the European legal order. The ‘real’ problem of the European Union is not whether there is a European constitution, but rather that there is ‘too much constitutional law’; the European Treaties alone contain 413 articles. Length is unfortunately not the only problem of the European constitution, for unlike more mature legal orders, the European constitutional order still struggles with its ‘vocabulary’. The semantic confusions are partly the result of the constant legal revolutions within the European Union. This book then aims to reflect the judicial and legislative practice of the Union as at October 31, 2020. It provides a guide through the most important theories and realities of the European Union law.


2020 ◽  
pp. 183-190
Author(s):  
Marios Costa ◽  
Steve Peers

This chapter outlines the framework for enforcement of European Union (EU) law, and describes the various actions that may be brought before the Court of Justice (CJ). In interpreting the relevant provisions of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), the CJ has played a key role in the enforcement of EU law especially with its insistence on the effective protection of individuals’ Union rights. The chapter also explains the significance of judicial review in the EU legal order by focusing on the jurisdiction of the CJ in the appeal cases originating from the General Court (GC). Finally, the chapter outlines how questions of infringement of EU law can also be raised in the national legal system.


2016 ◽  
pp. 49-64
Author(s):  
DUBRAVKO LJUBIC

The study presents the human dignity as the basis of every legal order, its ethics and all the other factors that make a legal system just, a condition for the existence of rights in general. Croatian Constitution does not recognize human dignity as the highest value and the basis of design of the basic legal sphere, but, by accepting the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union human dignity is not becoming just the source and means of interpretation of the basic legal sphere, but it is also becoming the basis for establishing relations between the individual and the state and individuals themselves


1999 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 87-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steve Peers

It must be considered that there is nothing more difficult to carry out, nor more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to handle, than to initiate a new order of things. Niccolò Machiavelli, The PrinceIt was born, with much rejoicing, at a party near a quiet Luxembourg village; it died, alone and unlamented, on a desk in a non-descript Brussels office. On May 1, 1999, the fourteen-year old Schengen legal order finally breathed its last; but nothing quite became its life as the ending of it. For it was immediately reincarnated, with much confusion, into a legal system born in Rome over forty years ago. Long a byword for obsessive secrecy, unaccountability and complexity, the Schengen legal system has with one stroke moved from the “black market” of European integration into the mainstream.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document