scholarly journals Tiesiskuma nodrošināšanas instrumenti Eiropas Savienības rīcībā – līdzšinējie un jaunais papildinājums

2021 ◽  
pp. 72-80
Author(s):  
Irēna Kucina ◽  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Supreme Courts ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Legal Space ◽  
Fundamental Values ◽  
The Eu

Rule of law is one of the fundamental values of the European Union. Over time, Court of Justice of the European Union, national constitutional and supreme courts and legal science, which form the common European legal space, have come to a more sophisticated and refined understanding of this notion – a concept, which more or less represents a shared understanding of what the rule of law means among all Member States. European Union cannot allow any of its Member States to deviate from this principle. It must have efficient tools for preventing such acts. The purpose of the Regulation 2020/2092 of the European parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2020 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget (the Regulation) is to give European Union a more efficient tool for ensuring Member States compliance with the rule of law. In addition to the existing legal instruments, it provides an entirely unique mechanism, which links the EU budget to the respect for the rule of law. This article analyses the already existing mechanisms for the enforcement of rule of law and then takes an in-depth look at the new mechanism established by the Regulation. It can be concluded that the Regulation represents a compromise, which is not perfect, but still workable. Although the process established by the Regulation is political, and there are certain risks to rule of law, guidelines adopted by the Council will precisely formulate the specific mandate of both political bodies (the European Commission and the Council of the EU) and align it with the legal purpose of the procedure. It will also enable Court of Justice to decide on specific cases, albeit post factum. Therefore, this Regulation should be considered as a step forward towards more efficient enforcement of rule of law in the European Union.

scholarly journals EU Values Are Law, after All: Enforcing EU Values through Systemic Infringement Actions by the European Commission and the Member States of the European Union

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kim Lane Scheppele ◽  
Dimitry Vladimirovich Kochenov ◽  
Barbara Grabowska-Moroz
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Member State ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Eu

Abstract Although compliance with the founding values is presumed in its law, the Union is now confronted with persistent disregard of these values in two Member States. If it ceases to be a union of Rule-of-Law-abiding democracies, the European Union (EU) is unthinkable. Purely political mechanisms to safeguard the Rule of Law, such as those in Article 7 Treaty of European Union (TEU), do not work. Worse still, their existence has disguised the fact that the violations of the values of Article 2 TEU are also violations of EU law. The legal mechanisms tried thus far, however, do not work either. The fundamental jurisprudence on judicial independence and irremovability under Article 19(1) TEU is a good start, but it has been unable to change the situation on the ground. Despite ten years of EU attempts at reining in Rule of Law violations and even as backsliding Member States have lost cases at the Court of Justice, illiberal regimes inside the EU have become more consolidated: the EU has been losing through winning. More creative work is needed to find ways to enforce the values of Article 2 TEU more effectively. Taking this insight, we propose to turn the EU into a militant democracy, able to defend its basic principles, by using the traditional tools for the enforcement of EU law in a novel manner. We demonstrate how the familiar infringement actions—both under Article 258 and 259 TFEU—can be adapted as instruments for enforcing EU values by bundling a set of specific violations into a single general infringement action to show how a pattern of unlawful activity rises to the level of being a systemic violation. A systemic violation, because of its general and pervasive nature, in itself threatens basic values above and beyond violations of individual provisions of the acquis. Certified by the Court of Justice, a systemic violation of EU law should call for systemic compliance that would require the Member State to undo the effects of its attacks on the values of Article 2. The use of Article 260 Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (TFEU) to deduct fines from EU funds due to be received by the troubled Member State would provide additional incentives for systemic compliance. We illustrate this proposed militant democratic structure by explaining and critiquing what the Commission and Court together have done to reign in the governments of Hungary and Poland so far and then showing how they can do better.

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.

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.

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 Combating the constitutional crisis in Poland – Can the European Union provide an effective remedy?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Monika Kawczyńska
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Proper Solution ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Effective Remedy ◽  
Fundamental Values ◽  
The Eu

AbstractRecent constitutional reforms in Poland have demonstrated a lack of respect for the rule of law and for the fundamental values which form the foundations of the EU legal order. The Polish authorities have substantially deviated from principles that the country has accepted as a part of the Copenhagen criteria. The aim of the article is to analyse the mechanisms and procedures applied by the EU institutions to address the systemic threats to the rule of law in Poland. The main focus of the assessment is on the effectiveness of the measure and its potential for a proper solution to the problem. The response provided by the EU demonstrate that there has been a shift from a political to judicial enforcement of values. The article argues that the remedies that were deemed to be the least suitable to address the systemic deficiencies in the rule of law – an infringement action and a preliminary ruling procedure – proved to be the most effective remedy to defend independence of the Polish judiciary. Unexpectedly, the most efficient institution to ensure the respect for values enshrined in Article 2 TEU in Poland proved to be the CJEU, providing extensive interpretation of Article 19 (1) TEU and Article 47 of the Charter. Nevertheless the values are still much more difficult to enforce than the law. While the most serious infringements have been reversed, this has not prevented the Polish authorities from further violating the rule of law.

Case C-650/18 Hungary v. European Parliament (C.J.E.U.)

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-18
Author(s):  
Tamás Molnár
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Majority Vote ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Grand Chamber ◽  
The Eu

On June 3, 2021, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), closely following the Advocate General's Opinion, delivered its Grand Chamber judgment in case C-650/18 Hungary v. European Parliament by dismissing Hungary's action. The ruling confirms that the European Parliament (EP) acted within the procedural boundaries of its powers when initiating, by a two-thirds majority vote of its members, proceedings against Hungary for the situation in the country regarding the rule of law, democracy, and other values on which the European Union (EU) is founded. The ruling comes after the Hungarian government decided to challenge the validity of the resolution of the European Parliament of September 12, 2018, which triggered the proceedings foreseen in the event of a clear risk of serious breaches of the foundational values of the EU, including the rule of law, pursuant to Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU).

Nationales Verfassungsrecht in der Europäischen Union

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claus Dieter Classen
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Head Of State ◽  
State Functions ◽  
The Eu

The book presents the constitutional systems of the 27 EU member states in an integrated form. Basic principles such as democracy and the rule of law, constitutionalismincluding constitutional jurisdiction, state organs (parliament, government, head of state) and state functions (legislation, administration, jurisdiction, foreign policy) are dealt with. Thus, common European basic principles are elaborated, but above all, the different manifestations of many constitutional principles are clarified. The book is aimed at all those who wish to inform themselves in a clear form about the constitutional systems of the EU member states on which the European Union is based.

scholarly journals La Unión Europea como unión de valores y derechos : teoría y realidad = The European Union as a union of fundamental values and rights : theory and reality

2014 ◽  
Vol 1 (33) ◽  
pp. 99
Author(s):  
Antonio Bar Cendón
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Human Dignity ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Derechos Humanos ◽  
Fundamental Values

La UE se fundamenta en un conjunto de valores que son enunciados en el Art. 2 del TUE de manera explícita: el respeto de la dignidad humana, la libertad, la democracia, la igualdad, el Estado de Derecho y el respeto de los derechos humanos. Valores que el mismo precepto considera que son comunes a todos los Estados miembros. Hasta ahora, la protección de estos valores fundamentales se encuentra en el mecanismo previsto en el Art. 7 del TUE. La existencia de este mecanismo no ha logrado, sin embargo, evitar la vulneración de los valores fundamentales de la UE por parte de varios de sus Estados miembros. En este sentido, este trabajo propone la formulación de un nuevo mecanismo —«mecanismo de Copenhague»— que sea capaz de hacer un seguimiento permanente de la actuación de los Estados para evitar que se produzcan esas vulneraciones, pero que sea capaz también de imponer las sanciones más graves a las vulneraciones de estos valores fundamentales, incluida la expulsión de la UE.The UE is founded on a set of values which are mentioned in an explicit manner in Art. 2 of the TEU: respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights. Values which the same article states that are common to the Member States. Until now, the protection of these fundamental values is based on the mechanism foreseen in Art. 7 of the TEU. The existence of this mechanism though has not prevented the violation of these fundamental values by several of the Member States from taking place. This is why this article proposes the establishing of a new mechanism - the «Copenhagen mechanism» - which would be able to monitor the performance of the Member States on a permanent basis in order to prevent the violations from taking place, but which would also be able to impose the most serious penalties to the most serious violations of these fundamental values, including the expulsion of the UE.

scholarly journals The Values of the EU and their Protection in the European Law

2020 ◽  
Vol 100 (7) ◽  
pp. 37-45
Author(s):  
Stanislav Kuvaldin ◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
European Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
European Institutions ◽  
History Of ◽  
National Governments ◽  
The Eu

Article 7 of the Treaty on the European Union envisages a mechanism for responding to breaching by Member States the values of democracy, equality, the rule of law and human rights proclaimed by the Union, as well as the introduction of sanctions. Nevertheless, the EU structures are extremely cautious about this mechanism, despite the reasons for its application. The article analyzes the history of this clause in European legislation and the first attempts to influence dubious decisions of the Member States. The author explores the cases of Poland and Hungary in light of discussions to initiate the Article 7 procedures against these countries. It is concluded that such an outcome is unlikely. It is highlighted that the clause was deliberately formulated so that it allows to limit the actions of European institutions, to leave decisions in the hands of national governments and to provide an opportunity to settle the disput through negotiations. The author explores the internal discussions of alternative ways to influence values-violating Member States.

scholarly journals “WOULD MONEY MAKE A DIFFERENCE?”: HOW EFFECTIVE CAN THE RULE-OF-LAW-BASED PROTECTION OF FINANCIAL INTERESTS IN THE EU STRUCTURAL AND ENLARGEMENT POLICY BE?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aleksandar-Andrija Pejović
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Big Bang ◽  
The Other ◽  
Annual Reports ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Eu

In recent years, the rule of law and, especially, its “proper” implementation has become one of the most debated topics in Europe in recent years. The “Big Bang Enlargement” marked the beginning of dilemmas whether the new EU Member States fulfil the necessary rule of law criteria and opened the way for divergent views on how to implement TEU Article 2 values in practice. Furthermore, constant problems and difficulty of the candidate countries to fulfil the necessary rule of law criteria added to the complexity of the problem. In turn, the European institutions have tried to introduce a series of mechanisms and procedures to improve the oversight and make the states follow the rules - starting from the famous Treaty on the European Union (TEU) Article 7, the Rule of Law Mechanism, annual reports on the rule of law and the most recent Conditionality Regulation. The Conditionality Regulation was finally adopted in December 2020 after much discussion and opposition from certain EU Member States. It calls for the suspension of payments, commitments and disbursement of instalments, and a reduction of funding in the cases of general deficiencies with the rule of law. On the other hand, similar provisions were laid out in the February 2020 enlargement negotiation methodology specifying that in the cases of no progress, imbalance of the overall negotiations or regression, the scope and intensity of pre-accession assistance can be adjusted downward thus descaling financial assistance to candidate countries. The similarities between the two mechanisms, one for the Member States, the other for candidate countries shows an increased sharing of experiences and approaches to dealing with possible deficiencies or breaches of the rule of law through economic sanctioning, in order to resolve challenges to the unity of the European union. The Covid-19 pandemic and the crisis it has provoked on many fronts has turned the attention of the Member States (i.e. the Council) away from the long running problematic issues. Consequently, the procedures against Poland and Hungary based on the Rule of Law Mechanism have slowed down or become fully stalled, while certain measures taken up by some European states have created concerns about the limitations of human rights and liberties. This paper, therefore, analyses the efforts the EU is making in protecting the rule of law in its Member States and the candidate countries. It also analyses the new focus of the EU in the financial area where it has started to develop novel mechanisms that would affect one of the most influential EU tools – the funding of member and candidate countries through its structural and enlargement policy. Finally, it attempts to determine and provide conclusions on the efficiency of new instruments with better regulated criteria and timing of activities will be and how much they would affect the EU and its current and future member states.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document