scholarly journals THE IMPACT OF COVID-19 ON THE FREE MOVEMENT OF PERSONS IN THE EU

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dunja Duić ◽  
Veronika Sudar
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Political Legitimacy ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Freedom Of Movement ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

The impact of the COVID-19 outbreak is being endured throughout the world, and the European Union (EU) is no exception. The rapid spreading of the virus effected, among other things, restriction on the freedom of movement. The EU member states introduced national response measures to contain the pandemic and protect public health. While broadly similar, the measures differ with regard to strictness and the manner of introduction, reflecting the political legitimacy of the respective country. With the ‘Guidelines concerning the exercise of the free movement of workers during COVID-19 outbreak’ – its first COVID-19-related Communication – the European Commission (EC) attempted to curb differing practices of the EU member states and ensure a coordinated approach. Ultimately, this action was aimed at upholding of fundamental rights as guaranteed to EU citizens, one such being the freedom of movement. Thus, from the very start of the pandemic, the coordinated actions of EU institutions sought to contain the spread of COVID-19 infections with the support and cooperation of EU member states. This is confirmed by the most recent Council of the EU (Council) recommendation on a coordinated approach to restrictions to freedom of movement within the EU of October 2020. While they did prevent the spread of infection and save countless lives, the movement restriction measures and the resulting uncertainty have greatly affected the people, the society, and the economy, thereby demonstrating that they cannot remain in force for an extended period. This paper examines the measures introduced by EU member states and analyses the legal basis for introducing therewith limitations on human rights and market freedoms. To what extent are the EU and member states authorized to introduce restrictions on the freedom of movement in the interest of public health? Have the EU and member states breached their obligations regarding market freedoms and fundamental rights under the Treaty? And most importantly: have they endangered the fundamental rights of the citizens of the EU?

European Union Rights and Values in Human Health

2019 ◽  
pp. 16-51
Author(s):  
Anniek de Ruijter
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
European Union ◽  
National Policy ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Eu Fundamental Rights ◽  
The Eu

This book looks at the impact of the expanding power of the EU in terms of fundamental rights and values. The current chapter lays down the framework for this analysis. Law did not always have a central role to play in the context of medicine and health. The role of law grew after the Second Word War and the Nuremberg Doctors Trials (1947), in which preventing the repetition of atrocities that were committed in the name of medicine became a guidepost for future law regarding patients’ rights and bioethics. In the period after the War, across the EU Member States, health law developed as a legal discipline in which a balance was struck in medicine and public health between law, bioethics, and fundamental rights. The role of EU fundamental rights protections in the context of public health and health care developed in relation with the growth of multilevel governance and litigation (national, international, Council of Europe, and European Union). For the analysis here, this chapter develops an EU rights and values framework that goes beyond the strictly legal and allows for a ‘normative language’ that takes into consideration fundamental rights as an expression of important shared values in the context of the European Union. The perspective of EU fundamental rights and values can demonstrate possible tensions caused by EU health policy: implications in terms of fundamental rights can show how highly sensitive national policy issues may be affected by the Member States’ participation in EU policymaking activities.

scholarly journals Status obywatela UE a Europejski Program w zakresie Migracji

2021 ◽  
Vol 47 (22 (180)) ◽  
pp. 163-182
Author(s):  
Katarzyna Strąk
Keyword(s):  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Freedom Of Movement ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Research Material ◽  
Legal Situation ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

Przedmiotem tego artykułu jest próba oceny wpływu Europejskiego programu w zakresie migracji z 2015 r. na status obywatela UE. Ocena ta została zrealizowana w kontekście swobody przemieszczania się na podstawie art. 21 TFUE w dwóch obszarach. Pierwszym z nich jest tymczasowe wprowadzenie kontroli na granicach wewnętrznych państw członkowskich UE, drugim – środki przyjmowane przez państwa członkowskie, związane z utrzymaniem porządku publicznego i bezpieczeństwa publicznego, w tym ochroną przed zagrożeniem terrorystycznym. Materiał badawczy jest jednak stosunkowo nieliczny, ogranicza się do wybranych przepisów Kodeksu Granicznego Schengen i wybranych spraw przed Trybunałem Sprawiedliwości UE, w dalszym ciągu w większości przypadków jeszcze nierozstrzygniętych. Mimo to z analizy tej wynika konkretny wniosek. Przepisy unijne, nawet jeśli faktycznie ograniczają sytuację prawną obywateli unijnych, wpisują się w zakres ograniczeń dopuszczalnych. Rzeczywisty wpływ na ograniczenie praw wynikających z posiadania statusu obywatela UE mają przepisy państw członkowskich. Status of Citizen of the European Union and European Agenda on Migration The subject of this article is to attempt to assess the impact of the 2015 European Agenda on Migration on the status of an EU citizen. This assessment was carried out in the context of freedom of movement under Article 21 TFEU, within two areas. The first one is the temporary introduction of controls at the internal borders of EU Member States, the second one are measures adopted by Member States and related to the maintenance of public order and public security, including protection against the terrorist threat. The research material is however relatively sparse, limited to selected provisions of the Schengen Borders Code and selected cases before the Court of Justice of the EU, still mostly pending. Nonetheless, one conclusion that emerges from this analysis is that EU rules, even if they actually restrict the legal situation of EU citizens, fall within the scope of acceptable restrictions. The real impact on the limitation of the rights attached to the status of EU citizen is in the Member States’ legislation.

Autonomy of Public Sector Investments in the Light of the Free Movement of Capital in the EU

2014 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 503-518
Author(s):  
Janja Hojnik
Keyword(s):  
Market Integration ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Member States ◽  
Freedom Of Movement ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Financial Market Integration ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Free Movement Of Capital ◽  
The Eu

This article deals with the impact of the EU’s endeavours to achieve financial market integration and the free movement of capital on rules of the Member States that limit autonomy of public bodies when making investment decisions. These rules have direct importance for rules such as those applicable in Slovenia which require 1,500 public entities to invest their liquid assets exceeding EUR 100,000 solely in securities of the Republic of Slovenia and not in securities of other EU Member States. In this case, they are obliged to offer their liquid assets first to the Ministry of Finance, thereby running the risk that such liquid assets would be decommitted and allocated to other public purposes. The aim of this article is to develop arguments to the effect that, in the light of the freedom of movement of capital as construed by the Court of Justice of the EU, especially in the recent case concerning Polish open pension funds (OPFs) the investment policy of indirect budget spending units should be more open – not only from the viewpoint of ensuring the EU single market but mainly from the perspective of the profitability of public finance. The security of investments can also be achieved in ways other than closing the investment market for all public entities.

scholarly journals Review of the Construction Labour Demand and Shortages in the EU

Buildings ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 17
Author(s):  
Belinda Brucker Juricic ◽  
Mario Galic ◽  
Sasa Marenjak
Keyword(s):  
Free Movement ◽  
Construction Sector ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Total Employment ◽  
Member States ◽  
Skill Levels ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Free Movement Of Workers ◽  
European Union Member States ◽  
The Eu

This paper reviews the recent literature on skill and labour shortages in the labour market with special emphasis on the construction sector in the European Union Member States, foreseeing the Construction 4.0 era. The free movement of people is one of the rights of all citizens of the EU which also includes the free movement of workers. Labour shortages in the EU are expected to increase in the future due to a declining population and an ageing workforce. In order to recognize and forecast labour shortages, EU Member states use a variety of instruments but they do not answer as to whether it is possible to use migrant labour to appease those shortages. There are several systems used to classify labour shortages in the EU Member states. Most of the countries classify labour shortages in relation to different sectors or occupation groups as well as by skill levels, but in some Member States, classification is made according to the type of employment. Instruments used to measure labour shortages significantly differ from country to country. Several criteria are used for creating lists of shortage occupations and most of the criteria include demand side and supply side criteria. A majority of the Member States are facing labour and skill shortages in various sectors and the construction sector is not an exception. As total employment in the construction sector decreased, so did the share of employed migrants. Labour shortages in the construction sector can be eased by the availability of a labour supply willing to accept unqualified and low-paying jobs. The construction sector seeks low-, medium-, and high-skilled individuals and is most likely the sector where most of the incoming migrants will be working, which has an impact on the development and implementation dynamic of Construction 4.0.

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.

If You Are Not Part of the Solution, You Are the Problem: Article 37 of the EU Charter as a Defence for Climate Change and Environmental Measures in Investor-State Arbitrations – Joint 2nd Prize Winner Essay competition 2020

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 265-295
Author(s):  
Florence Humblet ◽  
Kabir Duggal
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Environmental Protection ◽  
Critical Role ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Environmental Measures ◽  
The Eu

Climate change is severely impacting the survival of humankind on earth. In the European Union (EU), the Charter of Fundamental Rights (EU Charter) codifies environmental protection as part of the EU’s corpus of fundamental rights protection and states that “a high level of environmental protection and the improvement of the quality of the environment must be integrated into the policies of the EU and ensured in accordance with the principle of sustainable development”. By virtue of this article, the EU has elevated environmental protection to the level of constitutionality. Environmental concerns have played a critical role in investor-state arbitration. This article submits that Article 37 of the EU Charter might be a viable defence for Member States of the EU (Member States) that adopt climate change and environmental measures. Such defence would not consist of a jurisdictional challenge based on the Achmea decision but of a defence based on the applicable law which protects the notion of sustainable investment enshrined in the applicable international investment agreement. Article 37 of the EU Charter could, therefore, operate a powerful tool to foster environmental protection in investor-state disputes and, therefore, address one of the most widespread complaints in the backlash against investor-state arbitration.

scholarly journals Contradictions in Frontex Operations: the Push-back

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 85-92
Author(s):  
Gábor Kemény ◽  
Michal Vít
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Influencing Factors ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Organisational Structure ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Eu

The aim of the paper is to introduce the legal misfits between the standards of human rights as stated by the European Union and the Council of Europe and practical day to day experience related to EU member states. For this purpose, the article focuses on political and legal assessment of the so-called pushbacks at the Greek-Turkish external border and introduces the influencing factors, such as the various interpretation of the legislation, differences in the organisational structure and values. Authors concluded that these factors are endangering the fulfilment of the fundamental rights and the efficiency of the border protection thus the security of the EU and its member states.

scholarly journals From Diversity to Coordination: A European Approach to COVID-19

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 283-296 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessio M. PACCES ◽  
Maria WEIMER
Keyword(s):  
National Policy ◽  
Political Legitimacy ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Safe Spaces ◽  
Mutual Learning ◽  
The Face ◽  
Free Movement Of Persons ◽  
The Eu

The COVID-19 pandemic is changing the face of Europe. Member States’ divergent responses to this crisis reveal a lack of unity in the face of a humanitarian catastrophe. At best, this undermines the effectiveness of health protection within the European Union (EU). At worst, it risks breaking up the Union altogether. Divergent national responses to COVID-19 reflect different national preferences and political legitimacy, and thus cannot be completely avoided. In this article, we argue that these responses should be better coordinated. Without coordination, the price for diversity is high. Firstly, there are damaging spill-overs between Member States, which undermine key pillars of European integration such as the free movement of persons and of goods. Secondly, national policy-making is easily captured by local interest groups. Our proposal is that the EU indicates – not mandates – a European exit strategy from asymmetric containment policies of COVID-19. In particular, the EU should help Member States procure and validate tests for infection and immunity. The EU should also indicate ways in which testing could be used to create safe spaces to work, thereby restoring the free movement of persons and of goods. We see a great advantage in such EU guidance: it could improve mutual learning between Member States, which have faced different timings of the epidemic and learned different lessons. Although the local political economy has so far delayed learning and undermined cooperation, the EU can mitigate both effects and indicate the way for Europe to resurrect united from the ashes of COVID-19.

scholarly journals Montenegro’s accession to the European Union: Possible consequences of the free movement of persons for the Montenegrin social security system

SEER ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-58
Author(s):  
Frederic De Wispelaere ◽  
Gabriella Berki ◽  
Snjezana Balokovic
Keyword(s):  
Social Security ◽  
Social Security System ◽  
Security System ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
System P ◽  
Free Movement Of Persons ◽  
The Eu

This article discusses the potential impact of the free movement of persons in the EU on the Montenegrin social security system. It can be argued that three variables will be of great importance: 1) mobility between Montenegro and other EU member states; 2) social security legislation in Montenegro; and 3) the social security Coordination Regulations. The scale of migration will be highly dependent on whether there are transitional arrangements and whether neighbouring countries, not least Serbia, join the EU at the same time. In order to avoid an erosion of the workforce and consequently of people paying taxes in Montenegro, it might be useful to negotiate transitional arrangements as well as to promote oth er types of labour mobility, such as intra-EU posting. Furthermore, it can be expected that Montenegro’s accession will have financial and administrative implications in the area of healthcare. After all, accession to the EU will lead to a further increase in the number of tourists and thus of the amount that Montenegro will have to recover from member states if unplanned healthcare has been provided in Montenegro.

scholarly journals Inkorporacja acquis Schengen do prawa Unii Europejskiej i prawa krajowego państw członkowskich

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 69-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Artur Gruszczak
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Internal Security ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Political Analysis ◽  
Free Movement Of Persons ◽  
The Eu

This article takes up in the form of an interdisciplinary legal and political analysis the issue of the incorporation of the Schengen acquis into European Union law and the national legal systems of the EU member states in the light of the concept of a hybrid system of territorial governance. Accordingly, the Schengen acquis stimulated the process of intersecting the interests of internal security and the protection of Member States’ borders with the supranational ideological imperative with regard to the principle of free movement of persons. The argument developed in this article is that the incorporation of the Schengen acquis into EU law consolidated hybridity of the legal and institutional construction of the EU after the Amsterdam Treaty as a result of the contradiction between the logic of political bargain at the intergovernmental level and the vertical spillover generated at the supranational level in the institutional and decision-making dimensions. The conclusions point to the emergence, as a result of “schengenisation”, of the area of freedom, security and justice in the EU, in which the principle of free movement of people brought about diversification of the states’ adaptation mechanisms in relation to the ideologically determined project of transformation of the system of management of the territory and borders within the European Union.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document