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.

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.

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 Democratic Backsliding in the European Union

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nick Sitter ◽  
Elisabeth Bakke
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Member State ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
The Other ◽  
Political Will ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Eu

Democratic backsliding in European Union (EU) member states is not only a policy challenge for the EU, but also a potential existential crisis. If the EU does too little to deal with member state regimes that go back on their commitments to democracy and the rule of law, this risks undermining the EU from within. On the other hand, if the EU takes drastic action, this might split the EU. This article explores the nature and dynamics of democratic backsliding in EU member states, and analyses the EU’s capacity, policy tools and political will to address the challenge. Empirically it draws on the cases that have promoted serious criticism from the Commission and the European Parliament: Hungary, Poland, and to a lesser extent, Romania. After reviewing the literature and defining backsliding as a gradual, deliberate, but open-ended process of de-democratization, the article analyzes the dynamics of backsliding and the EU’s difficulties in dealing with this challenge to liberal democracy and the rule of law. The Hungarian and Polish populist right’s “illiberal” projects involve centralization of power in the hands of the executive and the party, and limiting the independence of the judiciary, the media and civil society. This has brought both governments into direct confrontation with the European Commission. However, the EU’s track record in managing backsliding crises is at best mixed. This comes down to a combination of limited tools and lack of political will. Ordinary infringement procedures offer a limited toolbox, and the Commission has proven reluctant to use even these tools fully. At the same time, party groups in the European Parliament and many member state governments have been reluctant to criticize one of their own, let alone go down the path of suspending aspect of a states’ EU membership. Hence the EU’s dilemma: it is caught between undermining its own values and cohesion through inaction on one hand, and relegating one or more member states it to a second tier—or even pushing them out altogether—on the other.

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.

Generating Trust Through Law? Judicial Cooperation in the European Union and the “Principle of Mutual Trust”

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 339-382 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Wischmeyer
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Mutual Recognition ◽  
Mutual Trust ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Judicial Cooperation ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Legal Rules ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Eu

For a long time, EU institutions have emphasized the connection between one of the most important concepts of the integration method, mutual recognition, and the presence of mutual trust between EU Member States. Only recently, the ECJ reaffirmed in its Opinion 2/13 that mutual trust is at the heart of the EU and a “fundamental premiss” of the European legal structure. But can law really restore, advance or even govern by trust? This question is crucial for the EU of today, which finds itself in the midst of a severe crisis of trust. For the EU as a community “based on the rule of law” generating trust through law might seem the natural, maybe the only politically viable response to a crisis of trust. Nevertheless, even if one agrees that the rule of law requires people to place trust in legal rules, and that courts and administrative agencies need to trust each other in order to work efficiently and consistently, how would legal rules be able to generate or promote trust? Moreover, isn't it deeply rooted in our ideas about constitutional government that democratic law must institutionalize mutual distrust rather than govern by trust? These conceptual and normative objections did not stop the European Union from pursuing the project of trust-building through law in one of the most sensitive areas of EU law, judicial cooperation in civil and criminal matters. This Article will ask whether the project to promote trust through law is a promising one, and, eventually, how to reinterpret statutory provisions and legal principles that purport to generate trust amongst their addressees.

scholarly journals Considerations on the Infringement Procedure against Romania

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Crina Mihaela Verga ◽  
◽  
◽  
◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Good Practice ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Comparative Methods ◽  
The Other ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Relevant Case ◽  
The Eu

This paper is a study of the infringement procedure, as it is regulated at EU level. Thus, we first analyze the existing legal framework on the matter. The implementation of this procedure in various Member States of the European Union and its consequences are then presented. Last but not least, the article refers to a series of aspects regarding the fields in which the procedure was directed against Romania since its integration into the EU. The purpose of the essay is to present in detail Romania's situation regarding the violation of EU’s law.Thus, a comparative presentation throughout time of the number of such proceedings launched against the Romanian state was made.A relevant case in which Romania was tried and convicted was also presented in detail.The large number of cases launched in 2021 highlights the delays registered by Romania on the matter. The measures ordered by the Romanian government through the elaborated the Annual Transposition Plan-2021must be carefully and systematically implemented. Romania could also consider and effectively apply the examples of good practice from the other EU’s member states. The historical and the comparative methods used in this presentation reveal both the similarities between the application of this procedure in the EU Member States under review as well as the differences and its succession in time. The article is important not only for the scientists, but also for the practitioners to dispose all the necessary measures that are required.

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 Constitutional Courts and the Rule of Law in the New EU Member States

2019 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. 202-231
Author(s):  
Angela Di Gregorio
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
The Other ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Constitutional Courts ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
New Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Communist Countries ◽  
New Eu Member States

This paper analyses the use of the rule-of-law principle in the jurisprudence of the constitutional courts of the new Member States of the European Union. The purpose is to discover whether past or recent decisions could clarify the use of the principle in these countries. An example is the legalistic concept of the rule of law as expressed by the Hungarian and Polish constitutional courts in examining the constitutionality of lustration laws. On the other hand, some constitutional courts (such as the Czech one) have used a wider and more sophisticated application of the rule of law. Considering the severe rule-of-law crisis which has been taking place in Hungary and Poland in recent years, this recognition is particularly important in order to avoid cumulative judgments that could devalue the former communist countries in general, trivializing the harsh path of democratic conditionality with its strengths and weaknesses.

scholarly journals “The Rule of Law Mechanism” and the Hungarian and Polish Resistance: European Law Against National Identity?

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 49-67
Author(s):  
Christoph J. Schewe ◽  
◽  
Thomas Blome ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Economic Recovery ◽  
Adoption Process ◽  
European Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The World ◽  
The Eu

Similarly to the rest of the world, the COVID-19 pandemic has also hit the European Union (EU) severely. In order to foster the process of the economic recovery of EU Member States, the EU Member States agreed on a financial aid package combined with a regulation – the conditionality mechanism – that provided for financial sanctions in the event of a breach of the rule of law. Given that the positions of Poland and Hungary in the adoption process of this regulation caused a controversy, this article examines general questions on the rule of law, the regulation and the background to the controversy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document