scholarly journals The EU Lisbon Treaty and EU Development Cooperation: Considerations for a Revised EU Strategy on Development Cooperation in Eritrea

2012 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 324-343
Author(s):  
Daniel R. Mekonnen ◽  
Mirjam van Reisen
Keyword(s):  
Lisbon Treaty ◽  
Development Cooperation ◽  
The Eu

‘An Association of Sovereign States’

2009 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 391-406 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roland Bieber
Keyword(s):  
European Integration ◽  
Critical Assessment ◽  
Lisbon Treaty ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
German Constitution ◽  
German Constitutional Court ◽  
Conceptual Foundations ◽  
Fundamental Requirement ◽  
The Eu

German Constitutional Court decision of 30 June 2009 on the compatibility of the Lisbon Treaty with the German Constitution – Continuing sovereignty of member states under the EU Treaty – Extended constitutional limits to European integration (‘eternity clause’) under German Constitution, but these are not violated by Lisbon Treaty – Composition of European Parliament does not satisfy fundamental requirement of democracy but does not violate German Constitution since EU is not a state – Critical assessment of conceptual foundations of decision

scholarly journals BRIEF CONSIDERATIONS ON THE EUROPEAN LEGISLATIVE PROCEDURES, WITH PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO PASSERELLE CLAUSES

2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-15
Author(s):  
Mihaela Pătrăuș ◽  
Darius-Dennis Pătrăuș
Keyword(s):  
Lisbon Treaty ◽  
National Parliaments ◽  
Judicial Cooperation ◽  
Legislative Procedures ◽  
The Family ◽  
Defence Policy ◽  
European Policies ◽  
Legislative Procedure ◽  
Ordinary Legislative Procedure ◽  
The Eu

The Lisbon Treaty in order to strengthen the EU's capacity to decide, to act and to ensure the legitimacy of decisions taken at the same time, reformed the decision-making process of the EU, particularly by changing the legislative procedures in force.Among the novelties of the Lisbon Treaty, we must mention the passerelle clauses, which according to the ordinary legislative procedure will be generalized, under certain conditions, in areas which were initially outside its scope.The treaty nominates two types of passerelle clauses: the general passerelle clause which applies to all European policies and the enabling of this clause will be authorized by a decision of the European Council, acting unanimously; the passerelle clauses specific to certain European policies (MFF, Common Security and Defence Policy, judicial cooperation regarding the family rights- this specific clause is the only one explaining which national parliaments keep their right to oppose; cooperation is strengthened in the areas governed by unanimity or by a special legislative procedure, social affairs, environmental ).The flexibility introduced through a significant number of passerelle clauses in the Lisbon Treaty allows adjustment of the EU quickly and efficiently, depending on punctual developments, without neglecting the guarantees on the sovereignty of member states.

The EU Energy Policy After the Lisbon Treaty

2011 ◽  
pp. 147-165 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johann-Christian Pielow ◽  
Britta Janina Lewendel
Keyword(s):  
Energy Policy ◽  
Lisbon Treaty ◽  
Eu Energy Policy ◽  
The Eu

Data Protection in EU Law After Lisbon

2019 ◽  
pp. 73-99
Author(s):  
Maria Tzanou
Keyword(s):  
Data Protection ◽  
Critical Comment ◽  
Lisbon Treaty ◽  
New Right ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Comprehensive Data ◽  
Right To Be Forgotten ◽  
The Eu

This chapter provides an analysis of the data protection rules in EU law, focusing on the constitutional and legal developments after the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty. It examines the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the EU on data protection issues, including the recent decisions of the Court on metadata retention and the new right to be forgotten. It concludes with a critical comment on the possibilities and limitations of the EU to provide for effective and comprehensive data protection.

Comitology

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Craig
Keyword(s):  
Previous Analysis ◽  
Lisbon Treaty ◽  
Historical Overview ◽  
Eu Policy ◽  
Detailed Evaluation ◽  
The Eu

The discussion thus far has focused on centralized and shared administration as ways in which EU policy is delivered. This chapter focuses on Comitology and the making of secondary norms, which normally take the form of rules. This cuts across the previous analysis, in the sense that rulemaking is a feature of both direct and shared administration. The structure of the discussion is as follows. It begins with analysis of the problem presented by rulemaking, and the necessity for any polity, including the EU, to administer an area through secondary norms of a legislative nature. This is followed by an historical overview of rulemaking in the EU and the role of Comitology therein. The focus then shifts to detailed evaluation of the approach to rulemaking in the Lisbon Treaty.

The EU’s engagement with foreign powers on human rights

2020 ◽  
pp. 265-292
Author(s):  
Francisca Costa Reis ◽  
Weiyuan Gao ◽  
Vineet Hegde
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Lisbon Treaty ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Cohesive Group ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Economic Partnership ◽  
Set Up ◽  
The Eu

With a mandate under the Lisbon Treaty, the European Union (EU) has been engaging with foreign powers like Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa (BRICS) nations on human rights issues. Despite the common and shared goals, the BRICS set-up is not institutionalised, which prompts the EU to engage with each country on a bilateral basis. Such collaborations have occurred in bilateral dialogues, multilateral fora, through developmental assistance, and negotiations in economic partnership agreements. The scope and content of the discussions and cooperation vary due to the difference in the political structures of the countries. While the EU and the BRICS may share some common goals politically and economically, pursuing shared objectives related to democracy and human rights promotion remains challenging. These countries may believe in human rights protection, but the understandings and the approaches vary drastically, as visible when issues of sovereignty and non-intervention are raised to resist comprehensive discussions. Although the BRICS are emerging as an interconnected group and have begun to cooperate more closely in multilateral fora, the EU may also have to consider dealing with it in its institutional capacity. It could be more challenging to fulfill the mandate of the Lisbon Treaty for the EU while dealing with this cohesive group that has different understandings on human rights protection within their own states.

Human Rights in EU Development Policy

2021 ◽  
pp. 682-706
Author(s):  
Jan Wouters ◽  
Michal Ovádek
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Development Policy ◽  
External Action ◽  
Development Cooperation ◽  
Development Programs ◽  
Member States ◽  
Missed Opportunities ◽  
Constitutional Level ◽  
The Eu

This chapter studies the role of human rights in EU development policy. The place of human rights in development policy was solidified at the constitutional level with the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, which made the promotion of human rights in all EU external action a legal obligation. As a result, different institutional mechanisms, thematic guidelines, and dedicated instruments and strategies have been put in place to consolidate a comprehensive operational framework aimed at ensuring that EU development programs advance human rights worldwide coherently and consistently. EU development policy is a shared competence, which means that both the EU and its Member States are entitled to act within this domain, as long as national actions do not undermine EU laws and positions. The sharing of competences, however, makes it more difficult for the EU to live up to the commitment of coherent and consistent promotion of human rights. In any case, substantial amount of coordination between the EU and the Member States is required in order to deliver coherence in development policy. However, the role of the EU as a normative leader in development cooperation remains subject to a multitude of long-standing criticisms and various evaluations of EU human rights policy point to a series of mixed results and missed opportunities.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document