Articles for category: English Articles

Subnational Politics and the Path of National Democracies

In Germany and the United States, political factions have emerged in the last decade that have challenged some of the core institutions, conventions, and norms of liberal democratic life. In both countries, subnational units of government—states or municipalities—have operated as staging grounds for parties or factions of parties that reject some or all necessary elements of democratic practice. While they have used different institutional tactics to this end, many basic elements of political strategy can be observed across the two cases.

Regime Adaptation Within Russia’s Judicial Elites

The case of Valery Zorkin, chairman of the Russian Constitutional Court, shows how elites prioritize their own survival and therefore do not oppose a repressive and aggressive regime, most likely because they fear revenge from liberal peers and victims of the system. And since the war against Ukraine, elites have another reason to stay loyal. For those who fear being held responsible for a war of aggression and war crimes, Putin is the only “guarantor of stability.”

Examining the EU’s Artificial Intelligence Act

Finally, consensus on the EU Artificial Intelligence Act. The academic community is thus finally in a position to provide a (slightly) more definitive evaluation of the Act’s potential to protect individuals and societies from AI systems’ harms. This blog post attempts to contribute to this discussion by illustrating and commenting on the final compromises regarding some of the most controversial and talked-about aspects of the AI Act, namely its rules on high-risk systems, its stance on General Purpose AI, and finally its system of governance and enforcement.

Paving the Way for Violence

The negative effects of the 1993 conflict prevailed over the benefits from the end of a confrontation. Its outcomes raised a major barrier to the democratization of Russia and paved the way for the use of violence as a means of preserving power. This conflict contributed to the maximization of presidential power and to the weakening of checks and balances in the constitution, which included significant authoritarian potential. The political order established in Russia after the 1993 conflict largely determined the subsequent trajectory of Russian political evolution and its drift towards a personalist authoritarian regime.

Bricolage, Bullshit, and Bustle

On 15 December 2023, the Swiss Federal Council (Government) announced that it intended to start formal negotiations with the EU on the conclusion of a Framework Agreement (FA) 2.0. Five existing and two new treaties between the EU and Switzerland are to be subject to dynamic alignment and institutionalised, i.e. provided with a monitoring and judicial mechanism. The project, which is practically fixed in the decisive questions by a “Common Understanding” (“CU”) between the two parties, is based on a triple B approach: in substance, it consists of unsuccessful bricolage, the foundations were laid by bullshit, and because elections and a change of the Commission are imminent in the EU, bustle is supposedly of the essence. The CU summarizes what the Parties have informally agreed on.

Heightening the Repressive Dynamic

The new French Immigration Act was promulgated and published on 26th January 2024, the day after the Conseil Constitutionnel decision which censored 35 provisions in one of its longest decisions to date. The Conseil chose to emphasize the Constitution’s procedural requirements, while largely avoiding substantive analysis of the Act’s drastic reduction of foreigners’ rights. Indeed, it asserted the constitutionality or remained silent on many provisions that undercut foreigner’s rights. The Act as promulgated thereby constitutes the most repressive text since 1945 and heightens a migration restrictive dynamic.

Unveiling Democracy

On 11 January, Advocate General Richard de la Tour delivered his Opinions in two cases, against the Czech Republic and Poland, which cautiously uncover part of the core of the EU value of democracy. The Commission launched these infringement cases against the two Member States back in November 2012 and April 2013 respectively. Now that the rule of law is a well-established principle of EU law, these cases present themselves as a chance to focus on a less explored value enshrined in Article 2 TEU. They allow the Court to construct a foundation to address prospective questions regarding democratic principles.

Milieudefensie v ING: Climate Breakdown and Banks‹ Duty of Care

There is a trend towards climate lawsuits against companies based on their alleged duty of care not to emit more than a certain amount of greenhouse gases (GHGs). Currently, there are four such cases before courts in Germany, all of which have been unsuccessful so far. On 19 January 2024, Milieudefensie, a Dutch environmental group, initiated legal proceedings against the Dutch Bank ING, for the first time raising the issue of whether financial actors have such a duty of care. This case represents a significant milestone in the worldwide effort to transform the financial sector and curb its seemingly endless appetite for financing fossil fuels. In light of these proceedings, I argue that the German courts have adopted an imprecise understanding of what the duty of care entails and that an appropriate application of this duty can increase the accountability of financial actors.

An Unfortunate Trend of Vagueness

The German Government is planning to change the procedural and substantive legal framework on international criminal law in Germany, with an expert hearing having taken placed on 31 January 2024 before the German Parliament’s (Deutscher Bundestag) Legal Affairs Committee. One aspect appears to have been totally neglected by the current draft proposal: the issue of functional immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction in case of core crime charges. In this post, I highlight an ambiguity regarding the personal scope of functional immunity arising from German case law which the German Government and Parliament should take the opportunity to clarify with the current reform proposal. This is particularly important given that the ambiguity appears to have traveled to other jurisdictions as illustrated by the case of Ziada v. Netherlands.