The political question doctrine is a controversial admissibility requirement that intersects the rule of law and separation of powers. Based on recent ECtHR and ECJ judgments, this blog post highlights the need to evaluate the doctrine within a broader framework of legal accountability.
The Italy-Albania deal provides a new, some say innovative, approach to externalization in migration procedures. It differs from the current EU toolbox, raising issues related to these differences and the treatment of procedural rights. Where these issues arise and how they will be litigated nationally and/or in front of the ECJ is unclear but will shape migration discourses beyond Italy.
On 23 October, 2024, BUND (Friends of the Earth Germany) and several individuals filed a constitutional complaint mirroring the Neubauer case, but directed at the biodiversity crisis. The claimants seek a declaration from the Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) that the lack of a coherent scheme for the protection of biodiversity infringes fundamental rights and seek an order from the court for the legislature to take the necessary measures to adopt an appropriate, legally binding protection scheme within a clear timeline. This case presents a significant development in the field of strategic biodiversity litigation as the first systemic government framework case. It can be seen as the Urgenda of biodiversity litigation.
The European Commission’s Annual Rule of Law Report aims to prevent further rule of law backsliding within the EU by examining the rule of law situation in Member States. However, the report is missing an important chapter: the EU itself. On 28 October 2024, the Rule of Law Clinic (CEU Democracy Institute, Budapest), together with experts from across Europe, began bridging this gap by publishing the first report on EU adherence to rule of law standards. Without a meaningful self-assessment of its own compliance with rule of law principles, the EU weakens its credibility, particularly when addressing systemic non-compliance with EU law by Member States.
Launching our Series on the 2024 US Elections
The CJEU shook the world of football with its Diarra ruling on Friday, October 4. The impact of the ruling is all but a surprise for me. In a way, the FIFA transfer system was always on shaky legal grounds in terms of EU internal market law. Now, the chickens have come home to roost and key parts of the football transfer system have been brutally set aside. I aim to explain why the Diarra ruling marks a crucial turning point for football, its economy and even its identity.
Teaching international law as an antiracist endeavour is essential for addressing the historical and systemic biases that continue to shape the field. The text argues that by diversifying the curriculum, employing critical pedagogy techniques, and promoting active learning and engagement, educators can help students develop a more comprehensive and nuanced understanding of international law and its impact on diverse populations.
After Rhodesia's 1965 unilateral declaration of independence, which upheld white minority rule, sanctions were imposed to challenge the regime. However, support from allies like South Africa helped circumvent these restrictions, revealing the limitations and mixed effectiveness of sanctions.
On September 13, the new Dutch government led by Dick Schoof outlined its programme for the next years. Unsurprisingly, a major point of this programme regards asylum and migration, for which the greatest ambition is to install the strictest regime ever and to include the Netherlands within the category of Member States of the European Union with the strictest admission rules. This post reviews these proposals through the lens of European Law to challenge their legal feasibility and flag the potential incompatibility with Dutch obligations stemming from EU and international law.
With the Rwanda scheme, the UK government unleashes a regime of offshore asylum processing which is being considered by countries around the world. Such schemes though may be considered racist for their obvious neocolonial implications of removing and returning asylum seekers and refugees from the global north to the global south. More importantly though, such schemes undermine the commitment to abide by international human rights law and the obligations which attach to states in a particular rather than vicarious sense.
13. September 2025
Giovanni Capoccia
12. September 2025
Anne Peters
12. September 2025
Anne Peters