According to Frans Timmermans, speaking on 17 September 2017, “the situation in Hungary is not comparable to the situation in Poland” implying that Poland is far worse off than Hungary in the rule of law department. But is that true?
Despite the Commission’s best and repeated efforts, the rule of law situation in Poland has indeed been going from bad to worse under the stewardship of Poland’s de facto leader and its “Law and Justice” governing party.
Why have some EU officials called Article 7 the EU’s “nuclear option” – and is Article 7 really that powerful?
Does the Commission have the competence under the Treaties to monitor compliance with the rule of law in countries suspected of rule of law backsliding, even in the event of a breach in an area where the Member States act autonomously?
On 26 January 2018, Jarosław Kaczyński, Poland’s de facto leader (which in itself is a rather unhealthy sign in a democracy), claimed that what he refers to as judicial “reforms” would not be an EU matter but rather an “internal competence guaranteed by EU law”.
What would happen to the principle of mutual trust? Take requests for extradition under the European Arrest Warrant: Member States would be required to send anyone on their territory (including their own nationals) to a non-rule-of-law abiding Member State.
The notion of backsliding implies that a country was once better, and then regressed. How does that happen? Turns out, it follows a well-organised script that can be summed up in 8 steps.
Is the rule of law too vague a notion to be enforced by the EU against its Member States? Discussing possible sanctions against Poland over its rule of law issues, the Bulgarian prime minister recently claimed that the rule of law is too “vague” to be measured before adding: “Every time you want to hurt someone’s feelings, you put [on the table] ‘the rule of law’.”
Twelve scholars from eight countries have offered their critical perspectives on the legal governance of historical memory, categorised under the common heading of “memory laws”. One aspect crystalized by this symposium is that despite their multiple forms (punitive and declarative, constitutional and administrative, legislative and judicial, etc.), the adoption of such memory regulations has been on a tremendous rise in Europe.
An important area where law and historical memory intersect is the use of memory laws to express collective disapproval of crimes against humanity. These laws, although based on a compelling need to use the symbolic dimension of the law in order to condemn the lowest points of history, can have dangerous unintended consequences for freedom of speech.
13. September 2025
Giovanni Capoccia
12. September 2025
Anne Peters
12. September 2025
Anne Peters