Articles for category: EU FOCUS

Challenging Strasbourg

Since 22 May 2025, a disquieting letter has been circulating: nine leading EU politicians are calling for “a new and open-minded conversation about the interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights,” with particular reference to migration. The signatories seek to explore whether “the Court, in some cases, has extended the scope of the Convention on Human Rights too far compared with the original intentions behind the Convention, thus shifting the balance between the interests that should be protected.” The letter raises not only political and ethical questions but also significant legal concerns.

A Threat to the Core

On May 13, 2025, just before midnight, a FIDESZ deputy tabled a new bill before the Hungarian Parliament. The bill seeks to enhance “sovereignty protection measures” by introducing sweeping transparency instruments targeting foreign-funded interference in Hungarian public life. These restrictions purposefully shrink civic space further, roll back protections of fundamental rights and impair the functioning of constitutional democracy in a retrogressive fashion. When adopted, Hungary’s constitutional order will fundamentally regress from the state that existed at the time of its accession to the European Union.

Text Messages, Transparency, and the Rule of Law

On 14 May 2025, the General Court of the EU ruled in favour of The New York Times in the much-awaited Pfizergate case, annulling the European Commission's decision to withhold the SMS text messages presumed to have been exchanged between EU Commission President von der Leyen and Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla. While presented as another case concerning document access, potentially illuminating the informal negotiation process behind COVID-19 vaccine contracts and the management and archive of texts and other instant messages, this judgment largely defies this expectation.

(de) la Tour fait le cavalier

On 3 April 2025, AG de la Tour handed down his Opinion in C-713/23, Wojewoda Mazowiecki, a case concerning the recognition and transcription of same-sex marriage contracted in another Member State between two nationals of the State where recognition was sought. The Opinion states that Member States where same-sex marriage is not permitted must recognise a family bond lawfully established in another Member State. Yet, akin to a knight’s leap in chess, the Opinion sidestepped the question of marriage transcription with a reasoning that does not seem entirely convincing.

In the Name of Primacy

In 1973, Pierre Pescatore noted that “[P]rimacy is an ‘existential requirement’ of EU law”. The Opinion of AG Spielmann in Case C-448/23 (Commission v. Poland), delivered on 11 March 2025, opens with this harsh observation. His difficult task is to frame in legal terms the two essentially political rulings delivered by the Polish Constitutional Tribunal in 2021, where – notoriously – the “captured” domestic court refused to adhere to the most basic principles governing the relationship between national and EU law. This requires adjustments in the current vocabulary of the Luxembourg judges.

How Hungary’s Pride Ban Tests the EU’s Commitment to Democracy

On March 18, 2025, the Hungarian Parliament passed legislation aimed at protecting children from assemblies that promote homosexuality. Although the amendment imposes general limitations on freedom of assembly, it is commonly understood as a ban on the LGBTQ+ Pride march, just ahead of the 30th anniversary in 2025. The new law purposefully violates European human rights standards on freedom of assembly and LGBTQ+ rights, as well as fundamental values of the European Union, such as the rule of law and democracy (Article 2 TEU).

Anonymity and Surveillance, Creativity and Copyright

The emergence of digital networks over the past decades has presented a problem for copyright exploiters. Thus, they resorted to strategic enforcement targeting individual users. However, the users would often remain anonymous due to the lack of access to traffic data revealing their identity. But the decision in La Quadrature du Net II – permitting retention and disclosure of traffic data for minor offences – has the adverse effect: it incentivises enforcement strategies targeting users and requiring platforms to hand over such data.

Paying Judges Properly

On 22 February, several thousand marched in Budapest for an independent judiciary, including fair pay for judges. Three days later, the CJEU issued a decision in Joined Cases C‑146/23 and C‑374/23, setting out the EU law criteria for judges’ remuneration. The decision sets general minimum criteria for the remuneration of judges to guarantee their independence and is highly relevant for Hungary, where the salary pathway for judges is not set by law, it is not judicially enforceable, and the entire system lacks foreseeability.

Kippt in Brüssel das individuelle Asylrecht?

Während ganz Deutschland leidenschaftlich den „Merz-Plan“ für Zurückwei-sungen an den deutschen Grenzen diskutiert, hat in Brüssel eine Grundsatz-debatte von viel größerer Tragweite begonnen. In einer spektakulären Wen-dung erachtet die EU-Kommission „Pushbacks“ unter Umständen neuerdings für rechtmäßig. Das ist heikel, weil Pushbacks an den Außengrenzen das in-dividuelle Asylrecht beseitigen.

Does the EU Have What it Takes to Counter American Plutocratic Power?

Our symposium ‘Musk, Power, and the EU’ has evolved in parallel with the inauguration of the new US administration and has been marked by numerous and unprecedented attacks on the European Union. Amid a flurry of announcements challenging the status quo - often with brutal disregard, even against traditional allies - the European Union, along with the way it exercises power, suddenly appears as the antithesis of the new America. Yet does the EU have what it takes to resist such an expansionist and plutocratic projection of power, which now threatens Europe’s security, lifestyle and overall existence?