Articles for category: EU

FIFA Transfer System Rules in front of the Court

The governance of professional football is facing turbulent times. After three verdicts on 21 December 2023 (ESL, RAFC and ISU), the next case potentially sanctioning football governance is already well underway. In the pending Diarra case (C-650/22), the validity of the FIFA transfer system is at stake. Transfers are among the bread and butter of daily football practice. Any flaw in the transfer system will affect the whole industry. This blog post explores Diarra from a competition law perspective.

The Sovereign Protection Office as the Tip of the Iceberg

In December 2023, the Hungarian Parliament passed a law establishing a Sovereign Protection Office—a state administration which now possesses unfettered access to personal data to find and sanction supposed foreign agents among the Hungarian populace. This office operates at will and without oversight, offers no avenue for legal redress, and wields prison time upwards of three years. In recent weeks, the European Commission launched an infringement proceeding over the law, and the European Parliament called on the European Council to consider Article 7(2) procedures.

Shipwreck after Shipwreck

On 26 February 2024, the European Ombudsman issued a decision OI/3/2023/MHZ on the fundamental rights obligations of Frontex with regard to search and rescue in the context of its maritime surveillance activities. While affirming Frontex’s compliance with the applicable rules and protocols, the inquiry exposed significant shortcomings in how the Agency handles maritime incidents, including the issuance of emergency signals. Given the persistent scale of recurrent shipwrecks, I argue that integrating AI systems into Frontex’s activities has the capacity to significantly improve the decision-making process in responding to boats in potential distress and the overall SAR system.

European Nuclear Weapons

After Donald Trump’s announcement to withhold US military support in case of an attack on a NATO member by Russia under certain circumstances, a discussion has been sparked on whether Europe itself should have their own nuclear weapons for nuclear deterrence. However, given the progress in the legal framework of nuclear non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament, European nuclear weapons would violate international law.

EU’s Involvement in the Renewal of the Spanish Council of the Judiciary

The growing political polarization of Western liberal democracies often leads to situations of political deadlock that require the intervention of an external authority capable of untangling the knot. After the second (fruitless) meeting held today between Commissioner Reynders and representatives of the Spanish government and the main opposition party, there is no simple solution in sight to an issue of the renewal of the Spanish Council of the Judiciary with significant implications for the immediate future of the Spanish political scenario. In this blog, I argue that underneath all the technical layers of legal order invoked under the generic defence of the rule of law, there are political and democratic debates for which the EU may play an important yet uncertain and questionable role.

In Search of a Methodical Approach to Seat Apportionment in the European Parliament

The European Parliament is once again trying to tackle the problem of how to apportion its seats between member states. In one of those rare Treaty instances, Parliament is obliged to initiate this procedure itself [Article 14(2) TEU]. It has so far failed in this obligation, and finding a decent solution still proves difficult. However, on 14 February 2024, the Parliament’s Constitutional Affairs Committee (AFCO) organised a workshop to consider three alternative formulae, all of which respect the principle of degressive proportionality. The blog outlines these proposals and explicates the challenges of the search for a methodical approach to seat apportionment in the European Parliament.

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.

Unpacking the Critical Raw Materials Act

The recently adopted Critical Raw Materials Act (CRMA) is framed as a milestone for the EU Green Industrial Plan and the twin green and digital transitions. In the context of emerging green industrial policies and the resurgence of the state as an economic actor, the Act encapsulates the EU’s attempt to instrumentalise markets for public objectives. Yet, the bid to generate tailored and specific market outcomes is undercut by the Act’s primary strategy of adjusting risks and returns for ultimately volatile, profit-driven private initiative. At the same time, the Act’s focus on domestic green growth, even if read charitably, remains myopic to the global challenge of climate change and perpetuates existing patterns of core-periphery extractivism.

Germany Blocks Europe-Wide Protection of Women Against Violence

Gender-based violence has dramatically increased in the European Union (EU) in recent years. In particular women are widely affected by rape. On 8 March 2022, the Commission presented a Draft Directive for comprehensive, effective and enforceable protection against gender-based violence in all EU Member States. The main point of contention in the negotiations, which could ultimately prevent the adoption of the Draft Directive, is the introduction of the common definition of the criminal offence of rape. The Directive aims to harmonize across Europe the definition of rape as a violation of the consent-based sexual act. Yet, twelve Member States, with Germany and France at the forefront, are not convinced that the EU has a sufficient legal base to regulate that issue. This article highlights the arguments for a common regulation of the criminal offence of rape in the EU under Art. 83 (1) TFEU against the doubts raised by the German Federal Ministry of Justice.