Articles for category: Focus

The Collective Memory of Trauma and Why it Still Matters

Holocaust historian Jan Tomasz Gross claimed in a 2015 article that the immigration crisis in Europe is inextricably linked to the way Europeans today contend with their group’s behavior during the Holocaust. What does the influx of mostly Muslim immigrants to Europe have to do with how Europeans treated their Jewish population eighty years ago? According to Gross, the answer lies in whether nations acknowledge their historical culpability, most notably in the case of Germany, or whether they actively try to deny any wrongdoing, such as in the cases of Poland and Hungary.

24. Juli 2024

,

Never Again. And Not Quite.

Those who build new public law act with the past hovering over their shoulders. Rejecting regimes of horror explains much of the content of new constitutions. Aversive constitutionalism – in which constitutionalists overtly steer away from a country’s appalling pasts – guides how they understand these new texts. On balance, even among those who disagree over precisely how the past is memorialized as “never again” in new constitutions, evidence shows that the horrors of the past influence public law in the present much more than do the dreams of some ideal future.

23. Juli 2024

, ,

Administrative and Citizen Interpretations of Unwritten Constitutional Principles and Constitutional Silences

Looking at Canadian law, this blog posts argues that administrative agencies should be able to interpret and articulate unwritten constitutional principles when exercising their discretionary powers, and that these interpretations ought to be deferred to by courts. This would also encourage citizens to put forward their own interpretations of unwritten constitutional principles, fostering a participatory approach to constitutional interpretation.

22. Juli 2024

, ,

Never Again Say »Never Again«

“Never Again” is one of those slogans on which practically everyone can agree. How can one not? (Unless you belong to the flat-earth Holocaust-denial lunatic fringe). When we use “Never Again” it is, of course, a shorthand to the enormity of German National Socialism. The pledge “Never Again” is absolute in time: Never again. It is absolute in space too: “That” cannot and should not ever take place anywhere. It is universal: It bridges Left and Right, North and South, Rich and Poor. Standing at the barricades under the “Never Again” banner is both powerful and self-empowering. But herein lies its potential for abuse. What exactly is the “that” which must never happen again?

22. Juli 2024

,

»Never Again«

“Never again” is, first and foremost, a story. It’s a story about our collective fears, anxieties, and aspirations, those moments and events that we have promised ourselves that will never be repeated. The Jewish story is interwoven with the Holocaust—the killing of six million Jews in Europe and the urgency of the re-establishment of a Jewish state to solve the problem of Jewish homelessness. Yet the constitutional and international meaning of “never again” depends on one’s position and point of view, and it changes over time. The chain reaction that began with the horrors of WWII continues to drive constitutional and international agendas. It is clear that “history talks,” but in which direction?

22. Juli 2024

, , , , ,

Ensuring the Mission of Public Service Broadcasters

Public Service Broadcasters (PSBs) are publicly organised and funded broadcasters, organised by each of the EU’s Member State with a great degree of discretion and under a unique legal framework. Politicised interventions and the decline of PSBs’ independence threaten their ability to adequately perform their role and offer citizens a high-quality public service which meets the public’s democratic and cultural needs. The politicisation of PSBs by national authorities, coupled with the increasing concerns about media freedom, shows that some type of regulatory intervention is necessary.

16. Juli 2024

,

Biting More Than It Can Chew

Among (too) many other things, the recently adopted European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) introduced an assessment of the impact of media market concentration on media pluralism and editorial independence. It thereby aims to address the growing economic threats media pluralism and freedom have been facing all across Europe. However, when considering recent media merger cases in Poland as well as the substantive and institutional competition law framework, it is uncertain whether the Act will provide efficient solutions.

16. Juli 2024

,

Digital News Aggregators, Media Plurality and the Right to Information

&

The advent of the digital economy has brought many challenges to traditional business models, leading to new issues that go beyond pure market problems. This is also true for the news media industry since the emergence and rapid expansion of digital platforms like Google and Facebook. While the latter, in contrast to press publishers, do not produce any news content themselves, they have become digital news aggregators and first contact points for readers of online news. In this post, we reflect on the existing approaches towards addressing the bargaining imbalance between press publishers and digital news aggregators. We argue that the most adequate measure in addressing this imbalance would be a regulatory instrument such as a bargaining code.

16. Juli 2024

, , ,

Taking Extra Care of the Media?

The adoption of the European Media Freedom Act broke new ground in the EU’s approach to media law. Amongst other goals, the EMFA seeks to address the risk of restricting media content by online platforms by envisaging the special, privileged, treatment of media service providers in the area of content moderation. This post discusses the extent of the privilege granted to media service providers and the relationship between the EMFA and the DSA.

16. Juli 2024

On Tables, Markets, and Free Speech

On the surface level, we see private actors exercising more and more power over speech; on a deeper level though, we might be returning to a far older discussion about the interplay of private and public power, and the fate of an individual who lives in the crash zone between them. Given that the result of this clash largely comes down to choosing a proper regulatory policy, this contribution argues that when regulating market-situated speech particular caution should be exercised.

15. Juli 2024

, ,