Articles for category: Europa

Obstinate Choices

Denmark is currently going through a full-blown intelligence scandal. It includes charges of illegal activity lodged by the Danish Intelligence Oversight Board (TET) against the Danish foreign intelligence service (FE), as well as a range of criminal cases brought against the former head of FE, a former minister of defence, and a former intelligence officer on charges of leaking classified information. In this post, I argue that these scandals can best be understood through the lens of a series of obstinate choices made by the Danish government and its representatives. Seemingly, because key decision-makers lacked trust and got fed up with leaks, the situation was handled aggressively from the start, as a matter of principle. I explain the complex scandal but focus on specifics only in the case against former minister of defence, Claus Hjort Frederiksen, as his case is the most clear-cut and observable for outsiders.

13. Oktober 2023

, , , , ,

A Hidden Success

Following the EU General Court’s dismissal of the complaint of WS and other asylum seekers against Frontex in its ruling on September 6, 2023, scholarly commentary has largely expressed disappointment. However, a more optimistic way of reading the judgement is also possible. By declaring the lawsuit admissible, the court confirmed that factual misconduct by Frontex can be addressed with action for damages claims – and this in itself is a major step forward in the system of fundamental rights protection in the European Union.

13. Oktober 2023

, ,

Automated Decision-Making and the Challenge of Implementing Existing Laws

Who loves the latest shiny thing? Children maybe? Depends on the kid. Cats and dogs perhaps? Again, probably depends. What about funders, publishers, and researchers? Now that is an easier question to answer. Whether in talks provided by the tax-exempt ‘cult of TED’, or in open letters calling for a moratorium, the attention digital technologies receive today is extensive, especially those that are labelled ‘artificial intelligence’. This noise comes with calls for a new ad hoc human right against being subject to automated decision-making (ADM). While there is merit in adopting new laws dedicated to so-called AI, the procedural mechanisms that can implement existing law require strengthening. The perceived need for new substantive rules to govern new technology is questionable at best, and distracting at worst. Here we would like to emphasise the importance of implementing existing law more effectively in order to better regulate ADM. Improving procedural capacities across the legal frameworks on data protection, non-discrimination, and human rights is imperative in this regard.

5. Oktober 2023

, , ,

The Comeback of the Mixed Chamber

Three years ago, in the wake of the Weiss judgment of the German Federal Constitutional Court, we proposed the creation of a “Mixed Chamber” in the Court of Justice of the European Union, to rule in last instance on judicial disputes on points of Union competence. The rationale of a Chamber so composed is not obvious. After all, in a Union in which EU Law has primacy over national law, in which the autonomy of EU law is all-pervasive and where the Court of Justice is the ultimate interpreter of EU law, why should a Mixed Chamber be needed? We believe there are at least three good reasons that make a Mixed Chamber as salient as ever.

2. Oktober 2023

, , , , ,

Europe’s Faustian Bargain

On Thursday, news broke that the German government had agreed to incorporating the previously rejected Crisis Regulation into the EU’s new asylum and migration pact. The decision was a radical change of course since Germany had previously consistently opposed its inclusion. Framed as allowing for more ‘flexibility’ in case of migratory surges, the Crisis Regulation’s adoption will, in effect, suspend the EU asylum system as we know it for the time being, given that recorded sea arrivals are currently nearing the 2015 levels. A crisis in need of regulation, if you will. In this blogpost, I highlight the dangerous fallacy that underpins our tolerance for the illegality that has come to characterize contemporary border control. In particular, our failure to oppose the constant expansion of the limits of the law that occurs in the name of crisis and political necessity rests on the mistaken assumption that we have nothing to lose in this race to the bottom. 

1. Oktober 2023

, , , ,

False Hope for Democracy in Bosnia & Herzegovina

Bosnia & Herzegovina (B&H) is notoriously hard to govern. Scarred from a bloody war in the 1990s after the collapse of Yugoslavia, the country’s constitutional order emerged in international peace talks in the United States. What later became famous as the Dayton Peace Agreement (DPA) might have stopped the war but, in our opinion, sowed the seeds for complex democratic problems today. As we will show in this text, the ECtHR’s judgments represent a false hope for democracy in B&H, because ethnopolitical parties in B&H will not agree on how to implement the ECtHR’s judgments and the Office of the High Representative will not take a more active role in this context. We therefore argue against an earlier contribution on this blog by Woelk (2023), who suggested that the solution for the implementation of the ECtHR’s judgments should come from within the country, as we will show, ethnopolitical actors do not have a real interest in implementing these judgments. To put it bluntly, change from within is, alas, pie in the sky. It is much more likely that nothing changes and the powers that are remain the powers that will be.

1. Oktober 2023

, , , , ,

Für einen Menschenrechtspakt in der Flüchtlingspolitik

&

Als Wissenschaftler*innen aus dem Asylrecht und der Fluchtforschung, die seit Jahren die Flüchtlingspolitik untersuchen und kommentieren, sehen wir die jüngsten politischen Debatten und Forderungen mit großer Sorge. Die Debatte über Flucht und Asyl wird weitestgehend faktenfrei geführt. Dadurch werden Ängste geschürt und gesellschaftliche Probleme Schutzsuchenden angelastet. Zudem werden kurzerhand rechtsstaatliche und menschenrechtliche Minimalstandards für populistische Überschriften geopfert.

30. September 2023

, , ,

Act Three for Climate Litigation in Strasbourg

Yesterday, on 27 September 2023, a historic hearing took place before the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights. The Court heard the Duarte Agostinho case, brought by six Portuguese children and young people against a whopping 33 Member States of the Council of Europe. Having heard two other climate cases this past March (the KlimaSeniorinnen v. Switzerland and Carême v. France cases, respectively), this was the Court’s final hearing before it issues its first-ever findings on climate change. It was also the Court’s first youth climate case. For several reasons, yesterday’s hearing was a historic one: Duarte Agostinho is the Grand Chamber’s biggest-yet climate case, both in terms of the substantive rights invoked and the number of States involved.

28. September 2023

, , ,

Recovery and Resilience Facility two years after – quo vadis EU money?

In 2020, at the height of the Covid crisis, the EU embarked on a new path. It extensively borrowed money at capital markets and handed it out to member states. After two years of implementation, it is now possible to make some preliminary conclusions about how that money is being spent. Reading the reports and listening to the hearings in the European Parliament, it becomes abundantly clear that most of it has very little to do with European policies. Rather, spending goes into mundane national budgetary expenditures that may be useful as such but have little genuine European value and little transformational potential. In a time with pressing common European needs, this is not how it should be.  

28. September 2023

, , , ,

Verwaltung ohne Verantwortung

Mit Urteil vom 6. September 2023 hat das Gericht der Europäischen Union (EuG) in erster Instanz erstmalig über eine Schadensersatzklage geflüchteter Personen gegen die Europäische Agentur für die Grenz- und Küstenwache (Frontex) entschieden und die Klage abgewiesen. Politische und zivilgesellschaftliche Vereinigungen sowie die Wissenschaft weisen schon länger auf systemische Mängel bei der Geltendmachung von Rechtsverletzungen gegenüber Frontex hin. Die Entscheidung des EuG perpetuiert diese Mängel, weil sie Bewertungsmaßstäbe nicht berücksichtigt, die aus menschenrechtlicher Sicht geboten sind. Eine dogmatisch überzeugende Integration dieser Maßstäbe in das Unionsrecht würde die Rechte geflüchteter Personen wahren und so das unionale Recht auf effektiven Rechtsschutz stärken.

27. September 2023

, , , ,