Articles for category: Europa

Securitizing the Economy

In June 2023, the European Commission presented the European Union’s first Economic Security Strategy. Its publication is in itself a Zeitenwende  in the EU’s foreign and economic policy, despite undeniable shortcomings, in particular the lack of a clear definition which opens the door for overly protectionist measures under the guise of security concerns. To succeed, however, it is critical to view economic security as a public good which can benefit the EU, its Member States, and its citizens.

A Timid Proposal

With the Council position of 12 June on the proposal for a EU Directive on improving working conditions in platform work, a presumption of employment status for digital platform work is now becoming the subject of trilogue negotiations. A lot could be said about the proposal, the process, and the innovation that would come with an EU Directive on platform work as such. This comment focuses on one central part of the proposal: the presumption of employment. The Commission’s and Council’s proposals suggest a well meant, but timid instrument. Given the already limited scope of te proposals in their definition of “digital labour platforms”, only the Parliament’s position that does not condition the presumption to any additional criteria is able to convince.

Judges and Organized Crime

Scandalous arrests of judges taking millions in bribes continue to make headlines. For purging the judiciary from corruption, vetting the integrity of judges through internationally supported commissions has become one of the most promising tools. In July 2023, the ECtHR has upheld the dismissal of yet another prominent judge – who had served, both, at the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court of Albania (Thanza v. Albania). While it is obvious that a judge should be dismissed for engaging in organised crime, this case may be the first in the world to raise another, rather unusual question: Can a judge be dismissed simply for having contact with organised crime, even if he has never committed any offence?

Changing Tides in European Election Law

On 15 June, the Bundestag approved a minimum percentage threshold for elections to the European Parliament (EP). Shortly before the summer break, the Bundesrat (Federal Council) also agreed to the clause. German lawmakers already failed twice in this endeavour before the Federal Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht, short BVerfG). This time, the German legislator can refer to a binding EU legal act backing its reform efforts. This means the electoral threshold must now be treated (also by the constitutional court) as determined by EU law – with all consequences. However, even a 2% hurdle is not 100% safe from the BVerfG.

The Definition of ›Digital Labour Platform‹ in the Proposed Platform Work Directive

On 9 December 2021, the European Commission announced its proposal for a Directive on improving working conditions in platform work—the ‘Platform Work Directive.’ The Directive’s main goals are to reduce false self-employment among persons performing platform work, to regulate algorithmic management on digital labour platforms, and to provide legal certainty for platforms. This blog post focuses on an element of the proposed Directive that has gone relatively unremarked in the scholarly and policy debates so far: the definition of ‘digital labour platform.’

Vorzeichenwechsel im Europawahlrecht

Der Bundestag hat am 15. Juni einer Sperrklausel für die Wahlen zum Europäischen Parlament zugestimmt. Kurz vor der Sommerpause schloss sich auch der Bundesrat an. Der deutsche Gesetzgeber unternimmt auf ein Neues, womit er schon zweimal vor dem Bundesverfassungsgericht gescheitert ist. Dieses Mal hat der deutsche Gesetzgeber bei der Einführung der Sperrklausel einen verbindlichen EU-Rechtsakt im Rücken. Damit geht allerdings einher, dass die Sperrklausel nun (auch verfassungsgerichtlich) mit allen Konsequenzen als determiniertes Unionsrecht behandelt werden muss. Doch auch eine 2 %-Hürde ist nicht zu 100% sicher vor dem BVerfG.

Competition law as a powerful tool for effective enforcement of the GDPR

It looks like a good week for data protection. On Tuesday, the Commission presented a new proposal for a Regulation on additional procedural rules for the GDPR, and a few hours later, the ECJ published its decision C-252/21 on Meta Platforms v Bundeskartellamt (Federal Cartel Office). While the Commission's proposal to improve enforcement in cross-border cases should probably be taken with a pinch of salt, the ECJ ruled on some things with remarkable clarity. The first reactions to the ruling were quite surprising; few had expected the ECJ to take such a clear stance against Meta's targeted advertising business model. It does however represent a consistent interpretation of the GDPR in the tradition and understanding of power-limiting data protection.

Reform the European Union for Enlargement!

External shocks such as the financial and migration crises, the Coronavirus pandemic, as well as internal and external security threats from terrorism as well as Russia's war against Ukraine emphasise that the EU, which has developed to be more heterogeneous, has become increasingly fragile. In line with a reduced willingness and ability of Member States to integrate further, the EU is becoming incapable of action and therefore is in danger of losing the trust of its citizens. Against this background, it is important not to gloss over the problems and to develop constructive solutions. This blogpost offers several possible solutions.

A Taxonomy of Standing

On June 21, the General Court handed down its order in T-628/22 René Repasi v the European Commission. Repasi had challenged the validity of the Commission Delegated Regulation 2022/1214, a complementary taxonomy regulation on nuclear energy and natural gas. The General Court dismissed the action due to lack of standing.  To surmount the notoriously strict standing requirements before the CJEU, Repasi relied on his position as a Member of Parliament (MEP) and argued that a claim of a wrong choice of the legal basis that leads to deviation from the ordinary legislative procedure (OLP) gives an MEP standing before the EU courts. The difficulties that MEPs encounter while fulfilling their legislative responsibilities make Repasi’s argument appealing. However, creating a new semi-privileged standing category through the Union courts could also present its own set of difficulties.

A Constitution without Constitutionalism

“Digital constitutionalism” has attracted a good deal of scholarly attention in recent years, much of it enthusiastic, some more sceptical. Just what constitutionalism means, and how this meaning can be transposed into a realm of private ― albeit increasingly regulated ― interactions rather than traditional public law, is part of the debate between the enthusiasts and the sceptics. All agree, however, that it is a normatively charged idea, a shorthand reference to certain values which include ― whether or not they are limited to ― respect for certain human rights. In this post, I argue that while we can indeed think of internet regulation in constitutional terms, we must first understand what I shall call the constitution of cyberspace. A descriptive effort must precede any normative projects directed at imposing values allegedly inherent in the notion of constitutionalism onto cyberspace. And further, understanding the constitution of cyberspace should at least make us wary of digital constitutionalism’s normative ambitions.