Articles for category: Europa

Principled Generosity Mixed with Unmanaged Market

The EU is experiencing internal dissatisfaction at its inability to supply Member States with enough Covid-19 vaccines, while other countries – notably the UK – are racing ahead of it towards the end of the pandemic. Much criticism of the EU is unfair. It is being compared with countries that have shown more brutal and unashamed vaccine nationalism, but it should be proud that it has not gone down this path. By contrast, its role as global and regional vaccine supplier should not hide the fact that it has been too slow to recognize that vaccine sales cannot be left to the free market, while the Member States should not be allowed to hide their absence of leadership, initiative or organization behind critique of the EU.

A Letter to the European Commission

Further to the letter of December 2020, endorsed by more than 5,000 judges and prosecutors of the Member States, we, the representatives of Polish civil society organisations and European scholars specialising in EU law and human rights, are writing to you once again in connection with the worsening rule of law crisis in Poland. We have now reached a stage where independent judges seeking to apply EU law and the Court of Justice’s judgments are threatened with abusive criminal charges and coercive measures. We urge you therefore to urgently adopt concrete legal measures to prevent the further destruction of the rule of law in Poland.

Der Corona-Aufbaufonds, die Fiskalunion und das Bundesverfassungsgericht

Am 26.03.2021 hat der Zweite Senat des Bundesverfassungsgerichts angeordnet, dass das Eigenmittelbeschluss-Ratifizierungsgesetz (ERatG) vorläufig nicht durch den Bundespräsidenten ausgefertigt werden darf. Dadurch bannt es vorläufig die Gefahr, dass ein europarechts- und verfassungswidriger Weg in die Fiskalunion eingeschlagen wird. Was steckt dahinter, und was ist von den in diesem Verfahren aufgeworfenen Verfassungsrechtsfragen zu halten?

A Shot in the Arm or a Shot in the Foot?

The European Commission’s proposal to impose what was referred to as an “export ban” on exports of COVID-19 vaccines has generated considerable political and social media comment, particularly from the United Kingdom. The measure is (probably) lawful as a matter of international law and is certainly not a breach of the rule of law. But that does not mean that it is wise. Using the EU’s power in this way is a bit like pulling a brick from the tower in the well-known game of Jenga: the risk is that what is already a somewhat rickety tower (the rules-based trading order) will wobble yet further.  More immediately, the risk of vaccine nationalism is that other states will retaliate in a negative-sum game.

Liberté, Egalité, Identité

Berichten zufolge plädiert die französische Regierung vor dem obersten französischen Verwaltungsgericht, dem Conseil d’État, dafür, ein Urteil des EuGH zur Vorratsdatenspeicherung nicht zu befolgen, weil es gegen die französische Verfassungsidentität verstoße. Die Entscheidung steht noch aus, aber sollte das Gericht der französischen Regierung folgen wäre das ein weiterer Schlag gegen den Vorrang des EU-Rechts. Dabei ist die Berufung auf die französische Verfassungsidentität kein überzeugendes Konzept – erst recht nicht wenn es um Vorratsdatenspeicherung geht.

Vaccination for Vacation

The European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen announced on 1 March that the Commission will put forward a proposal for a “digital green pass” on 17 March, which would enable safe cross-border movement of three categories of individuals: those who have been vaccinated, those who have developed antibodies after recovering from COVID-19 and those who can produce a negative PCR test. This concept could enable individuals to travel across Europe without unduly discriminating citizens. By contrast, "EU vaccination certificates" would violate EU law and unduly discriminate citizens.

Corona Constitutional #56: Wer gewinnt?

EU-Mitgliedstaaten, die ihre Justiz unterjochen, verletzen EU-Recht: das hat der EuGH in Luxemburg mit seinem gestrigen Urteil zum polnischen Nationalen Justizrat kraftvoll deutlich gemacht. Die PiS-Regierung in Polen darf nicht einfach den Rechtsbehelf gegen Entscheidungen des von ihr kontrollierten Justizrat mit einem gesetzgeberischen Federstrich abschaffen. Der Kanal zwischen unabhängigen polnischen Gerichten und dem EuGH muss offen bleiben – und gleichzeitig versucht die PiS verzweifelt, diesen Kanal zuzustopfen. Wer wird das Rennen gewinnen? Darüber diskutiert Max Steinbeis heute mit dem Verfassungsrechtsprofessor WOJCIECH SADURSKI von der Universität Sydney.

Preserving Prejudice in the Name of Profit

Few CJEU judgments in recent years have received more criticism than the ‘headscarf judgments’, Achbita and Bougnaoui. In particular the decision in Achbita that private employers can legitimately pursue a policy of neutrality and ban expressions of political, religious, or philosophical belief at work, proved contentious. Two other headscarf cases, IX v Wabe and MH Müller, are currently pending before the CJEU and provide it with an excellent opportunity to do so. However, the first signs are not promising: Last week, Advocate General Rantos delivered his Opinion in these cases, which may be even more unpalatable than the Achbita judgment itself.