Articles for category: Gerichte

The Tail That Wags the Dog

In Opinion 2/13 the Court of Justice held that accession to the ECHR must not interfere with the operation of the principle of mutual trust as this would affect the autonomy of EU law. I offer a different reading: mutual trust is not a general principle capable of having autonomous legal effects. Furthermore, mutual trust is acquiring a novel value for the progressive operationalisation of the foundational values ex Article 2 TEU. Read in this way, it has then the potential to enhance fundamental rights protection and is certainly no bar to accession to the ECHR – it is the dog of core values that wags the tail of mutual trust and not vice versa.

Weniger ist mehr

Praktiker, Politiker aber auch Wissenschaftler kritisieren schon seit längerem die hohe Anzahl von externen Kontrollinstitutionen für die Tätigkeit der Nachrichtendienste in Bund und Ländern. Fälschlicherweise wird häufig das Bundesverfassungsgericht für die Zersplitterung der Kontrolleure verantwortlich gemacht. Das verwundert, weil die Gesetzgeber verfassungsrechtlich einen großen Gestaltungspielraum haben und die Anzahl der Kontrolleure reduzieren könnten. In diesem Beitrag sollen daher Vorschläge unterbreitet werden, wie sich die Kontrollarchitektur durch relativ einfach umsetzbare Regelungen übersichtlicher gestalten ließe, ohne dabei Kontrolllücken entstehen zu lassen.

Two Courts, Two Visions

The diverging standards of protection concerning the right to a fair trial, as interpreted by the CJEU and the ECtHR, remain a critical obstacle to the EU’s renewed attempt at accession to the ECHR. In this field, the two Courts seem to be drifting further apart rather than converging, leading to unresolved conflicts between the standard of fundamental rights protection and mutual trust obligations in the EU. Except in the unlikely event of a course-correction by the CJEU, this means that we are no closer to accession today than we were ten years ago, when the now-infamous Opinion 2/13 was handed down.

Interviewing EU Judges

Who are the women and men behind the CJEU’s decisions? The CJEU is an incredibly powerful institution, yet little is known about the backgrounds, judicial philosophies, and ambitions of its judges and advocates general. The Union’s “Help Desk,” as CJEU President Koen Lenaerts modestly describes the Court, is now interpreting broad-ranging rules while also giving legal meaning to ambitious and ambiguous values such as the rule of law. This is where the Borderlines archive comes in – we interview the judges and advocates general of the Court of Justice, to learn about their backgrounds, varied experiences, and their jurisprudential philosophies.

Reconciling National and European Constitutional Legalities

In light of the increasingly established autonomous European constitutional legality, national constitutional courts are now compelled to reconsider their roles. Through a progressive expansion of its direct applicability by national ordinary judges, the Charter of Fundamental Rights risks fostering the marginalization of national constitutional courts. I argue that the solution lies in a highly differentiated consolidation of constitutional legalities that integrates and embraces the unique roles of national constitutional courts in their respective systems of adjudication.

Pouring New Wine into Old Wineskins

The three seemingly trivial observations that follow inform three substantive proposals regarding the protection of fundamental rights within the EU. To address the challenges faced by national constitutional courts and the CJEU, it is essential to leverage existing procedural tools within domestic legal systems. Additionally, expanding the applicability of these versatile tools and considering a structural revision of the judicial bodies may facilitate the creation of hybrid entities that could collaboratively address major issues, thereby steering constitutional developments in the EU.

Maintaining Resilience in Human Rights Interpretation

In the Religious Movement Advisory Opinion, the European Court of Human Rights established detailed risk and proportionality assessment criteria that deviate from its previous case law in individual applications. The Court thus seems eager to embrace its standard-setting role and the spirit of dialogue inherent in the advisory opinion procedure, indicating some potential for resilience in rights interpretation within this sensitive context.

Fundamental Rights Come Off the Bench

In 2014, the European Court of Justice clearly prioritised the EU’s position on the unity and effectiveness of EU law over the protection of fundamental rights (Opinion 2/13). Ten years later, in October 2024, a judgment pitting football against the media seems to have turned the tables. In Real Madrid vs Le Monde, the Court held that excessive defamation damages may breach the freedom of the press and trigger the public policy exception. This is a significant shift, prioritising fundamental rights protection over the traditional objective of seamless judicial cooperation across the EU.

Beyond the Letter of the Treaties

In the context of the EU’s intention to accede to the ECHR, the CJEU, through its recent case-law on restrictive measures, shapes the scope of its jurisdiction in CFSP matters and opens up new prospects for the future architecture of the EU legal order. The first part of this post recalls how the Court’s case-law on restrictive measures contributed to the constitutionalization of the CFSP through the extension of its jurisdiction in the matter. The second part presents the challenges posed by the most recent cases on EU sanctions and the possible implications of the Court’s responses.

The EU Charter’s Odyssey

Since its inception, the Union has grown into a tremendously powerful political actor through ever-increasing legal harmonization. This development has significantly marginalized the role of national apex courts – the lighthouses of democracy. Moreover, the globally observed trajectory of authoritarian forces is shaking EU's roots and questioning the vision of a lasting European polity. To fend off all these challenges, the Union should be centred around the hard-won humanistic freedoms and common values defined in the Charter, serving as a basis for common identification and a canvas to project shared visions of a political entity.