Articles for tag: Asyl, EU-Außengrenze, EuGH, Haft, Migration

Kein Vor und kein Zurück

Im September hat die EU-Kommission ihren "New Pact on Migration and Asylum" vorgestellt. Noch haben sich die Mitgliedsstaaten nicht auf das Gesetzespaket geeinigt, nächste Woche wollen die europäischen Innenminister erneut verhandeln. Mit Blick auf die Entwürfe einerseits und die aktuelle Praxis der Mitgliedstaaten andererseits ist es jedoch wahrscheinlich, dass die Umsetzung der Vorschläge zu pauschaler Inhaftierung einer Vielzahl von schutzsuchenden Menschen an den EU-Außengrenzen führen wird.

11. Dezember 2020

, , , ,

LawRules #11: We need to talk about the European Court of Justice

The European Court of Justice has been in the middle of the European rule of law crisis for the last couple of years – and it has called out rule of law violations especially in Hungary and Poland multiple times. But the Court can’t defend the rule of law in the European Union on its own, and it needs institutional partners in this struggle. For example, it needs someone to file cases and to follow up on the Court's orders. Does the European Commission do enough on their part? Who is the guardian of the Treaties – the Commission, the Court, none of the two? The European Council is able to decide on sanctions against member states using the procedure of Article 7 TEU. But that tool has not been effective so far. Does that mean that we witness the juridification of a political conflict that puts too much of a burden on the Court?

4. Dezember 2020

, , , ,

The Commission’s Al Capone Tricks

In its judgement dealing with the Central European University, the CJEU had to employ a trick to address the rule of law issue at stake: It found that Hungary had violated the General Agreement on Trade in Services. The legal trick was succesful but in reality, the ruling came too late. The Central European University has moved to Vienna and will not return to Hungary.

20. November 2020

, ,

Towards a European Court of Fundamental Rights

With its judgments on bulk data retention issued at the beginning of this month, the European Court of Justice has entitled itself to examine virtually all surveillance measures in the digital sphere. In doing so, it has once more clarified its positioning as the decisive Fundamental Rights Court in Europe. In the midst of the ultra vires-storm caused by the PSPP-judgement of the Bundesverfassungsgericht – and questions arising with regard to German Legal Hegemony in Europe – a true shift of power to the ECJ can be spotted which is, surprisingly, supported by the national constitutional courts.

19. Oktober 2020

, , , , , , ,

Constitutionalising the EU Foreign and Security Policy

In the appeal case of Bank Refah Kargaran v Council (C-134/19 P), the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has held that the EU Courts have jurisdiction over claims for damages in the area of the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). This is coherent with the rationale of the exceptional exclusion of jurisdiction under CFSP and confirms that the Union’s commitment to the rule of law extends to CFSP.

18. Oktober 2020

, ,

Goodbye Vorratsdaten­speicherung

Der Europäische Gerichtshof (EuGH) ist standhaft geblieben: Eine anlasslose Massenüberwachung der EU-Bürgerinnen und Bürger kann es nicht geben. Zum bereits dritten Mal haben die Luxemburger Richter klargestellt, dass eine allgemeine und unterschiedslose Vorratsdatenspeicherung (VDS) aller Kommunikationsdaten der EU-Bürgerinnen und Bürger mit den europäischen Grundrechten nicht vereinbar ist. Sie erklärten einige nationale Regelungen vor allem in Frankreich und Großbritannien für unvereinbar mit der Europäischen Grundrechtecharta und der E-Privacy-Richtlinie.

8. Oktober 2020

, , ,