Articles for tag: Academic FreedomCEUEuGHVertragsverletzungsverfahren

Finally: The CJEU Defends Academic Freedom

The CJEU’s judgment against Hungary in the CEU case is the first major judicial pronouncement by a European court on the institutional dimension of academic freedom as a fundamental human right. Infringement action has become the surprise weapon in the Commission’s rule of law toolbox. The initial surprise is a thing of the past: over the years the Hungarian government has built some defenses of its own, using familiar components of the European constitutional architecture in service of illiberal democracy.

Frequent Recourse to the Principle of ›Effectiveness‹ in ECJ Asylum Jurisprudence

An empirical study of all asylum-related preliminary rulings reveals a disquieting trend: the Court has adopted an administrative, passivist role within the area. Its distinguishing features include an overzealous concern for the technicalities of the legislative instruments before it and sparse to no references to human rights instruments or values in the operative parts of the judgments. In light of the symbolic power carried by the Court’s language, this trend risks sending the wrong signal to national judicial instances; namely, that concerns for the system can legitimately trump concerns for the individuals caught in it.

Hyperlinks, ein urheberrechtliches Minenfeld

Eine zentrale Innovation, die zum Siegeszug des World Wide Web beigetragen hat, ist der Hyperlink, also die Möglichkeit, Internetinhalte durch Querverweise miteinander zu vernetzen. Doch die rechtlichen Vorgaben, die beim Verweis auf externe Medien beachtet werden müssen, werden immer komplizierter. In einem anstehenden Urteil könnte der EuGH erstmals zwischen verschiedenen Verlinkungstechniken differenzieren und diese Komplexität weiter erhöhen, mit potentiell gravierenden Folgen für die Kommunikationsfreiheit.

Lawful composition – the EFTA Court’s approach

On 10 September 2020, the British Advocate General at the Court of Justice of the European Union, Eleanor Sharpston, was replaced by the Greek lawyer Athanasios Rantos. Most of the commentators of the incident, which stirred up a great deal of dust, focus on the question whether the termination of Ms. Sharpston’s mandate on 10 September 2020 was lawful. The following considerations, on the other hand, examine the legal situation in the event that her expulsion from the ECJ was after Brexit in line with EU law. A precedent of the EFTA Court in 2016 may be relevant in this context.

It’s Urgent II

On Friday 4 September 2020, Judge Anthony Collins of the General Court has ordered the suspension of operation and all consequential effects of the Decision of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, in so far as it purports to appoint Mr. Athanasios Rantos to the position of Advocate General of the Court of Justice. The significance of this development for the independence of the judiciary in the EU and the general articulation of the rule of law in Europe is difficult to overestimate.

Defending the Open Society against its Enemies

On 18 June 2020, in the case of Commission v Hungary (Transparency of associations), the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice held that Hungarian authorities “introduced discriminatory and unjustified restrictions on foreign donations to civil society organisations” when it adopted a new legislation on NGO in 2017. How will the Hungarian government react? Six potential scenarios can be outlined from not doing anything (scenario 1) – an unlikely option due to the threat of pecuniary sanctions – to full and good faith compliance with the judgment resulting in the total repeal of the Lex NGO (scenario 6) – equally unlikely. Between these two, four additional ones may be foreseen.

Ein Schiedsgericht für die Gerichte?

Der Ultra-vires-Konflikt zwischen dem Bundesverfassungsgericht und dem Europäischen Gerichtshof begründet eine Verfassungskrise, die sich nicht rechtlich, sondern nur politisch überwinden lässt. In diesem Sinne hat Armin Hatje hier jüngst einen begrüßenswerten rechtspolitischen Vorschlag für einen Gemeinsamen Rat der obersten Gerichtshöfe der Europäischen Union vorgestellt. Nachdem Hatje bereits die Funktion und mögliche Ausgestaltung eines solchen Gremiums beschrieben hat, möchte ich seinen Vorschlag im Folgenden um die Beobachtung ergänzen, dass ein Gemeinsamer Rat nur dann Erfolg verspricht, wenn alle Beteiligten die politische Natur seiner Entscheidungen akzeptieren.

Ultra vires and constitutional identity control – apples and oranges or two drops of water?

The PSPP decision raised the question of how to deal with competence and jurisdictional conflicts in the EU. Once suggestion is to install a Mixed Appeal Chamber of the CJEU. Apart from ultra vires control, the New Chamber could also engage in constitutional identity review of EU law. In order to do that I will propose, what I call, the “sequential” model of adjudication on Art. 4(2) TEU, which in my opinion can be applied in the current legal setting, but which could be potentially complemented with the establishment of the new chamber.

Taming the Karlsruhe Dragon

In order to reconcile the conflicting claims for primacy within the parameters set by the BVerfG and EU law, the German parliament could (and should) amend the procedural rules for the BVerfG: the first, and most fundamental of these changes would provide for an order to conduct a referendum on whether Germany should exercise its right to withdraw from the EU under Art. 50 TEU as the only definitive judicial remedy available if a conflict between EU law and the German constitution cannot otherwise be resolved.