Articles for tag: Article 2CJEU JurisdictionEU CharterEuGHthe Hungarian anti-LGBTIQ* lawVertragsverletzungsverfahren

Keine allgemeine Verfassungsaufsicht über die Unionswerte im Vertragsverletzungsverfahren

Am 19. Dezember 2022 reichte die Europäische Kommission in der Rechtssache C-769/22 eine Vertragsverletzungsklage ein, in der sie im zweiten Klagegrund eine eigenständige Verletzung von Art. 2 EUV geltend machte. Dies löste eine breite Diskussion darüber aus, ob der EuGH seine Wertejudikatur in Zukunft so weiterentwickeln könnte, dass Art. 2 EUV auch als eigenständige Rechtsgrundlage herangezogen werden kann – ohne eine Verbindung zu spezifischen Bestimmungen des Unionsrechts.

European Society Strikes Back

“This is a frontal and deep attack against the … European society.” With this remarkable statement the Commission has started the “largest human rights battle in EU history”: the infringement proceedings against the Hungarian anti-LGBTIQ* law. The Commission claims that this law breaches the internal market, the Charter rights and the Union’s common values enshrined in Article 2 TEU. The “mega hearing”, which took place on 19 November 2024, is now facing its ultimate test: can the Member States’ compliance with Article 2 TEU be reviewed before the Court of Justice?

A Rare Win

In a rare win for the rights of asylum seekers in the first Greek asylum case making its way to Luxembourg, the CJEU has limited abusive uses of the safe third country concept that had condemned applicants to legal limbo. In its ruling on 4 October 2024, the Court left Greece’s designation of Türkiye as a safe third country intact. Nonetheless, the case will still have a significant impact on asylum applicants. This post sets out the practical effects of the judgment on people applying for asylum in Greece and beyond.

Rising Gender Disparity at the CJEU

With the recent swearing-in of Judges and Advocates-General at the CJEU in October 2024, the number of women has decreased. Among the new cohort of 11 Judges and AG arriving in Luxembourg, only one new woman was appointed to the CoJ. There are currently 5 women Judges out of the 27 positions at the CoJ. Among the 11 Advocates-General, only 3 are women. We urge Member States to intensify efforts for gender parity and to reform their domestic nomination processes. Finally, we call on the 255 Committee to guarantee full gender parity.

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.

Enhancing Fundamental Rights Protection

The EU should ensure fundamental rights’ compatibility of EU legislation before its adoption. To that effect, we propose three distinct paths to improve the EU control mechanisms. Whilst mechanisms to ensure quality control do exist, primarily in the form of impact assessments, these mostly remain a merely formal exercise. Henceforth, we suggest strengthening the ex ante fundamental rights review of EU legislation through enhanced involvement of FRA in the legislative process.

Stuck Between Unity and Diversity

The role of the EU Charter in disputes concerning fundamental rights standards between the EU and Member States has been characterized by ambiguity ever since the Charter’s inception. As the EU deepens integration of Member States to effectively face the challenges ahead, I advocate for a pluralistic interpretation of Article 53 of the Charter that allows for a greater degree of accommodation of national particularities. In that way, one would reduce constitutional tensions and find that there may be unity in diversity after all.

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.