Articles for tag: EuGHFront Polisariolegal personLegal standingMaroccoWestern Sahara

Taking Locus Standi of International Actors Seriously

On October 4th 2024 the Court of Justice issued its judgement in Front Polisario II upholding the judgement in which GC annulled Council’s decision on the conclusion of the trade agreement between European Union and Morocco. In its landmark judgement the Court acknowledged the legal standing of Front Polisario – the liberation movement representing rights of the people of Western Sahara. The Court’s findings advance the flexible and adequate approach on access to EU’s courts – and for that are worth applauding.

Bridging the CFSP Gap

The CJEU interprets its Common Foreign and Security Policy jurisdiction in light of the objectives set by the Lisbon Treaty, thereby integrating part and parcel of the CFSP into the rest of the European Union acquis. This aligns the CFSP with the general principles and constitutional rules set in the Treaty. As the Court advances the integration of CFSP jurisdiction within the broader EU legal order, the judgements of 10 September 2024 in Neves 77 Solutions and KS and KD v Council and Others serve as landmark ruling for the future of judicial review in CFSP.

Dismissing the Genuine Link by Disregarding Constitutional Principles

The struggle over the Maltese investment citizenship scheme is probably one of the fiercest debates of EU constitutional law. The conflict revolves around the question of whether EU law contains requirements for the acquisition of Union citizenship and whether these requirements consist in a “genuine link” between the respective state and individual. The recent Opinion by AG Collins provides us with an extremely narrow and astonishingly one-sided view. In particular, he seeks to make us believe that there are no sound ways to anchor a genuine link requirement in EU law. Martijn van den Brink finds it “hard to disagree with the Advocate General”. Respectfully, I disagree.

A Political Question Doctrine for the CFSP

On 10 September 2024, the CJEU issued its judgment in the joined cases of KS and KD, addressing the scope of its jurisdiction within the Common Foreign and Security Policy. Specifically, the Court asserted its jurisdiction in so far as the harm-causing conduct did not relate to “political or strategic” choices made in the context of the CFSP. I criticize the Court’s reliance on such an ill-defined concept to delineate the boundaries of its jurisdiction and argue that removing the limitations on the CJEU’s jurisdiction within the CFSP would require a reform of the Treaties.

Soft Law’s Increasing Clout

The non-binding nature of soft law is rather self-evident, yet, its influence is growing, as reflected in the recent Jemerak case, decided on 5 September 2024. While the judges in Luxembourg explicitly stated that the Commission’s guidance document had no effect on their interpretation of Union law whatsoever, their decision de facto indirectly reviewed that document. I argue that the Jemerak case exemplifies the growing significance of soft law.

Misjudging the Football Transfer System

In 1995, the Bosman ruling put an end to transfer fees for out-of-contract players. This year, the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) is dealing with the Diarra case, which concerns players still under contract. The Advocate General has already given the Opinion, which suggests that the upcoming CJEU's ruling will further weaken the transfer system. I argue that both rulings focus too much on the labour market and the freedom of movement of workers and neglect the fact that the football transfer system enhances competition in consumer markets at the benefit of smaller clubs and the football fans.

Mehr Opferschutz durch Vorratsdatenspeicherung

„Goodbye Vorratsdatenspeicherung“, kommentierte die frühere Bundesjustizministerin Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger vor vier Jahren die damalige Entscheidung des Europäischen Gerichtshofs auf dem Verfassungsblog. Sein jüngstes Urteil von Anfang Mai 2024 zeigt hingegen, dass sich solch apodiktische Aussagen in der Rechtspolitik nicht treffen lassen. Das Maß der Bedrohung bestimmt die Verhältnismäßigkeit der Mittel – beides unterliegt dem fortwährenden Wandel der Zeit.

Strengthening the EU Legal Edifice for Data Transfers

GDPR provides the rulebook for international transfers of personal data from the EU and serves as the vehicle through which EU data protection law interacts with the wider world. However, the EU seems ambivalent about deciding how far it can expect third countries to adopt data protection standards similar to its own. Moreover, DPAs often fail to scrutinize data transfers to third countries that may lack the rule of law. Finally, the EU lacks a comparative methodology for assessing data protection equivalence in third countries. It is essential for the EU to elevate the public discourse so that the global significance of data transfers is recognized.

Einstimmig für alle, alle für einstimmig?

Angesichts der Bestrebungen, das Bundesverfassungsgericht besser zu schützen, drängt sich unweigerlich die Frage auf, ob auf europäischer Ebene ähnliche Maßnahmen erforderlich sind. Derzeit sind rechtspopulistische und potenziell unionsfeindliche Parteien europaweit im Aufwind. Insbesondere das Verfahren zur Ernennung von Richter*innen des EuGH und des EuG weist Schwachstellen auf, die Feind*innen einer unabhängigen Gerichtsbarkeit ausnutzen könnten.

Im »Westen« viel Neues

Der EuGH hat in seinem Urteil vom 11. Juni 2024 einen geschlechtsspezifischen Asylgrund bestätigt: Frauen, die jahrelang in einem Umfeld der Gleichberechtigung zwischen Frauen und Männern gelebt haben, können unter Umständen einen Anspruch auf Asyl haben, wenn sie diese Lebensweise in ihrem Heimatland aufgeben müssten. Das Urteil stärkt damit nicht nur die Stellung von Frauen in Asylfragen. Es könnte sich auch auf den Schutzstatus von sogenannten „Klimaflüchtlingen“ auswirken.