Articles for tag: EuGHFlüchtlingsschutzMoldovasafe country of origin

Two Steps Forward?

On May 25 2024 the Advocate General Nicholas Emiliou delivered his opinion in the Case C-406/22 CV v Ministerstvo vnitra České republiky, Odbor azylové a migrační politiky on several issues regarding the application of the safe country of origin (SCO) concept. The case could have significant impact on SCO policies of several EU Member States and the rights of refugees as it addresses the possibility of designating countries as safe with territorial exceptions as well as a more active approach to judicial review of SCO designations. If adopted by the CJEU, the AG’s suggestions could serve to enhance refugee protection, though the adoption of the Pact on Migration and Asylum might possibly counteract this.

Waiting for Kinsa

On 18 June 2024, the Court of Justice of the European Union will sit as a Grand Chamber in a hearing addressing the compatibility of the so-called Facilitators Package with the principle of proportionality set out in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (CFR). The Kinsa case (previously named Kinshasa) provides an opportunity for the CJEU to counteract the trend towards overcriminalisation of humanitarian action that has taken hold across the EU. This blog highlights the ways in which the Facilitator Package fails to take account of important fundamental rights and why the criminalization of solidarity that it has facilitated is not an inevitability but a political choice.

From Strasbourg to Luxembourg?

KlimaSeniorinnen has established a remedy which, in EU law, is not easy to locate and may actually be unavailable in light of restrictive CJEU case law.  Whatever one’s views on this restrictive case law, it is a fact that the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights now obliges the CJEU to do as much as it can to accommodate the KlimaSeniorinnen remedy and to interpret the relevant TFEU provisions flexibly.  One may assume that, sooner or later, the CJEU will be confronted with a KlimaSeniorinnen claim.  If the CJEU were to declare such a claim inadmissible, it will put itself in the corner of courts refusing to engage with climate change policies.  That would be unfortunate for a court that has long been at the forefront of legal progress.

The Unbearable Lightness of Interfering with the Right to Privacy

The European Court of Justice has once again ruled on national data retention laws. In La Quadrature du Net II, the full court allowed the indiscriminate retention of IP addresses for the purpose of fighting copyright infringement. It seems that the Court is slowly but surely abandoning its role as guardian of the right to privacy, as it now allows member states to collect vast amounts of data on their citizens in order to solve even the most minor of crimes.

The New Transgender Ruling in Czechia

In a recent decision in the case of N.G. (Pl. ÚS 52/23), the Czech Constitutional Court (CCC) addressed the pressing issue of trans persons’ rights, more specifically the requirements for legal gender reassignment, involving (often involuntary) sterilisation and castration. When compared to the earlier decision in T.H. (Pl. ÚS 2/20), the new ruling represents a major shift. In fact, the CCC changed its legal position by 180 degrees, giving preference to protecting individual rights over deferring to the legislator’s choices.

Overcoming Big Tech AI Merger Evasions: Innovating EU Competition Law through the AI Act

To develop AI, computing power and access to data (aka bigness) are crucial. Now, Big Tech companies appear evading EU competition law. Companies like Google and Microsoft evade the EU Merger Regulation by entering partnerships with smaller AI labs that fall short of shifting ownership but nevertheless increase the monopolistic power of Big Tech. These quasi-mergers are particularly problematic in the context of generative AI, which relies even more than many other services on incredibly vast computing power. That is a dire state from an economic as well as a more fundamental and democratic perspective, as concentrating economic might in the hands of very few companies may cause problems down the road.

Europe’s Judicial Narratives

Through the representations of Europe that it conjures up and conveys, the European Court of Justice significantly influences the EU’s self-perceived identity. In that sense, it contributes to the shaping of a European polity, i.e. a European political community united by shared representations about its history and identity.

Mehr Transparenz, aber vorläufig keine weitreichende Entlastung

Am 27. Februar hat das Europäische Parlament nun einer Reform der Zuständigkeiten des EuGH zugestimmt. Die vorgeschlagenen Änderungen der Satzung (EuGH-Satzung nF) sollen einerseits die Arbeitsbelastung des EuGH vermindern und andererseits der Transparenz der Verfahren dienen. Letzteres stellt einen entscheidenden Beitrag zur Offenheit des Gerichtshofs dar. Ob die Reform allerdings zu einer echten, langfristigen Entlastung des EuGH führen wird, lässt sich angesichts der geringen Anzahl erfasster Verfahren sowie der vorgelagerten „Triage“-Entscheidung beim Gerichtshof bezweifeln.

Re-Imagining the European (Political) Community through Migration Law

The constant portrayal of migration as an exceptional and problematic phenomenon fuels public anxieties and makes deterrence and harshness seem like the only effective political approaches to managing global migration. By contrast, positive visions of how a society of immigration needs to look like for all members of society to benefit are scarce. Yet to counter apocalyptic scenarios, we need not only such a positive vision but also a theory of societal action that helps to realize it. This blog post offers such a vision and theory that is grounded in the normative and legal framework of the European Union. It argues that we should conceptualize the European society as an inclusive, participatory, and self-reflexive community that is based on constitutional principles as enshrined in Art. 2 TEU. To realize this vision, we must understand practices of claiming and defending human rights not as an overreach into the political latitude of the legislator but as a joint practice of (political) community-building.

Pushing Back

The CJEU has pending before it a crucial case on the criminalisation of seeking asylum and assistance to those seeking protection. At this critical juncture, this blog post highlights a sample of important decisions in which courts, giving effect to constitutional and international legal principles, set legal limits on this form of criminalisation. These cases reflect not only the appropriate legal limits, but also acknowledge the character of irregular migration and smuggling. Rather than framing individuals as  dangerous illegal migrants and exploitative smugglers, they reassert the humanity of both those in search of refuge and opportunity, and those that assist them.