Articles for tag: EU, Militant public administation, Poland, Whistleblower

Militant Public Administration

An unprecedented scandal surrounding a Polish governmental fund established to aid crime victims highlights the role of civil servants in authoritarian state capture. The revelations surrounding the Justice Fund show broad levels of bureaucratic acquiescence with shocking abuses of power, and only belated effort to document and report these abuses. The Polish case shows it is time for a democratically militant public administration – the new vision of civil service better prepared to fend off authoritarian encroachment from elected politicians.

6. Juni 2024

, , ,

Trans Rights and Gender Recognition before the CJEU

On May 7, 2024, the Advocate General of the CJEU issued his Opinion on the Mirin case concerning the right to Legal Gender Recognition (LGR) for transgender persons. Yet, the solution offered by the AG deviates from the Court’s previous case-law on LGR, by making it about free movement rather than protection against discrimination, or fundamental rights. It also places the applicant, and those in a similar position, in an administrative situation that is defeating the very purpose of LGR – an issue that the AG himself acknowledges. A more satisfactory and ambitious alternative would instead be to frame the LGR as protected under the EU Charter.

5. Juni 2024

, , , ,

Zur Gestalt Europas

Die Debatte über die Finalität der Europäischen Union ist in eine Sackgasse geraten. Die letzte Vertragsrevision liegt bald 15 Jahre zurück, ernsthafte politische Initiativen sind nicht erkennbar oder nicht Erfolg versprechend. Die Konferenz zur Zukunft Europas präsentierte Mitte 2022 ihre Ergebnisse, vermutlich dürften aber auch diese alsbald verpuffen. Wir tippeln auf der Stelle, seit dem Vertrag von Lissabon, eigentlich aber schon seit dem Scheitern des Verfassungsvertrages scheint die Debatte festgefahren. Anstatt über die weitere Entwicklung der Integration zu sprechen, scheint es eher darum zu gehen, das Bestehende zu bewahren und zu verhindern, dass es zu signifikanten Integrationsrückständen kommt.

4. Juni 2024

, ,

Dividing the Indivisible

The absence of a number of important human rights instruments from the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive, notably for indigenous peoples’ and migrants’ rights, are serious omissions and must be rectified at the EU level during the first review of the directive. Given the status of the CSDDD as a directive, Member States also have the freedom to add these missing instruments during national transposition and should do so in order to further honour their commitments under the UNGPs.

1. Juni 2024

, ,

Unionsfeindlichkeit und Obstruktion

Am 9. Juni ist Europawahl. Mit dem zu erwartenden, starken Ergebnis der potenziell unionsfeindlichen Parteien bei der Europawahl wächst vor allem auch das Risiko für Angriffe aus dem Inneren des Europäischen Parlaments selbst. Ein Blick in die aktuelle Geschäftsordnung des EU-Parlaments (GOEP) zeigt bereits heute ein EU-Parlament, das sich im Bewusstsein dieser Obstruktionsgefahren selbst organisiert hat.

31. Mai 2024

, , , ,

Conditions of Corporate Civil Liability in the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive

The civil liability provision of the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) in Article 29 has been highly debated during the entire drafting and negotiation process of the Directive, but it held on. Where harm occurs, will Article 29 CSDDD fulfill its function to provide a right to remedy for the affected individuals and legal clarity for the companies at the same time?

28. Mai 2024

,

Access to Supply Chain Justice?

One of the novel features of the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive is a private law liability for damages caused upstream in the supply chain. However, liability under substantive law is worthless without procedural rules that allow for its enforcement. Within the context of supply chain liability there are at least two major procedural problems. First, victims affected by supply chain mishandlings might be unable to afford proceedings in Europe. Second, proving that a company has not exercised a sufficient level of diligence can be difficult. Art. 29 para. 3 CSDDD seeks to address those issues.

27. Mai 2024

, ,

Harmonization Pains but Stakeholders‹ Gain

The Article 13 EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive is home of the meaningful engagement provision. It is significantly more robust than similar provisions in national due diligence legislation in France, Germany and Norway. Despite the fact that a number of differences between EU CSDDD and these national laws is likely to give rise to some “harmonization pains”, one silver lining exists: stakeholders gain some leverage.

25. Mai 2024

,

Unboxing the New EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive

There is a lot to unpack in the now final text of the Directive. The German Institute for Human Rights offers initial analysis in this blog symposium, which starts with this contribution. The contributions engage with the final text of the Directive and give some initial guidance for interpretation and transposition requirements. Topics covered include a critical reflection on the neo-colonial context of the the law-making process, access to justice and administrative supervision measures for rightsholders, the scope of human and environmental rights that are covered by the Directive as well as the transposition phase with comparative analysis in the context of existing national due diligence legislation, its extraterritorial reach and the involvement of National Human Rights Institutions.

24. Mai 2024

,