Articles for tag: BeweislastClankriminalitätEURechtsstaatlichkeitStPOStrafprozessrecht

Fremdkörper im Strafprozess

Nach der Vorstellung des Lagebildes „Clankriminalität Berlin 2022“ fordert die Berliner Innensenatorin Iris Spranger öffentlichkeitswirksam eine Beweislastumkehr im Recht der Vermögensabschöpfung für Fälle mit Bezug zur sog. Clankriminalität. Damit erlangt die Entwicklung der vermögensabschöpfungsrechtlichen Debatte ihren vorläufigen, allerdings keineswegs überraschenden Tiefpunkt. Neben erheblichen verfassungsrechtlichen und strafprozessrechts-dogmatischen Bedenken, die gegen diesen Vorstoß sprechen, stellt sich die Frage, ob das Abschöpfungsbesteck des geltenden Rechts nicht gleichermaßen in der Lage wäre, diese Operation durchzuführen.

Did Israel Lose its Sanity?

Israel is in the midst of an acute struggle over its constitutional identity. We are witnessing a government adamant about revolutionizing Israel’s constitution (“Basic Laws”), which may typically be amended by a simple majority of the legislature and is thus prey to the whims of an extreme government. The most recent move on the government’s agenda, passing a constitutional amendment that would severely restrict the reasonableness doctrine, would bring Israel closer to the brink of constitutional chaos. In this blog, I explain the theoretical arguments in favor and against the proposal and lay out the implications, should this proposal go through, given the government’s true, concerning motivations that are already evident on the grounds.

Bolsonaro Faces the Rule of Law

On 30 June 2023, the Brazilian Electoral Superior Court ruled that former President Jair Bolsonaro is disqualified from running for any electoral position for the next eight years. Although there are fifteen other electoral actions brought against Bolsonaro by other political parties or by public electoral prosecutors, most of which refer to accusations of attempting to compromise the integrity of the 2022 elections, this was the first case to reach Brazil’s highest electoral court. Despite there being a precedent, the ruling is not a legal innovation, but the mere application of existing laws.

Poland’s Extended Disciplinary System

The judgement of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on June 5, 2023 (C-204/21) has added a new chapter to the rule of law crisis in Poland. The outcome was largely expected given the well-established jurisdiction of the ECJ on matters of the rule of law. However, a close reading of the judgment demonstrates that it recognizes the more insidious ways in which Poland has undermined judicial independence. Specifically, I argue that the ECJ's ruling paves the way for a legal response to the suppression of judicial independence through public intimidation and stigmatization of judges.

How to Rebuild Poland’s Rule of Law

Ahead of the next parliamentary elections, a core question is whether and if so how we can restore Poland’s rule of law. While the current effort is understandably focused on resurrecting the Constitutional Court and rebuilding an independent judiciary and prosecution, a purely institutional approach won’t be enough. Instead, it is imperative to mobilize and build lasting defiance on the ground.

Walking A Democratic Tightrope

That was fast. On 8 June, only 11 days after the Polish so-called ‘Lex Tusk’ was signed into force, the Commission launched an infringement procedure against Poland. For the first time, the Commission is relying on the principle of democracy in Art. 10 TEU as an autonomous plea, dropping another bombshell shortly after the first direct invocation of Art. 2 TEU in infringement proceedings against Hungary earlier this year. This contribution discusses both the perks and potential perils of the direct enforcement of the principle of democracy in Art. 10 TEU. On the one hand, a shift from what is arguably better called ‘militant rule of law’ towards more literally EU militant democracy is a positive development, as it better captures the nature and range of the principles which are de facto under threat in several EU Member States. On the other hand, the present infringement action illustrates the principled challenge of militant democracy to preserve the possibility of democratic regime change, all whilst not lapsing into a form of institutional conservatism.

EMFA and its Uphill Battle for Media Freedom and Democracy in the EU

The European Media Freedom Act, primarily designed to safeguard the EU media market, can also serve as an important tool in preserving the rule of law in member states such as Hungary and Poland, that have experienced an alarming assault on media freedom and pluralism in the past decade. This contribution critically evaluates the potential of the proposed European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) for addressing the ongoing issues in media freedom in Poland and Hungary.

Enforcing Democracy

On the 8th of June, the Commission announced the opening of an infringement procedure against Poland in relation to the so-called ‘Lex Tusk’ or ‘anti-Tusk’ law. The principle of democracy is the first alleged violation specified by the Commission, based on Articles 2 and 10 TEU. Although proposed back in 2020 by observers of the Rule of Law crisis (see here and here), using this combination of articles to protect democracy is an unprecedented step by the institution. In a way, this follows the successful actions brought against Poland based on Articles 2 and 19 TEU (with ‘successful’ referring to the Court upholding the Commission’s complaints). It also recalls similarities with the Commission’s decision to invoke Article 2 TEU as a stand-alone provision in the infringement proceedings against Hungary’s ‘anti-LGBTQ’ law. The Commission is now testing out the legal waters to see if Article 10 TEU can be the trigger for ‘democracy’ in the same way Article 19 TEU is the trigger for ‘rule of law’.

The Key to Ensure Media Pluralism in the EU? A Unified Framework

Media freedom is one of the necessary conditions for democracies to function. Yet media freedom is currently not guaranteed in all European Union countries. The European Media Freedom Act proposed by the European Commission in 2022 aims to protect and foster media pluralism across the EU block and, while some changes would need to be made to strengthen the proposal’s efficacy, monitoring on the ground shows that a common European framework is indeed needed. While there are already several harmonisation measures that revolve around media – such as the Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD) – this is the first text that clearly and specifically addresses the media market in and of itself, which marks a paradigm shift in EU media regulation.

Doing Justice to Poland’s Muzzle Law

On 5 June 2023, the Court of Justice issued its fourth infringement judgment in relation to yet another Polish piece of legislation – informally known as the muzzle law – which aimed to dissuade or punish Polish judges for applying and upholding EU rule of law requirements. As anyone with any basic understanding of EU law could have predicted, the law rushed into force by Poland’s ruling coalition in December 2019 did not survive judicial scrutiny in Luxembourg. As long as the Commission fails to demand full compliance with CJEU case law and decisively address the issue of judicial usurpers, however, just chipping away at the arbitrary disciplinary changes Polish authorities have made will always fail to solve Poland’s fundamental and systemic issues.