Articles for tag: AutoritarismusDemokratieEURechtsruckRechtsstaatlichkeitWehrhafte Demokratie

Offener Zugang zum Grundgesetz

Weltweit erstarken autoritäre Kräfte, die sich offen gegen demokratische Strukturen wenden. In der Rechtswissenschaft wird zumeist das klassische Instrumentarium der wehrhaften Demokratie diskutiert. Kaum eine Rolle spielt dagegen das Thema der Verfassungsrechtsvermittlung – obwohl für die Rechtsbefolgung und damit für die Resilienz der Verfassungsordnung Normverständnis bekanntlich viel wichtiger ist als Zwang. Welchen Beitrag aber leistet die Rechtswissenschaft, Verständnis für und Einsicht in den Wert unserer Verfassung zu fördern? Wie steht es überhaupt um ihr Verhältnis zur verfassungsrechtlichen Bildung?

Georgian Dream as a Nightmare for Democracy

The Georgian Dream Party has been declared as winner of the parliamentary election in Georgia. Independent observers, however, identified a large-scale, multi-faceted election-rigging scheme in favor of Georgian Dream, prompting calls to annul the results. These allegations triggered protests and sparked a debate about the future of democracy, and the rule of law in Georgia. Due to the absence of effective judicial oversight to address evidence of electoral fraud, public resistance and external pressure are crucial to preventing power capture by Georgian Dream and halting Georgia’s autocratic shift.

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.

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.

The right lessons from Trump 1.0

The US withdrawal from international institutions is a broader trend, not solely tied to Trump-era policies. Consequently, European governments that aim to preserve the rules-based international order should be prepared to take the lead and fill the gap left by the US exit. To pursue this strategy effectively, certain imperatives must be addressed.

Fundamental Rights Come Off the Bench

In 2014, the European Court of Justice clearly prioritised the EU’s position on the unity and effectiveness of EU law over the protection of fundamental rights (Opinion 2/13). Ten years later, in October 2024, a judgment pitting football against the media seems to have turned the tables. In Real Madrid vs Le Monde, the Court held that excessive defamation damages may breach the freedom of the press and trigger the public policy exception. This is a significant shift, prioritising fundamental rights protection over the traditional objective of seamless judicial cooperation across the EU.

Why the EU Charter Matters

This blog post argues that the most interesting aspect of the Charter of Fundamental Rights at the moment is its impact on remedies in national law. Almost 15 years since its entry into force, it is not unusual to meet domestic lawyers and judges who will voice doubts as to whether the Charter really matters in practice. Yet, through the right to an effective remedy under Article 47, the Charter opens up domestic law for new (or modified) remedies, thus placing national procedural autonomy under greater constraint than it was from the principles of effectiveness and equivalence.