EU Rule of Law Dialogues: Risks – in Context

On January 16, 2020 the European Parliament passed a resolution about the state of the Article 7(1) TEU hearings with Hungary and Poland, noting with concern that “the reports and statements by the Commission and international bodies, such as the UN, OSCE and the Council of Europe, indicate that the situation in both Poland and Hungary has deteriorated since the triggering of Article 7(1) of the TEU”. The resolution is a plea for a structured and more meaningful process in which each EU institution would exercise its existing powers in a meaningful and cooperative manner. The resolution emphasizes that the Article 7(1) TEU preventive process is one of risk assessment and one that may have actual – including budgetary – consequences.

CSUler in die Container? Oder wie man doch noch zu einem Bundestag mit 598 Abgeordneten kommen kann

Bundestagspräsident Wolfgang Schäuble ist vorerst mit seiner Arbeitsgruppe zur Reform des Wahlrechts gescheitert. Das könnte schon sehr bald zum Problem werden, denn ohne Wahlrechtsreform wird der begehrte Raum im Berliner Regierungsviertel bald knapp. Und so ist Schäubles Ankündigung, künftig Büro-Container aufstellen zu lassen ganz bestimmt nicht als reiner Scherz zu verstehen. Doch so weit muss es gar nicht kommen.

Urban Citizenship is About Improving the City – not Just About Letting Foreigners Vote

In a way, the question of urban citizenship is easy. If a state were to give non-citizens citizenship rights with respect to local elections or urban affairs more generally, it would be fully within its powers to do so. As Rainer Bauböck and others have argued, there are many good reasons why a state might want to do so – and just as many reasons to protect the state’s authority to uphold the system of rights as a whole. That said, many issues remain. There is no consensus, and perhaps there never can be on the key terms at issue: state, nation, urban, and citizenship.

Herrschaft über die Verfassung

Die Nachricht kam überraschend. Am Mittwoch unterbreitete der russische Präsident Putin in seiner jährlichen Botschaft an die Föderalversammlung einen Katalog von Vorschlägen zu einer Reform der Verfassung. Und nur fünf Tage später brachte Putin einen entsprechenden Änderungsvorschlag in die Duma ein. Die Änderungsvorschläge wirken aus verfassungsjuristischer Sicht widersprüchlich und kaum durchdacht. Obwohl die Bedeutung des Vorrangs der Verfassung in Putins Rede stark betont wird, zeugen die Ausführungen von einer Geringschätzung ihrer freiheitsschützenden Inhalte und wirken in Teilen gar „sarkastisch“.

The Return of Power-Sharing in Northern Ireland

After three years power-sharing government has returned to Northern Ireland following extensive discussions and the recent publication of a document by the British and Irish governments. It is a lengthy text containing many proposals, plans and initiatives; the relative incoherence is evidence of the conflicting challenges faced. At the core of the dilemma is how to encourage the representatives of the two main communities in Northern Ireland (nationalist-unionist) to share power once again.

Personal instead of Institutional Power

The gist of the constitutional reform suggestions in Russia is to cement the power of Vladimir Putin once he leaves the office, and to make this in a safe, controlled environment. The latter aim cannot be achieved within the boundaries established by the Constitution. Thus, the constitutional requirements are thrown into the litter bin of necessity. However, circumventing formal procedures still calls for a sort of justification. That is why the proposed plan relies on substitutes that would mask its deficiencies.

The Case of Mr. Junqueras is a Case of Respect of the Rule of Law

Mr. Junqueras was not an MEP nor had any immunity whatsoever when he was put on trial for a crime committed in Spain in accordance with Spanish law. When the trial was completely over, in June 2019, but before a sentence was given by the Court, Mr. Junqueras was elected to the European Parliament. And that was possible, precisely, because Spain being a most protective country, his presumption of innocence was still complete at that time.

Doch noch ein Verfassungs­referendum in Italien

Die Verkleinerung des italienischen Parlaments wurde im vergangen Oktober beschlossen, jedoch haben sich knapp vor Ablauf der Frist genügend Parlamentarier zusammengeschlossen, um die Entscheidung doch dem Wahlvolk durch ein Verfassungsreferendum zu überlassen. Die traditionelle Scheu der italienischen Wähler vor Verfassungsänderungen dürfte diesmal durch eine Annahme dieses „Reförmchens“ höchstwahrscheinlich überwunden werden. Nichtdestotrotz bestätigt das Vorgehen die Richtigkeit einer Verfassungsbestimmung, die für konstitutionelle Novellierungen einen breiten Konsens vorsieht, damit die Verfassung nicht Spielball der Tagespolitik wird.

The Junqueras Saga Continues

Notwithstanding the clear message from the ECJ, the Spanish Supreme Court has decided that the Catalan separatist leader and MEP Oriol Junqueras will not be released from prison. The contradiction between the logic of the ECJ’s judgment of December 2019 and the decision of the Spanish Supreme Court of 8 January 2020 forms a new challenge for the EU legal order, in the sense that it puts the relationship between EU law and Spanish national law under strain.