Thema: Europarecht

EU-Verfassungsrecht, verfassungsrechtlicher Rahmen der europäischen Integration und Mehrebenenverfassungsrecht. Umfasst EU-Institutionenrecht, Grundfreiheiten, EU-Grundrechte, verfassungsrechtliche Aspekte der EU-Mitgliedschaft und das Verhältnis zwischen EU-Recht und nationalen Verfassungsordnungen.

Why the British demands on national parliaments must be resisted

Six years ago today, the Treaty of Lisbon came into force, introducing an early warning system for national parliaments concerned with the principle of subsidiarity. UK Prime Minister David Cameron has called for more incisive rights of national parliaments to block EU legislation. The UK government, which normally preens itself on its flexibility and pragmatism, is trying to impose a one-size-fits-all approach on national parliaments, ignoring their very different mandates, powers, practices, timetables and levels of political interest and staff support. The fact is that waving subsidiarity cards is the least important EU function of national parliaments.

1. Dezember 2015

, , ,

Terrorgefahr und Vorratsdatenspeicherung in Europa: unterschiedlichste nationale Schutzstandards mangels klarer unionsrechtlicher Grenzen

Bereits wenige Tage bevor Europa durch Terrorangriffe in Paris erschüttert wurde, haben sich in Großbritannien, Frankreich und Deutschland bemerkenswerte sicherheitsrechtliche Kurskorrekturen vollzogen. Sie betreffen insbesondere das Instrument der Vorratsdatenspeicherung und gewinnen angesichts der Debatte, welche Lehren wir aus den jüngsten Anschlägen ziehen sollten, enorm an Relevanz.

21. November 2015

, , , , ,

How to make the Brexit deal formal, legally-binding and irreversible

Whatever one thinks (and one does) about the British renegotiation of its terms of EU membership, one can only marvel at the prime minister’s bravado when he insists on the changes being ‘formal, legally-binding and irreversible’. Nobody expected David Cameron to be so categorical when he embarked on his long-anticipated speech and ‘Dear Donald’ letter, eventually delivered on 10 November. Surely somebody warned him that to demand something so trenchant would pose huge legal problems?

18. November 2015

, , ,

Europe Does Need a Constitution. But Of What Kind?

Matej Avbelj’s contribution ‘Now Europe Needs a Constitution’ is surely right in its diagnosis that constitutionalism must play a role in the re-generation of the EU. The gulf between the EU’s leaders and its population, and between distinct groups of EU states, is wider than it has ever been. If constitutionalism is an act of ‘putting things in common’ in a spirit of open dialogue, of deciding on the crucial question about the type of society we want to live in, such a discussion about Europe’s future is sorely needed. The key question, however, is not whether Europe needs a Constitution but what kind of Constitution the EU should build. Many commentators suggest that the lesson to be learned from the failed constitutional project in the early 2000s is that it was too ambitious: too laden with constitutional symbolism and state-paradigms. Perhaps, we argue, the failed constitutional project was not ambitious enough: it made no attempt to break with the models of the previous EU Treaties and in doing so, to capture the political imagination of Europe’s citizenry.

17. November 2015

, ,

David Cameron is not a visionary, he is an illusionist

The UK Prime Minister proclaims EU reforms. But the reform steps he demands address none of the actual problems of the EU. Neither on the sovereign debt crisis nor on the refugee and migration crisis any proposals or solutions from Cameron are forthcoming. Instead, he focuses on comparatively insignificant issues that affect the UK. This explains the largely ‘open-minded’ response by most European leaders after the speech.

13. November 2015

, ,

Now Europe Needs a Constitution

I am a constitutional sceptic. I have been turned into one a decade ago, when the European Union embarked on its first ever process of explicit documentary constitutionalization. That process ended up in tatters. There are strong legal, socio-political and philosophical reasons that speak against endowing the European Union with a constitution understood in conventional terms. However, they may no longer be strong enough.

11. November 2015

, ,

Brexit, Voice and Loyalty: What ›New Settlement‹ for the UK in the EU?

The UK Prime Minister, David Cameron has finally found time to write a letter to the European Council President Donald Tusk setting out the basis for the UK’s renegotiated membership of the EU. Although in recent weeks, European leaders have complained that they lacked clarity as to what it was that Mr Cameron would seek in these negotiations – despite his recent tour of European capitals – in the end, the themes contained in the letter have been well rehearsed both by the Prime Minister, and more recently by the UK Chancellor in his speech to the BDI in Germany. There are four pillars to the ‘new settlement’ sought by the UK government: economic governance, competitiveness, sovereignty and immigration. The Prime Minister’s stated aim is – through voice – for the UK to remain a member of the EU, albeit an EU with differentiated membership obligations. As he reiterated in a speech at Chatham House to trail the letter to Donald Tusk, if he succeeds in his negotiations, the Prime Minister will campaign for the UK to remain in the EU. He also made clear that a vote for Brexit would be just that, with no second referendum to seek a better deal. So what then are the key policy planks supporting the four-pillars?

10. November 2015

, , ,

Cameron’s EU reforms: political feasibility and legal implications

David Cameron, the UK’s Prime Minister, has set out his objectives for EU reforms in a speech at Chatham House on 10 November 2015 – objectives which he later clarified in a letter to the President of the European Council Donald Tusk. Cameron’s demands fall in four categories – i) safeguarding Britain’s position in the Union’s ‘variable geometry’; ii) strengthening the competitiveness of the Union’s internal market; iii) bolstering the democratic authority of the EU by strengthening the role of national parliaments in the EU’s decision-making process; and iv) ensure changes to the principles of free movement and equal treatment of Union citizens in access to welfare systems in the host state. The political feasibility and legal implications of these objectives differ quite significantly. More crucially, each of the stated objectives can be interpreted and implemented in different ways. Generally, it seems, Cameron’s success seems to depend on presenting reforms that at the same time address British domestic issues as well as strengthen the EU’s functioning.

10. November 2015

, , , , , ,

VG Stuttgart: Europarecht bremst Grenzschützer

Die Bundespolizei darf im Grenzgebiet nicht verdachtsunabhängig Personen kontrollieren, um illegal Einreisende aufzuspüren. Die Regelung in § 23 Bundespolizeigesetz, die ihr im 30 km-Grenzgebiet jederzeit anlasslose Identitätsfeststellungen erlaubt, ist europarechtswidrig und daher unanwendbar. Das hat das Verwaltungsgericht Stuttgart gestern entschieden (Az. 1 K 5060/13) – ein Urteil, das in diesen Zeiten europaweiter Diskussionen um Grenzzäune und Transitzonen noch für Wirbel sorgen dürfte.

24. Oktober 2015

, ,