The Post-Truth about Corruption in the European Union

Even if the European Parliament has in recent years managed to get a majority to scold member states Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Bulgaria and Malta on corruption it has a far more difficult time in controlling its own members. The current Qatar gate so far involves just a few MPs alongside EP vice-president PASOK Eva Kaili. However, Qatar paid luxury trips for several MEPs, although a few refused, and some more MPs had offered public endorsement to Qatar already. The European Parliament is the absolute sovereign of its own integrity. If it wants to cut opportunities by offering full transparency on meetings, access, expenses and travel, it can- good proposals have been laying around for years.

The Slippery Slope of a Snooping Strasbourg

Last week, the ECtHR ruled in Spasov, for the first time, that there was a 'denial of justice' and thus a violation of Article 6(1) ECHR due to a manifest error of law by a national court regarding the interpretation and application of EU law. A Romanian court had convicted Mr Spasov, the owner and captain of a Bulgarian-flagged vessel, of illegal fishing inside Romania’s exclusive economic zone. Spasov is an important principled judgment that further intertwines the EU and ECHR legal systems.

The Qatar Scandal and Third Country Lobbying

The EU was given the worst kind of early Christmas present: a corruption scandal that has rocked the Union to its core giving ammunition to anti-EU populist actors and drawing attention and schadenfreude from outside the EU. The facts of the case remain under investigation, but the case has already been approached from many angles.Qatar has been given the role of an international villain in this story, and the EU has used the opportunities to frame the case as malign third country efforts to corrupt the EU. While there is no denying the corrupting role of a third country, the EU’s framing enables it to pose as a victim, which, as I argue in this blogpost, is intellectually dishonest and harmful.

An early Christmas Gift from Karlsruhe?

The 6 December Karlsruhe ruling on the constitutional complaints against the ‘Act Ratifying the EU Own Resources Decision’ will be received by many as a Saint Nicholas present. This time, the Federal Constitutional Court avoided the head-on collision with the EU it caused with its PSPP judgment two and a half years ago. Instead, it opted for a seemingly constructive assessment of the EU’s pandemic recovery instrument. In particular, it found that the ORD did not manifestly exceed the competences conferred on the EU – i.e., it was not ultra vires – and did not affect the constitutional identity of the Basic Law. While the ruling is not as constraining as some might have feared, it does not give card blanche for a more permanent EU fiscal capacity.

#DefendingTheDefenders – Episode 3: Afghanistan

When the Taliban took over power in Afghanistan in the summer of 2021, it was a disaster for women. Immediately, they were stripped of their rights, in particular their political rights. In the third episode of #DefendingTheDefenders, a podcast by Deutscher Anwaltverein and Verfassungsblog, we talk to Shabnam Salehi about the human rights situation in Afghanistan and the rights of women in particular and to Matthias Lehnert about the German and European Migration Law system.

No Rainbow without Rain?

On 6 December 2022, Latvian National Electronic Mass Media Council (NEPLP) revoked the broadcasting licence of the independent Russian TV channel ‘TV Rain’. The measures taken against TV Rain in Latvia raise intricate legal questions from an EU law point of view: Is the crackdown on the anti-war Russian TV channel compatible with EU-wide rules on audiovisual media? Can the Latvian government lawfully request YouTube to make TV rain’s channel inaccessible in Latvia? This blogpost argues that EU law is powerless when confronted with possibly unjustified national restrictions against media outlets and their growing spillover into the Internet sphere.

Nikolaus 2.0

Unter der Überschrift „Corona“ wurde letztlich lange Geplantes politisch durchgesetzt – ohne Vertragsänderung. Insofern ist es kein Wunder, dass die Frage nach der Primärrechtskonformität von NextGenerationEU aufgeworfen wurde. Ebensowenig ist die Befassung des BVerfG erstaunlich, denn der Rechtsweg zum EuGH ist schwierig, wenn die Beteiligten einig sind, ein Programm ins Werk zu setzen, auch dann, wenn die Einigung kompromisshafte Züge hat.

Transparenz? Ja, aber bitte nicht für alle

Mit Urteil vom 22. November 2022 hat der Europäische Gerichtshof entschieden, dass Informationen über wirtschaftlich Berechtigte von Unternehmen nicht über ein öffentliches Transparenzregister zur Verfügung gestellt werden dürfen. Die Zivilgesellschaft erhält über Journalisten und NGOs aber weiterhin umfassenden Zugriff auf diese Informationen, die essenziell sind, um wirtschaftliche Strukturen im Rahmen von Recherchen nachvollziehen und prüfen zu können. Befürchtungen dieser Gruppen, von den Informationen abgeschnitten zu werden, sind daher unbegründet.

Demokratie in der Supra-EU

Heute soll CETA, das Umfassende Wirtschafts- und Handelsabkommen der EU mit Kanada, durch den Bundestag gebracht werden. Die absehbare Zustimmung von Bundestag und Bundesrat zu CETA darf nicht dazu führen, die verfassungsrechtliche und demokratietheoretische Problematik der „Ausschüsse“ einfach ad acta zu legen. Die EU ist dabei, das Regieren mittels transnationaler Ausschüsse oberhalb der EU systematisch auszubauen, insbesondere im Rahmen umfassender Freihandelsverträge. Dies bedarf dringend klarer Leitplanken und Stoppschilder seitens des Bundesverfassungsgerichts.