„An Ever-Stronger Union“ Under the Radar of the European Public

The intergovernmental political mode of EU defense policy is no longer appropriate for the level of European integration in this policy field, the development of which will significantly shape the European project in the coming years. In particular, it is necessary that the European Parliament and the national parliaments be informed of upcoming political decisions in a substantive and timely manner: They should be informed as long as the political process is still open, and their position should be a constituent part of decision-making at the EU level.

„An Ever Stronger Union“ unter dem Radar der europäischen Öffentlichkeiten

Dass das militärpolitische Integrationsgeschehen außerhalb der öffentlichen Wahrnehmung und Debatte stattfindet, bedeutet letztlich für die politischen Akteure geringe Rechtfertigungslasten und größere Handlungsspielräume. Es ist also alles andere als ein Selbstläufer, dass über die Fortentwicklung der EU-Verteidigungspolitik jetzt die breite, allgemeine Meinungs- und Willensbildung stattfindet, die bislang fehlt. Dies ist jedoch dringend angezeigt, um die „hard power“, die die Union in der Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik entwickelt und entfalten will, demokratisch und rechtsstaatlich einzubinden – und das ganze Unterfangen der militärischen Ermächtigung der Union überhaupt seiner Bedeutung entsprechend politisch zu behandeln.

Vorläufig teilweise verfassungskonform

Das Ende der „größten Verfassungsbeschwerde der Geschichte“ kommt recht unspektakulär daher: Fast fünfeinhalb Jahre nach der mündlichen Verhandlung über eine einstweiligen Anordnung zum Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) zwischen Kanada und der EU erklärte das Bundesverfassungsgericht mit seinem am 15. März 2022 veröffentlichten Beschluss vom 9. Februar 2022 die drei Verfassungsbeschwerden und den Organstreit der Fraktion Die Linke für teilweise unzulässig und im Übrigen unbegründet. Gerade einmal 29 Randnummern benötigte der Zweite Senat für die Begründetheitsprüfung, die damit in Anbetracht der Bedeutung des Verfahrens nicht nur recht knapp, sondern sogar etwas kürzer als die Folgenabwägung im Rahmen der einstweiligen Anordnung ausfiel.

Reimagining a European Constitution

At this point, it is almost trite to say that the invasion of Ukraine has thrown the world order into tailspin. Unimaginable steps have been taken by the European Union and its Member States in the weeks since the invasion. These steps have already started to have significant consequences for discussions on the future of EU constitutionalism. Arguably, the appetite and political will for change is unprecedented and could serve to unplug EU constitutionalism from its sclerotic tendencies – it must be capitalised on.

Due Diligence Around the World

On 23 February 2022, the EU Commission released its draft Directive on Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence (CSDDD). It follows – and seemingly takes inspiration from – several national mandatory human rights and environmental due diligence (HREDD) laws, notably in France, (“LdV”) Germany (“GSCDDA”) and Norway (“Transparency Act”). It provides a strong legal basis and innovations to enhance corporate accountability, to strengthen stakeholder value and to create a European and possibly global standard for responsible and sustainable business conduct.

A Tale of Two Borders

Poland has an over 500 km long border with Ukraine and – right next to it – an over 400 km long border with Belarus. At the border with Ukraine, tens of thousands of persons are crossing each day, and the authorities are making a huge effort to make the crossing smooth. At the border with Ukraine, tens of thousands of persons are crossing each day, and the authorities are making a huge effort to make the crossing smooth. At the border with Belarus, people who are trying to cross into Poland are still forced to wander in minus temperatures through thick woods.

»The Ever Closer Union among the Peoples of Europe« in Times of War

The war in Ukraine has brought a moment of the constitutional reckoning and the ultimate test of belonging for the Europeans. The ill-fated politics of appeasement and dialoguing with a criminal has come crushing down. Finally, Europe seems to take a more strategic and long-term view of its own politics at least when it comes to common foreign policy and defense. A true re-appraisal and reinvigoration of European ideals will however not be complete if the Union keeps looking the other way, dithering, procrastinating when its own axiological foundations are under attack by one of its own member states.

Cognitive Illusions in Legal Interpretation

In the light of current happenings in certain Member States, many attempt to interpret or explain the withdrawal process under Article 50 TEU. The “exit” narrative seems dominant in journalism and academia: Grexit, Dexit, Dutch Exit, Huxit, Polexit, Frexit, Sloven Exit, etc. Some news portals frequently portray (not so odd) Constitutional Court decisions or current political events as declarations of withdrawal from the EU. These simplistic approaches are battle-ready political weapons in the hands of social media influencers and politicians on both pro and con EU sides, shaping public opinion based on disinformation. This is an irresponsible mistake that misdirects public discourse.

Optionen und Perspektiven eines Bundeswehr-Sondervermögens

Besondere Zeiten erfordern besondere Maßnahmen. In einer historischen Bundestagssitzung am Sonntag, den 27.2.2022, hat die Bundesregierung eine Reihe weitgreifender Maßnahmen vorgestellt, die Deutschland im Angesicht der aktuellen Weltlage zukunftsfähig machen sollen. Zur umfassenden Ertüchtigung der seit Jahren vernachlässigten Bundeswehr sollen Mittel im Umfang von 100 Mrd. Euro über ein kreditfinanziertes Sondervermögen bereitgestellt werden. Wie dies in verfassungskonformer Weise geschehen kann, wird derzeit diskutiert.

Claiming »We are out but I am in« post-Brexit

It is not often that the European Court of Justice (ECJ) is presented with a case in which the law is so crystal clear, and so overwhelmingly contrary to the applicant’s claims, as in Préfet du Gers. The central question of the case is weather British nationals retain their EU citizenship and EU citizenship rights after Brexit. Given how straightforward the Treaties and the case-law are on this matter, it is unsurprising that AG Collins answered this question in the negative in a well-argued and straightforward Opinion.