No More Need for Doublespeak

How will Southeast Asian governments react to the violent developments in Myanmar? ASEAN’s non-interference principle is often described as an effective shield against foreign meddling in domestic affairs. In the face of reputational damage and possible economic setbacks, though, ASEAN members had started to refer to human rights, democracy and the rule of law to justify occasional peer pressure – not out of normative conviction but due to strategic considerations. After years of democratic backsliding and declining global expectations, however, these semantic gymnastics are much less required today.

Corona Constitutional #57: Reisen mit dem Digitalen Grünen Pass

Am 17. März hat die EU-Kommission einen Gesetzes-Vorschlag für ein europäisches Impfzertifikat, den sogenannten Digitalen Grünen Pass, vorgestellt. Damit sollen EU-Bürger, die eine Immunisierung, einen negativen PCR-Test oder Anti-Körper gegen das Corona-Virus nachweisen können, bald wieder innerhalb Europas reisen können. Vor allem Urlaubsländer wie Österreich und Griechenland hatten sich für den Digitalen Grünen Pass eingesetzt. Seit Wochen gibt es bereits Diskussion darüber, wie ein europäisches Impfzertifikat aussehen könnte und ob eine solche Maßnahme mit den EU-Grundrechten vereinbar wäre. Diese Fragen diskutiert Luise Quaritsch mit WALTHER MICHL. Er ist Habilitand am Institut für Politik und Öffentliches Recht der LMU München und er Associate Editor des Verfassungsblogs, zuständig für Europarechtsthemen.

Vaccination for Vacation

The European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen announced on 1 March that the Commission will put forward a proposal for a “digital green pass” on 17 March, which would enable safe cross-border movement of three categories of individuals: those who have been vaccinated, those who have developed antibodies after recovering from COVID-19 and those who can produce a negative PCR test. This concept could enable individuals to travel across Europe without unduly discriminating citizens. By contrast, "EU vaccination certificates" would violate EU law and unduly discriminate citizens.

Historians on Trial

On 9 February 2021, the District Court in Warsaw ruled that two prominent Holocaust researchers must publicly apologize for statements published in a book about the extermination of Jews in Nazi Germany-occupied Poland during the Second World War. The lawsuit is an example of strategic litigation aimed at intimidating researchers and exercising a chilling effect on the debate in Poland due to the involvement of an organization close to the government and framing of the case in pro-government public and private media. In March, courts in Poland handed judgments in two other important strategic lawsuits brought on criminal charges.

Es braucht nicht immer ein Gesetz

Am 02.03.2021 hat der Zweite Senat des BVerfG einen Antrag der Fraktion DIE LINKE im CETA-Organstreitverfahren als unzulässig verworfen. Die Linksfraktion hatte gegen die Unterlassung einer konstitutiven Zustimmung zur vorläufigen Anwendung von CETA durch ein förmliches Mandatsgesetz geklagt. Dass es eines solchen Mandatsgesetzes nicht braucht, damit das Parlament seine Integrationsverantwortung wahrnimmt, war spätestens seit dem Lissabon-Urteil klar, doch in seinem CETA-Urteil konkretisiert das BVerfG die Integrationsverantwortung nun abermals.

Money Talks

One of the judges of the Constitutional Court of Albania was dismissed after the country introduced radical judicial vetting measures. She challenged her dismissal before the ECtHR, claiming her rights to a fair trial and respect for private and family life were violated. In its decision in Xhoxhaj v Albania published on 2 February 2021, the ECtHR rejected her application and gave clear priority to the need for cleaning up a corrupt judiciary. It denied protection under the ECHR to those who seek to abuse human rights for protecting a status quo of corruption.

Corona Constitutional #56: Wer gewinnt?

EU-Mitgliedstaaten, die ihre Justiz unterjochen, verletzen EU-Recht: das hat der EuGH in Luxemburg mit seinem gestrigen Urteil zum polnischen Nationalen Justizrat kraftvoll deutlich gemacht. Die PiS-Regierung in Polen darf nicht einfach den Rechtsbehelf gegen Entscheidungen des von ihr kontrollierten Justizrat mit einem gesetzgeberischen Federstrich abschaffen. Der Kanal zwischen unabhängigen polnischen Gerichten und dem EuGH muss offen bleiben – und gleichzeitig versucht die PiS verzweifelt, diesen Kanal zuzustopfen. Wer wird das Rennen gewinnen? Darüber diskutiert Max Steinbeis heute mit dem Verfassungsrechtsprofessor WOJCIECH SADURSKI von der Universität Sydney.

The Digital Services Act and the Reproduction of Old Confusions

While intended to refit the 20-year-old E-Commerce Directive, the Digital Services Act reproduces a central confusion in its predecessor: The interplay between a lack of knowledge or awareness of illegality remains a precondition to enjoy liability exemptions, however, the Digital Services Act encourages platforms proactive investigation of hosted content, which might trigger aforementioned knowledge or awareness. The inclusion of a Section 230-like ‘good Samaritan clause’, meant to facilitate proactive, own-initiative investigations of user speech by platforms, complicates matters further.

Preserving Prejudice in the Name of Profit

Few CJEU judgments in recent years have received more criticism than the ‘headscarf judgments’, Achbita and Bougnaoui. In particular the decision in Achbita that private employers can legitimately pursue a policy of neutrality and ban expressions of political, religious, or philosophical belief at work, proved contentious. Two other headscarf cases, IX v Wabe and MH Müller, are currently pending before the CJEU and provide it with an excellent opportunity to do so. However, the first signs are not promising: Last week, Advocate General Rantos delivered his Opinion in these cases, which may be even more unpalatable than the Achbita judgment itself.