Shared powers: the elephant in the room in the division of powers-debate

The saga surrounding the signing of the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) has again brought the issue of the division of foreign affairs powers between the EU and its Member States to the centre of attention of many an EU lawyer. How far do the EU’s exclusive powers to conduct a ‘common commercial policy’ reach? Do implied powers supplement the EU’s express exclusive powers in this area? Is it appropriate to apply a so-called ‘centre of gravity’ test when assessing the vires of a particular EU action on the international scene, or should a piecemeal approach be followed, whereby the inclusion of a single provision that reaches beyond the scope of the EU’s exclusive powers requires a proposed international agreement to be adopted as a ‘mixed’ agreement?

Blowin‹ against the Wind: the Future of EU trade Policy

U.S. President-elect Trump has announced his intention to stop the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade agreement. In the EU too the wind seems to be blowing in a similar direction. There appears to be a widespread and growing anti-free-trade sentiment in some parts of the population. Should the EU, at this moment in time, continue to pursue a free trade agenda? If so, does the EU have the means to do that effectively?

South Africa and the ICC, or: Whose Rights Does the Constitution Protect?  

When the South African government announced that it would withdraw from the International Criminal Court, a great number of commenters expressed shock and disappointment. Legal commentators have also weighed in, questioning the legality of withdrawing from the ICC (here) and a legal challenge on several terms seems inevitable. Here, I want to consider the possibility of challenging the withdrawal on the basis of the Bill of Rights.

Die Geister der Vergangenheit ‒ Eine kritische Reflexion zur Kunduz-Entscheidung des BGH

Das Urteil des Bundesgerichtshofs zu der Frage, ob zivile Opfer von militärischen Einsätzen der Bundeswehr im Ausland Deutschland auf Schadensersatz verklagen können, hat viel Aufsehen erregt. Jetzt sind die Entscheidungsgründe einsehbar und erlauben eine detailliertere Auseinandersetzung, die vor dem Hintergrund der erheblichen Implikationen der betreffenden Entscheidung mehr denn geboten erscheint. Kritik an dem Urteil des BGH ist nicht nur aus völkerrechtlicher, sondern vor allem aus verfassungsrechtlicher Perspektive angebracht.

Ganz Gallien? Fehlschlüsse aus dem wallonischen CETA-Veto

Wallonien lässt die westliche Welt zappeln – und wird dafür je nach politischem Standpunkt des Betrachters als einzig aufrechtes gallisches Dorf besungen oder als eigennützige Erpresserbande geschmäht. Stutzig macht jedoch die prompte Reaktion, man hätte CETA besser doch nicht als „gemischtes Abkommen“ einstufen sollen, sondern als Abkommen zwischen der EU und Kanada ohne direkte Beteiligung der Mitgliedstaaten. Diese Reaktion zeugt von Demokratieverachtung.

The TTIP Negotiations Innovations: On Legal Reasons for Cheer

After 36 months of talks, the developments in the EU’s proposals for TTIP are far from perfect or complete. However, they demonstrate a huge faith in the EU’s power to institutionally nudge global trade - and render it more legitimate and accountable, as a good global governance actor should. They arguably do provide important reasons for cheer about the evolution of global trade through law.

BrEXIT AND BreUK-UP

How to balance the aim of the UK to leave the European Union with the complex independence and border issues this would cause in Scotland and Northern Ireland? One possible scenario could be for Scotland to broker a five-year EFTA-EEA "naughty step" membership for the United Kingdom, at the end of which Scotland could itself become an independent EFTA-EEA member state and thus be well positioned to re-enter the European Union.