The European Ombudsman as an Insurmountable Roadblock?

On 17 September 2019, the European Ombudsman adopted a decision rejecting a complaint against the European Parliament submitted by The Good Lobby, an NGO “committed to giving voice to under-represented public interests and bringing more citizens into the public policy process”. The action was supported by Alberto Alemanno, also co-founder and director of the NGO, and Laurent Pech. In their post of last May 2019 they already described in detail their dealings with the Authority of European political parties and European political foundations (hereinafter the Authority) and with the President of Parliament. The subsequent stages and the Ombudsman’s take reveal the wider consequences of this process and some silver linings.

Continue Reading →

‘Ze-Gate’: Excepting Accountability

On September 24, the democrats in the House of Representatives announced a formal impeachment inquiry of President Trump for allegedly having pressured Ukrainian President Zelenskiy during a call to probe Joe Biden, former US Vice-President and Trump’s political rival. The content of the conversation raises questions about the integrity of Ukraine’s President. Impeaching Zelenskiy, however, is not a viable option as Ukraine’s constitution sets a practically unattainable threshold for impeachment.

Continue Reading →
Advertising: Global Constitutionalism (Journal)

Volume 8, Issue 2

July 2019


Global Constitutionalism

Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law

  • Reactive vs structural approach: A public law response to populism
  • Glocalised constitution-making in the twenty-first century: Evidence from Asia

Es hat viel gedonnert, aber kaum geregnet

Mit dem Beschluss der Abgeordnetenkammer vom 8. Oktober 2019 hat das italienische Parlament entschieden, sich selbst um ein gutes Drittel der Sitze zu verkleinern. Aus 945 Parlamentariern sollen künftig 600 werden. Obwohl die von der Fünf-Sterne-Bewegung angestrebte Reform in der italienischen Verfassungsdebatte nicht neu ist, beschränkt sie sich auf eine rechnerische Verkleinerung, ohne Rolle und Kompetenzen der Volksvertretung in der Gegenwart ernsthaft zu hinterfragen.

Continue Reading →

Local Elections in Hungary: the Results in Context

On October 13, 2019 local elections were held in Hungary. Even though the opposition parties had to fight an uphill battle, they achieved significant success not only in Budapest, but also in other big cities. The aim of this article is to put the results in context in order to give a more accurate picture of the current Hungarian situation.

Continue Reading →

Trumps Supreme Court und der Schwanger­schafts­abbruch

Mit der Ernennung des umstrittenen Richters Kavanaugh hat US-Präsident Trump am US Supreme Court eine dauerhafte konservative Mehrheit installiert. Anfang Oktober hat der Supreme Court den Fall June Medical v. Gee zur Entscheidung angenommen. Der Fall aus Louisiana könnte mitten im Wahljahr eine Kehrtwende in der Rechtsprechung des Supreme Courts zu Schwangerschaftsabbrüchen einleiten.

Continue Reading →

How an EU Directive on Access to a Lawyer Became a Weapon for Secret Arrests

Directive 2013/48/EU of 22 October 2013 ‘on the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings’ had an unfortunate fate in Bulgaria. In particular, the transposition is troublesome because the government used the Directive as a pretext to revive a totalitarian practice ­­– secret arrests.

Continue Reading →

Is One Offended Pole Enough to Take Critics of Official Historical Narratives to Court?

In a recent interview with Verfassungsblog, Wojciech Sadurski lists his fears accompanying the high probability of the Law and Justice forthcoming electoral victory. He mentions fundamental rules and values, such as the constitutional order, an independent judiciary, fair elections and free press. However, what can also be at stake and what just seemingly may be considered of lesser importance, is the possible conclusion of the process of reshaping the historical narratives and introduction of a state-imposed vision of historical truth.

Continue Reading →

Wer darf wen „diskriminieren“?

Seit das Bundesverfassungsgericht in seinem Stadionverbotsbeschluss aus dem April 2018 die kategoriale Differenzierung zwischen Staat und Privaten aufgeweicht hat, ist unsicher geworden, wer eigentlich wen, wie und warum „diskriminieren“ darf. Der Nichtannahmebeschluss der 2. Kammer in Sachen Hotelverbot eines früheren NPD-Bundesvorsitzenden trägt auch nicht zu mehr Klarheit bei.

Continue Reading →

10 Anti-Constitutional Commandments

Poland is on the eve of the parliamentary elections to be held on October 13, 2019. This provides a good opportunity to step back for a second to analyse the turbulent years of 2015-2019 and to piece together scattered elements of a new constitutional doctrine that has emerged since November 2015. Such a perspective should help readers of Verfassungsblog to truly understand and appreciate the scale and depth of the change that has happened to the prevalent (and what was presumed to be unshakeable) post-1989 constitutional paradigms.

Continue Reading →

Miller/Cherry 2 Goes to Kashmir

There are certain principles which emerge from Miller/Cherry 2 which are meaningful for cases involving judicial review of executive powers. The application of these principles, especially in cases where the line between the executive and legislature is thin (resulting in what Bagehot described as the ‘fusion of powers’), can guide comparative lawyers to hitherto underexplored areas of administrative law accountability of the executive to legislative bodies.

Continue Reading →