Need a new search?
If you didn't find what you were looking for, try a new search!
Generalanwältin Eleanor Sharpston: mit dem Brexit verlieren wir eine Kraft für das europäische Asylrecht
Es gibt viele Gründe, den Brexit zu beweinen. Auf Seiten der EU ist einer davon Generalanwältin Eleanor Sharpston. Sie hat speziell für das europäische Asylrecht in den letzten Jahren eine zentrale Rolle gespielt.
Continue reading >>
Unpersuasive but Wise
On 16 June, by two parallel orders, the EU Court of Justice said the last word on the legality of advocate general Sharpston’s divestment. In the end, the Court did little more than reiterate the press statement it made in response to the member states’ declaration on the subject. The member states made a legitimate decision based on an old custom, and the Court could do nothing but oblige.
Continue reading >>Predictable and Unsatisfying
Most EU lawyers have already seen it looming on the horizon: On 16 June 2021, former Advocate General Eleanor Sharpston lost the legal dispute against her former employer, the European Court of Justice. Although the outcome in this regard was predictable, the decision is overall somewhat unsatisfying. The CJEU seems to be of that opinion in finding that Sharpston’s mandate ended automatically with the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the EU. The Court does so without revealing its legal considerations and interpretation of EU primary law in its reasoning.
Continue reading >>
CJEU’s Independence and Lawful Composition in Question (Part V)
The Sharpston Affair is over, at least as a matter of proceedings before the CJEU. The litigation had aimed at saving the CJEU’s dignity, but the opposite result has been achieved. At the critical juncture when the CJEU’s authority stands contested by the courts of established democracies, the phony panels of the ‘illiberal’ ones, as well as the immature in-betweens, the CJEU managed to pour oil into the fire and signed off its own lack of independence: when it is needed the most, its legitimacy is in the doghouse.
Continue reading >>CJEU’s Independence in Question, Part IV
In her much awaited appeal before the European Court of Justice, AG Sharpston is asking the right questions, that the Vice-President of the Court of Justice clearly got her Orders very wrong, and attempted to silence to ousted AG Sharpston through an abuse of ex parte procedure brought by the Member States.
Continue reading >>Lawful composition – the EFTA Court’s approach
On 10 September 2020, the British Advocate General at the Court of Justice of the European Union, Eleanor Sharpston, was replaced by the Greek lawyer Athanasios Rantos. Most of the commentators of the incident, which stirred up a great deal of dust, focus on the question whether the termination of Ms. Sharpston’s mandate on 10 September 2020 was lawful. The following considerations, on the other hand, examine the legal situation in the event that her expulsion from the ECJ was after Brexit in line with EU law. A precedent of the EFTA Court in 2016 may be relevant in this context.
Continue reading >>That Depends
The controversial debate about Eleanor Sharpston’s position as Advocate General has raised a lot of questions: political as well as legal. Many of the legal questions have not been decided by the Courts, the law is ambiguous, and the circumstances with one Member leaving the European Union are unprecedented. And yet, the Court of Justice treated those questions as if the answers were straightforward and clear-cut. In doing so, the Court seems to have ignored the complexity of the legal questions and thereby undercut the effectiveness of the proceedings for interim measures.
Continue reading >>It’s Urgent
In a remarkable move, the Member States appointed, on 2 September 2020, an Advocate General put forward by Greece, who will enter into office on 7 September 2020 if Member States get their way. There is a ginormous problem with this move, as the office that this Advocate General will try to fill, as things stand, does not become vacant until October 2021. Eleanor Sharpston, the officeholder presently in situ, remains there until then. Any other reading of EU law is tantamount to the Member States sacking a member of the Court in direct violation of the primary law. This is a wholly unacceptable scenario in a Union grounded and predicated upon the rule of law. Urgent measures are thus necessary to save not only the legitimacy of the Court, but that of the EU.
Continue reading >>Frankenstein’s Court
Due to Brexit, the remaining 27 EU Member States would like to remove Eleanor Sharpston, an Advocate General nominated by the United Kingdom, from the CJEU. Many have criticized this idea, claiming that a removal would undermine the judicial independence of the Court. This post argues that the position taken by the EU 27 to remove Eleanor Sharpston from the Court is actually well-reasoned and lawful while leaving her in office would lead to strange consequences e.g. that the Judges of the Court are less protected than its Advocate Generals.
Continue reading >>The Schrödinger’s Advocate General
We know Brexit means Brexit but should it also mean violating EU Primary Law? Eleanor Sharpston QC, one of the Advocates General of the European Court of Justice, launched an unprecedented legal action "against the EU and her own judicial colleagues after attempts were made to sack her": The national governments of 27 EU Member States decided to terminate her appointment early. Why? Because Brexit ought to mean Brexit or so it seems.
Continue reading >>Humiliating the Court?
The Member States, dismissing an Advocate General before the expiration of her term of office on the Court, have demonstrated that they are ready to humiliate the Court of Justice by allowing post-Brexit frustrations take the place of the Primary Law of the EU. The Rule of Law stands replaced with political whim. As AG Sharpston’s tenure is left in suspense, what is the worth of the core aspects of EU Rule of Law and judicial independence, when the Member States are willing to alter the composition of the Court by a political declaration?
Continue reading >>Could there be a Rule of Law Problem at the EU Court of Justice?
The Member States’ current plan of replacing the sitting U.K. Advocate General at the Court of Justice Eleanor Sharpston before the end of her six-year term raises a serious question whether doing so may violate the European Treaties. If yes, this would be a troubling intrusion on the independence of the Court and the constitutional structure of the Union – just when the EU should be setting an example for the Member States (both current and former).
Continue reading >>Kopftuchverbot am Arbeitsplatz als Diskriminierung
Ein pauschales Kopftuchverbot am Arbeitsplatz, so EuGH-Generalanwältin Eleanor Sharpston, ist diskriminierungsrechtlich kaum zu rechtfertigen. Dabei möchte die Generalanwältin den Fall offenbar zum Anlass nehmen, ein paar sehr grundsätzliche Dinge zum Verbot unmittelbarer Diskriminierung im Europarecht klar zu stellen.
Continue reading >>The Quality of Sovereignty
It can generally be agreed that the purpose of sovereignty is to enable a government to protect the best interests of its citizens. To what extent did UK membership of the EU preclude this? In the context of the EU, the discussion on sovereignty tends to focus on quantity – the greater the scope of action of the EU and its institutions, the lower the sovereignty of the member states. From this perspective, sovereignty is a zero-sum affair – less means less. However, sovereignty can also be assessed from a qualitative perspective, with a focus on its quality, or character, rather than its scope.
Continue reading >>
Why Declaring the Iranian Revolutionary Guards a Terrorist Group is a Trickier Business Than One May Think
The EU did not follow the European Parliament’s call to designate Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a terrorist group on the EU’s recent sanctions list. The High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Josep Borrell, justified this decision with the lack of a court decision finding that the IRGC is indeed a terrorist group. Is an EU court decision a pre-condition for sanctioning terrorist groups? Not necessarily. Nevertheless, Borrell does have a point.
Continue reading >>
Pride or Prejudice?
The joined cases IX v Wabe and MH Müller Handels GmbH offered the CJEU a second chance to heed the arguments raised against Achbita and reconsider its decision. Hopes that the Court would be willing to revise Achbita diminished significantly after AG Rantos’s disappointing Opinion in the case. Last week's decision in IX v Wabe to largely uphold Achbita was then also unsurprising, but nevertheless disappointing.
Continue reading >>Keine Kompromisse
Über Offensichtliches, Kontroverses und was passiert, wenn sich das "normale Volk" nicht im Spiegelbild der demokratischen Wahl erkennt
Continue reading >>
We will not compromise
On the obvious and the controversial and what happens when the "normal people" don't recognise themselves in the mirror of democratic elections
Continue reading >>Mitigating Brexit through Bilateral Free-Movement of Persons
Rather than bemoaning the Brexit choice the UK made, it is time to start thinking about living with it in a way that would cause as little disruption as possible for all those concerned. How to mitigate, at least to some degree, the sudden, unprecedented loss of rights that Brexit caused? EU citizenship not any more on the table, bilateral freedom of movement of persons agreements with the EU Member States, EEA countries and Switzerland could offer a way forward. This solution is fully in line with EU law and has already been tested.
Continue reading >>It’s Urgent II
On Friday 4 September 2020, Judge Anthony Collins of the General Court has ordered the suspension of operation and all consequential effects of the Decision of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, in so far as it purports to appoint Mr. Athanasios Rantos to the position of Advocate General of the Court of Justice. The significance of this development for the independence of the judiciary in the EU and the general articulation of the rule of law in Europe is difficult to overestimate.
Continue reading >>At the Margin of Society
On the marginalized, the marginalizers and a false symmetry.
Continue reading >>
Am Rand der Gesellschaft
Über Marginalisierer, Marginalisierte und falsche Symmetrien.
Continue reading >>Alive until you aren’t
On Poland, France, UK, Germany, Europe, the World and one great and one less great judgment from Karlsruhe.
Continue reading >>
Lebendig bis zum Schluss
Über Polen, Frankreich, UK, Deutschland, die Welt und ein tolles und ein nicht so tolles Urteil des Zweiten Senats des Bundesverfassungsgerichts.
Continue reading >>
A Glimpse of the Future?
On Venezuela, Hungary, Poland and other risky but interesting parallels in constitutional law and policy.
Continue reading >>Points and Vectors
On reasons of last resort, final cigarettes and other matters of constitutional ultimativity.
Continue reading >>Hic Rhodus, hic salta: The ECJ Hearing of the Landmark “Celmer” Case
The highly anticipated hearing in the Celmer case took place on 1 June 2018 before the Grand Chamber of the ECJ. The stakes are undoubtedly high. On the one hand, the efficiency of the European Arrest Warrant mechanism is clearly at risk — a risk which could lead to broader consequences for the whole architecture of mutual trust and recognition. On the other hand, the Celmer dispute goes to the heart of the problems surrounding the current Polish judicial reforms, and to the ensuing concerns about judicial independence. Taking into account the present negotiations between the Polish government and the Commission, Celmer is unquestionably both political and delicate in the extreme.
Continue reading >>Merkel’s Conscience
On conscientious objection as a method of constitutional interpretation and other ways to have the cake and eat it.
Continue reading >>Pushing Borders
On emergencies, Faustian pacts and other diabolical or divine matters constitutional.
Continue reading >>
Cleaning up after 2016
The end of this year of 2016 draws close, and relief about that fact, ill-founded as it may be, is palpable wherever I go. It has been a rough ride for constitutionalists, and we all deserve some days of rest and peace, if we can afford it. Therefore, I will spare you with seasonal reviews and reflections on these almost consistently dreadful twelve months past and highlight only one fact hopefully suitable to lift your spirits a bit: Since Brexit, support for European integration has jumped by 5 percent throughout the EU and by 7 percent in the UK.
Continue reading >>