Politicizing Constitutional Review
In July, the Finnish Parliament passed the Act on Temporary Measures to Combat Instrumentalised Migration. The Constitutional Law Committee, a Parliamentary organ in charge of ex ante constitutional review of legislation, greenlighted the Act despite the fact that all of the 18 legal experts it consulted found it to be in conflict with the Constitution, human rights obligations and EU law. This sparked a discussion about the politicization of the Committee and the role its experts play both in the Committee and the media. In this blog, I argue that the Committee’s politicization is visible in how it dressed political arguments as legal when assessing the law.
Continue reading >>
Legalising Illegality
Following Russia’s on-going facilitation of migrants to the Finnish border since last fall, Finland’s newly formed right-wing coalition government has closed the eastern land border indefinitely on 4 April 2024. Worried that this step will not be enough to ensure national security, the government is finalising a Draft Act on Temporary Measures to Combat Instrumentalised Migration, currently under revision.The draft bill allows for pushbacks in violation of non-refoulement and openly admits a conflict with Finland’s human rights obligations, EU law and own constitutional system, which is unusual. The unprecedented nature of the proposed measures is particularly worrying given that the Act appears unlikely to effectively address the essentially political problem that “migrant instrumentalisation” poses.
Continue reading >>Rallying under a Nazi Swastika Flag
On April 5th, 2024, the Helsinki Court of Appeal held that rallying under a Nazi swastika flag constituted an offense of incitement to hatred, namely, agitation against a group of population. Contrary to German law, Finnish law does not include any specific prohibition of symbols of this kind. It therefore leaves it open under which circumstances the public use of symbols such as those linked with the Nazi regime in fact constitute a criminal offense. Against this background, the Court of Appeal’s conclusion is to be welcomed. Had the outcome been different, this would have triggered a set of difficult questions of how to amend the regulatory framework in order to address this issue. The judgment may, however, still be appealed.
Continue reading >>
“Very Tight Control”
In 2020, at the height of the Covid crisis, the EU had its 'Hamiltonian Moment'. To overcome the pandemic's economic shock, Member States agreed to back an unprecedented, capital markets-based 750 billion Euro funding scheme to kickstart the European economy. However, since then, it proved surprisingly hard to make sense of where all the money went. Apparently, one main oversight body is a rather informal committee of Member States. Now, internal documents paint a picture of peer scrutiny that remains at a general level, is conducted under tight deadlines, and is strongly limited by scarce resources. They also reveal an evolution of the process to a point what looks much like a mere formality.
Continue reading >>
In the Dark
There is an old adage in the world of official transparency that “sunlight is the best disinfectant”. But when it comes to Europe’s recovery transformation via the NextGenerationEU (NGEU) programme and related instruments, the Commission insists on conducting as much of it as possible in the dark. As concerns grow about both the effectiveness and even potentially corruption in the use of recovery funds, this lack of transparency is particularly worrying.
Continue reading >>
Women’s Rights and the Russian Constitution
Since the beginning of Russia’ aggression against Ukraine, the government’s rhetoric has become more conservative and nationalistic. In 2022-2023, Russia witnessed the introduction of a slew of oppressive legislation directly violating human rights. Against the backdrop of Putin’s focus on the fight against the ‘enemies’ and Russia’s isolation due to ‘fighting for the right cause’ women once again became the target of regulation with a steady and consistent assault on their human rights, particularly reproductive rights. Moreover, as women actively participate in anti-war protests, the authorities have been treating women more harshly during arrest, trial and sentencing as various reports show. Nevertheless, women continue to fight for their rights and freedoms in courts and on the streets, hoping for change.
Continue reading >>
Paving the Way for Violence
The negative effects of the 1993 conflict prevailed over the benefits from the end of a confrontation. Its outcomes raised a major barrier to the democratization of Russia and paved the way for the use of violence as a means of preserving power. This conflict contributed to the maximization of presidential power and to the weakening of checks and balances in the constitution, which included significant authoritarian potential. The political order established in Russia after the 1993 conflict largely determined the subsequent trajectory of Russian political evolution and its drift towards a personalist authoritarian regime.
Continue reading >>
A Borderline Case
On 28 November 2023, Finland decided to close all its land border crossing stations to Russia due to the latter's apparent instrumentalization of migrants. That a foreign power, which conducts war elsewhere in Europe, directly engages in unfriendly acts against the EU’s (as well as NATO’s) eastern flank highlights the issues of national security involved. The situation is part of a broader European dilemma but presents certain idiosyncracies. How is an EU Member State such as Finland, respectful of the rule of law, to respond to such unfriendly acts which intrumentalize the vulnerable position of asylum seekers whose rights must, in principle, be observed at all times? This brief post addresses some of the legal issues involved in the currently unfolding situation.
Continue reading >>
Recovery and Resilience Facility two years after – quo vadis EU money?
In 2020, at the height of the Covid crisis, the EU embarked on a new path. It extensively borrowed money at capital markets and handed it out to member states. After two years of implementation, it is now possible to make some preliminary conclusions about how that money is being spent. Reading the reports and listening to the hearings in the European Parliament, it becomes abundantly clear that most of it has very little to do with European policies. Rather, spending goes into mundane national budgetary expenditures that may be useful as such but have little genuine European value and little transformational potential. In a time with pressing common European needs, this is not how it should be.
Continue reading >>How a Boat Trip to Estonia Challenged the Foundations of the Finnish Sentencing System
In August 2015, a Finnish citizen embarked on a tour from Finland to Estonia and back on a pleasure boat. The private boat trip quickly evolved into a matter of great significance. His journey not only challenged the foundations of the Finnish sentencing system but also shed new light on the requirements of proportionality that EU law may impose on national sentencing systems more broadly. The boatman was fined for not carrying his passport. He contested the penal order, and the case was heard by the district court before being escalated to the Supreme Court of Finland. The Supreme Court sought a preliminary ruling from the European Court of Justice (ECJ), which delivered a verdict that struck at the very core of the Finnish sentencing system.
Continue reading >>
How Cohesion Became the EU’s Vehicle for Economic Policy
In Brussels, something remarkable has happened in the last four years. Cohesion policy—which had heretofore been a policy backwater, aimed at addressing regional disparities—has emerged as the EU’s primary vehicle for reshaping economic and related fiscal policies in the Member States. As a result, any economic or fiscal policy measure that can be plausibly described as a structural reform (primarily an area of Member State competence, subject to Union coordination) can now be reframed as a measure of EU cohesion policy (a shared competence) that can be supported by EU funds to incentivize compliance. How did this happen?
Continue reading >>
A Taxonomy of Standing
On June 21, the General Court handed down its order in T-628/22 René Repasi v the European Commission. Repasi had challenged the validity of the Commission Delegated Regulation 2022/1214, a complementary taxonomy regulation on nuclear energy and natural gas. The General Court dismissed the action due to lack of standing. To surmount the notoriously strict standing requirements before the CJEU, Repasi relied on his position as a Member of Parliament (MEP) and argued that a claim of a wrong choice of the legal basis that leads to deviation from the ordinary legislative procedure (OLP) gives an MEP standing before the EU courts. The difficulties that MEPs encounter while fulfilling their legislative responsibilities make Repasi’s argument appealing. However, creating a new semi-privileged standing category through the Union courts could also present its own set of difficulties.
Continue reading >>
Watchdog Watching Too Closely
In December 2017, readers of the largest and maybe also the most esteemed Finnish newspaper, Helsingin Sanomat, were surprised to find an article which, among others, showed excerpts of classified, red-labelled documents. Very little was publicly known about the workings of that special center, part of the military intelligence, situated in a faraway resort. More than five years later, on January 27th, 2023, the Helsinki District Court found both of the journalists guilty of criminal disclosure charges. Put simply, the court’s decision is that media may report abuses of power. However, an interest to attract readers only is not enough to justify the disclosure.
Continue reading >>
Nature Restoration and Fundamental Rights
This year’s most heated topic of constitutional contestation in Finland is likely to be the Commission’s recent proposal for nature restoration. While nature restoration has an innocent sound, the matter actually involves a broad spectrum of constitutional issues. In this debate, political undesirability has turned into claims about the EU’s lacking competence in regulating forests and a general failure to respect the principle of subsidiarity. Last Friday the Finnish Parliament’s Constitutional Law Committee approved an interesting statement of principle, which is likely to affect the country’s stance on EU (fiscal) integration far beyond the question of nature restoration.
Continue reading >>
Krieg, wie er auch hieße
Wie das russische Recht das Sprechen und das Schweigen formt
Continue reading >>A Declaration on the Rule of Law in the European Union
Since the Second World War, Europe has witnessed the benefits of rule-based order. Peace, prosperity, and progress have grown out of a shared commitment to the rule of law, both between individuals and states. As of late, these unprecedented achievements are increasingly under threat, as the basics of the rule of law, including the need for an independent judiciary, are questioned both at the heart of Europe and in countries beyond our borders. Time is of the essence. If backsliding on the rule of law occurs faster than corrective action, the passage of time will inevitably erode the rule-based order. We, the signatories of this declaration, urgently call on all leaders, in Member States and the EU Institutions, to uncompromisingly safeguard the rule of law in Europe.
Continue reading >>
Time for Military Integration in the EU?
For decades, the EU’s security and defence policy was largely looked at as a theoretical piece in the overall puzzle of the Union’s external role. During the past week, however, the unthinkable happened, and European defence policy has taken a significant leap forward. This brings to fore questions about the legal nature of the security and mutual assistance provisions in the EU Treaties, including the relationship between aligned and non-aligned States in EU defence policy.
Continue reading >>Beware of the Bulldozer
The case of Russia teaches us how dangerous extra-constitutional constitution making can be – and that it should always be just a last resort. No substantive institutional changes should be made outside of the constitutional bounds. Otherwise, there will always be the danger that breaking the rule of law will continue even after constitutional change has taken place. This is precisely what Russian intellectuals and jurists, who supported Yeltsin in 1993, learned under the rule of Vladimir Putin. We should try to avoid repeating their mistakes.
Continue reading >>