POSTS BY Christophe Hillion
03 November 2021

A(nother) lost opportunity?

The October meeting of the European Council (EUCO) was its first occasion to react to the declaration by the Polish “Constitutional Tribunal” that several provisions of the Treaty on European Union are incompatible with Poland’s Constitution and consequently inapplicable to the country. The express denunciation of fundamental provisions of EU primary law by one of its members (with the support of another), while insisting on his country remaining part of the Union, is a situation the EUCO could hardly overlook. And yet, not a word about the unfolding constitutional crisis was included in the EUCO Conclusions. Various elements may explain the restraint. However, the complete muteness from the EU crisis-manager-in-chief is more questionable and may carry a disquieting message. Continue reading >>
0
27 April 2020
,

Corona Constitutional #16: Scheidung auf Europäisch

Wenn Polen und Ungarn sich erkennbar nicht mehr an das EU-Recht gebunden fühlen - was ist das dann anderes als eine Erklärung, nicht mehr Mitglied in der Europäischen Union sein zu wollen? Der Weg zum Polexit bzw. Hungrexit geht über Artikel 50 des EU-Vertrags, und CHRISTOPHE HILLION schlägt dem Rat vor, diesen Weg notfalls auch ohne das Einverständnis von Polen und Ungarn zu beschreiten. Ob und wie das europarechtlich genau funktionieren würde, bespricht Max Steinbeis mit dem Professor für EU-Recht in unserer heutigen Podcast-Folge. Continue reading >>
27 April 2020

Poland and Hungary are withdrawing from the EU

The latest developments in Poland and Hungary beg the question of what the EU may, or indeed shall do when a Member State no longer fulfils the prerequisites of membership. Can the Union force that state to meet its duties against its will? Or should it ultimately acknowledge that state’s choice, and proceed with its orderly retreat from the EU legal order? Continue reading >>
15 September 2014

Scotland and the EU: Comment by CHRISTOPHE HILLION

Like many participants in this stimulating symposium, I am in agreement with several of Sionaidh Douglas-Scott’s contentions. But like some others, I am less persuaded by one of her conclusions: namely, that a treaty revision based on Article 48 TEU would suffice to codify an independent Scotland’s membership in the EU. While admittedly unprecedented, such a situation could not in itself warrant a complete disregard of EU membership rules, eg Article 49 TEU. As part of ‘the particular constitution and rules of the EU’, they should instead be applied, given their specific function in the treaties, albeit in a ‘pragmatic and purposive fashion’ in consideration of the existing and future ties between Scotland and the EU. Continue reading >>
Go to Top