02 February 2017

Geschlossenheit in welchem Sinne? Europäische Verfassungsfragen beim Treffen in Malta

Beim Gipfel von Malta will die EU in punkto Migrationspolitik Geschlossenheit demonstrieren - auch gegenüber US-Präsident Trump. Die USA schultern aber den Löwenanteil der Kosten für das UN-Flüchtlingshilfswerk und für das Resettlement von Flüchtlingen. Beides unterstreicht, dass es nicht ausreichend ist, die USA an den Pranger zu stellen. Europa als ein Verbund vieler der wohlhabendsten Staaten der Welt trifft eine moralische Pflicht, gerade in so einer Situation die Idee des Flüchtlingsschutzes als einer minimalen weltbürgerlichen Solidarität aufrechtzuerhalten. Aber auch schon die von Ratspräsident Tusk betonte „Wahrung des internationalen Rechts“ macht Europa Vorgaben, was die Grenzsicherung angeht. Continue reading >>

An Instruction Manual to Stop a Judicial Rebellion (before it is too late, of course)

2016 was not a good year for the EU. Among many other things, one of the EU’s proudest achievements, its judiciary, has shown the first signs of worrying instability: In Germany, Denmark and Italy, high-level courts have openly and harshly declared their dissatisfaction with rulings by the European Court of Justice. I would not say that these are nationalist overreactions. These are worrying (and I would add justified) signs of something going wrong. Continue reading >>

What is the Situation of Constitutional Jurisdiction in Europe? Worrying News from Spain

Although the situation in Poland is unique, the speed at which the Polish Constitutional Court has been subjugated should make the rest of us think about the regulations concerning our Constitutional jurisdictions and about the behaviour of other political actors with respect to them. Recent developments in Spain have led me to these reflections, and I would like to describe them briefly here to sound the alarm about what happens in other European countries more discretely than in Poland, but also very disturbingly. Continue reading >>
01 February 2017

Sanctuary Cities and the Trump Administration

The current clash between the Trump administration and the so-called “sanctuary cities” on immigration is not qualitatively new. There have been other attempts by the local level in the United States to position itself as an alternative political force vis-à-vis the federal government. Due to the political style of the new administration and all the drama attached to it, the conflict may, however, reach new simmering heights. It may also be more dangerous for the social cohesion of the United States as a political entity. Continue reading >>
0

‘We Don’t Need No Constitution’ – On a Sad EU Membership Anniversary in Romania

These are troubled constitutional times in Romania. The newly elected government led by the corruption-ridden PSD party is pushing for legislative changes to make corruption offences virtually unpunishable by means of dubious Emergency Ordinances. A pending appeal before the Constitutional Court seeks to have legal provisions which prohibit persons with criminal convictions to occupy public positions in the Government declared unconstitutional. These attempts are met with resistance by the President who calls for an anti-corruption referendum. Continue reading >>
31 January 2017

“A Terrible Signal that International Law can be Flaunted without Consequence”

If refugees are detained or turned away for reasons of religion or country of origin, that is a case of discrimination clearly prohibited by international refugee law. In theory any other state party to the Refugee Protocol can take the US to the International Court of Justice. Will Chancellor Merkel or perhaps Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau – each of whom has spoken up for refugees in the current context – have the courage to make that referral? Continue reading >>

The Italian Constitutional Court in re Taricco: “Gauweiler in the Roman Campagna”

The Italian Constitutional Court’s Tarrico judgement is worded in apparently much milder terms than the BVerfG’s preliminary reference in Gauweiler. The content of the ICC’s decision, though, seems loaded with much more dynamite. In Gauweiler, the CJEU was called to interpret an act of another EU institution. In Taricco, the CJEU is called to reinterpret its own decision, after the ICC essentially asked “please, say it again?” Continue reading >>
0

New Constitutional Amendment Proposal in Turkey: A Threat to Pluralistic Democracy!

Turkey will hold a referendum on a fundamental constitutional reform, probably in April. The designed political regime is neither parliamentarism nor presidentialism. Although the government calls the new political regime as a “Turkish type of presidentialism” with a populist discourse; in reality, the new regime will bring a kind of “delegative democracy”, which is seen usually in the South American, sub-Saharan African and in central Asian countries. Continue reading >>
0
30 January 2017
, ,

Legal Disintegration? The Ruling of the Danish Supreme Court in AJOS

On December 6, 2016, the Supreme Court of Denmark (SCDK) ruled in the Ajos case. The ruling will be read, remembered and taught as an example of defiance of clear guidelines from the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) by the highest court in Denmark. EU law is an exterior phenomenon but part and parcel of Danish law. It follows that switching it off, as in Ajos, necessarily entails applying one law by breaking another. That is not a viable path for any legal system taking supranational obligations seriously. Continue reading >>

Stable Majorities in Italy: an Interview with FRANCESCO CLEMENTI

Last week, the Italian Constitutional Court has declared the electoral law reform constitutional in most respects. Francesco Clementi explains why it will still be extremely difficult to form stable majorities in both chambers of Parliament. Continue reading >>
0

President Trump and the Foreign Emoluments Clause

The election of Donald Trump to the American presidency has, among other things, brought newfound attention to one of the sleepier provisions of the U.S. Constitution. The foreign emoluments clause provides that “no person holding any office of profit or trust under [the United States], shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.” Within 72 hours of his inauguration, the nonprofit government ethics group CREW has filed a constitutional complaint against President Trump in federal court. The President shot back the same day, calling the suit meritless. Does CREW have a case? Continue reading >>
28 January 2017
,

The Taricco Decision: A Last Attempt to Avoid a Clash between EU Law and the Italian Constitution

Is Italy obliged by EU law to pursue criminal acts longer than provided by Italian law? This question might cause a fundamental clash between the Italian Constitutional Court and the European Court of Justice. Unlike the CJEU, the Italian Constitutional Court interprets a retroactive suspension of the limitation period as a matter of principle of legality, and thereby as a matter of a core principle of Italian constitutional law. By referring the case to the CJEU, the Italian Constitutional Court gives the European Court a chance to revisit its jurisdiction while avoiding the identity language of the German Constitutional Court - good news for cooperative constitutionalism in Europe. Continue reading >>
,

The Final Trick? Separation of Powers, Checks and Balances, and the Recomposition of the Turkish State

The Turkish parliament has recently passed constitutional amendments that will, pending the public referendum in spring 2017, set aside decades of parliamentary system tradition. Presumably aimed to repair the dysfunctions of the current regime and to respond to the need of a “stronger Turkey”, the proposed draft does not only eradicate the principle of separation of powers but rebuilds the state according to the interests of ruling groups, without much consideration being paid to the overall integrity of the system and long term implications. Continue reading >>
0
27 January 2017

The Turkish Constitutional Court under the Amended Turkish Constitution

In March 2016, the Turkish Constitutional Court (TCC) ruled that the rights of the Turkish journalists Can Dündar and Erdem Gül had been violated, leading to their release from prison after three months. Recep Tayyip Erdoğan responded by criticizing the TCC sharply, questioning its existence and legitimacy. This had not been the first time over the last years, that the Court had been attacked. The constitutional amendments, that will be put to referendum in April 2017, seemed to be a golden opportunity to change the composition and cut back the broad competences of the TCC. Did the AKP-led Parliamentary Constitutional Committee seize this opportunity? Continue reading >>
0
26 January 2017

Money Makes the Court Go Round: The Russian Constitutional Court’s Yukos Judgment

On 19 December 2017 the Russian Constitutional Court (RCC) ruled that payment of just satisfaction in the Yukos case was contrary to the Russian Constitution. It is the first time the apex court of a Council of Europe member state concluded that it should not pay just satisfaction. This blog post provides the background of the case, sums up the reasoning of the RCC and assesses the implications of its judgment of 19 December 2017. Continue reading >>
25 January 2017

Same-sex marriage before the courts and before the people: the story of a tumultuous year for LGBT rights in Romania

This article will briefly recount a particularly agitated year for LGBT rights in Romania, marked by a highly contentious campaign to amend the constitutional definition of marriage through a referendum, as well as the first referral to the Court of Justice of the European Union by the Constitutional Court, in a freedom of movement case involving a married mixed nationality same-sex couple. Continue reading >>
0

Sailing uncharted waters – for how long? On transitional post-Brexit trade arrangements

Given the short timeframe for negotiating an exit agreement, the UK and the EU-27 may not be able to agree on new terms for their future trade relations before the UK’s formal exit from the EU takes effect. Consequently, many experts are pushing for a transitional arrangement. Continue reading >>
24 January 2017

Brexit in the Supreme Court: An Opportunity Missed?

For all that this case has been written-up in the media as a ‘defeat’ for the government, this was a case in which the Supreme Court passed up a significant opportunity to compensate for the UK’s newly imbalanced constitutional framework. Continue reading >>

The Supreme Court in Miller – some early comments

The UK Supreme Court’s decision in the Miller appeal was probably greeted with a sigh of relief in 10 Downing Street. Sure, the Government will now need to seek parliamentary approval for triggering Article 50 TEU and starting the formal process of withdrawing from the EU, but the much greater political danger of having to also seek the consent of the devolved parliaments of Scotland, Northern Ireland, and Wales, has not materialised. What follows are a few brief comments on the Supreme Court’s reasoning and an assessment of its implications for the future. Continue reading >>
0

Europarecht, Prärogative und Devolution: Der UK Supreme Court entscheidet über den Brexit

In seinem heutigen Urteil zum Brexit hat der britische Supreme Court entschieden, dass die britische Regierung nur nach gesetzlicher Ermächtigung den Austritt aus der EU erklären darf. Die Mehrheit des Gerichts sieht das Unionsrecht als eigene Rechtsquelle an, die nur das Parlament trocken legen kann. Dass es das nun tun wird, steht außer Frage. Continue reading >>
0
21 January 2017

Nach der Entscheidung des Bundesverfassungs­gerichts im NPD-Verbotsverfahren – Kein Geld mehr für Verfassungsfeinde!?

Neben dem Parteiverbot könnte in Art. 21 Abs. 2 GG, quasi als milderes Mittel, ein zweiter Fall geregelt werden. Für diesen wäre nicht erforderlich, dass eine als verfassungsfeindlich erkannte Partei eine reale Chance zur Verwirklichung ihrer Ziele hat. Im Übrigen entsprächen die Kriterien des zweiten Falls denen des Parteiverbots. Seine rechtliche Folge wäre eine Streichung oder Kürzung der staatlichen Teilfinanzierung. Continue reading >>
19 January 2017

The Incompatibility of the Definition of Torture in Greece with International Law

In Greek criminal law, torture is defined primarily as the “planned” (μεθοδευμένη) infliction by a state official on a person of severe physical, and other similar forms of, pain. Under the established Greek case law and doctrine in order for the infliction of pain to be considered as “planned” it must be repeated and have a certain duration. This definition raises serious issues of compatibility with international human rights law. Continue reading >>

Sklavenhalter auf Europa-Urlaub: Nicht unser Problem?

Am Dienstag, überlagert vom NPD-Urteil, kam eine Kammerentscheidung des EGMR in Straßburg, die mehr Aufmerksamkeit verdient hätte. Es geht darin um eine Familie aus Dubai, die drei filipinische Frauen wie Haussklavinnen hielt. Continue reading >>

Is there Hope for the Right to Hope?

The European Court of Human Rights has overturned its former position that convicts sentenced to life in prison enjoy a "right to hope" to be eventually released. Arguably, in this case we have an instance of interpretation of evolution which lowers rather than heightens human rights protection. In the current climate when there is a growing political appetite to curtail human rights, a Court interpretation towards change in this direction without good reasons may create a dangerous precedent for further reduction of basic human rights guarantees. Continue reading >>
0
17 January 2017

Die eventuell, aber nicht potenziell verfassungswidrige NPD

Die NPD, das hat das Bundesverfassungsgericht heute festgestellt, ist verfassungsfeindlich, aber nicht verfassungswidrig. Dazu fehlt ihr zum Wollen das Können. Das wirft die Frage auf: was fangen wir mit einer solchen Wollen-aber-nicht-Können-Verfassungsfeindpartei jetzt an? Continue reading >>

Der Demokratie zumutbar? Zum NPD-Verbotsurteil des BVerfG

Das heutige Urteil zum Verbotsantrag des Bundesrats gegen die NPD kann als Verantwortungszuweisung für die Auseinandersetzung mit parteipolitischem Extremismus verstanden werden. Das Parteiverbot stellt in der jetzigen Situation keine wirksame Waffe des Staates im Kampf gegen rechtsextreme Parteien dar. Damit rückt der freie gesellschaftliche Diskurs in den Vordergrund, für den der Staat, auch das betont das BVerfG, die Rahmenbedingungen zu schaffen hat. Continue reading >>
16 January 2017
,

Social Bots: Wegbereiter der Maschinokratie

Der Einsatz von Social Bots ist den Parteien von Verfassungs wegen untersagt. Den Staat trifft eine Schutzpflicht zur Gewährleistung eines fairen Parteienwettbewerbs, der nicht durch den Einsatz von Social Bots manipuliert wird. Continue reading >>
15 January 2017

Warum Vertrauen in die Neutralität der Justiz ein schützenswertes Verfassungsgut ist

Gibt es Allgemeininteressen mit Verfassungsrang, die es rechtfertigen, Richterinnen das Tragen eines Hidschab zu untersagen? Anders als Aqilah Sandhu glaubt, lautet die Antwort Ja. Wer nicht bereit ist, auf auffallende Symbole gruppenbezogener Identität zu verzichten, kann nicht ein Richteramt beanspruchen. Dies gilt auch, wenn Anwärter ernsthaft und glaubwürdig versichern, ihre Zugehörigkeiten bei konkreten Entscheidungen ausblenden zu können. Zu der verantwortungsvollen Richterrolle gehören nicht nur die fachliche Ausbildung und die Fähigkeit zur Selbstbeobachtung, sondern auch Verständnis für die Funktionsbedingungen, die für das System Justiz von zentraler Bedeutung sind. Continue reading >>
13 January 2017

How to Kill an Idea: An American’s Observations on the NPD Party-Ban Proceedings

Next Tuesday, the German Federal Constitutional Court will announce its decision on the federal states’ application seeking to ban the National Democratic Party of Germany (NPD). In times of a far-right surge all over Europe, the procedure offers ample opportunity to reflect on a constitutional democracy's right to take repressive measures against odious ideas. Continue reading >>

The Ljubljana Initiative for Re-Launching the European Integration

It is a sign of unconventional times when earnest people wish you a less exciting year 2017 compared to the one that has just, luckily, passed. Starting a new year, a less exciting one then, is an opportunity for reckoning about the past and for charting the plans for the future. For those who care about the project of European integration, these are no easy moments. By looking back we are reminded about the chain of crises that has been strangling the Union. By looking forward we cannot help ourselves but to wring hands at what is yet to follow. It is high time that this self-destructive European (indeed Western) narrative and, unfortunately, praxis were put to a halt. It is high time to present a positive alternative to the present status quo and to the populist decay. It is high time to re-launch the process of European integration. Continue reading >>
0
12 January 2017

Der Burkini als Technological Fix

Während in ersten öffentlichen Bädern in Deutschland und der Schweiz Burkinis verboten worden sind, befand der Europäische Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte am 10. Januar 2017, dass der Burkini ein Mittel sein kann, die Teilnahme muslimischer Kinder am koedukativen Schwimmunterricht zu ermöglichen. Der schonende Interessenausgleich, der so erreicht werden konnte, war nur durch diesen Schwimmanzug, der den Charakter eines technischen Konfliktlösungsmittels annimmt, denkbar. Solche technological fixes, die praktische Konkordanz zulassen, stehen auch in anderen Fällen zur Verfügung. Continue reading >>
,

Constitutional Review as an Indispensable Element of the Rule of Law? Poland as the Divided State between Political and Legal Constitutionalism

The power of constitutional courts appears to be a political matter which depends on the political majority and public support notwithstanding their desirability in certain political contexts, in particular in countries with relatively young democratic traditions and authoritarian pasts. This might not be the best news for modern constitutionalism but one we need to be aware of, in particular in times of the recent re-rise of populist movements, illiberal disenchantment, and anti-establishment rhetoric – not only in Poland. Continue reading >>
11 January 2017

Poland’s Constitutional Tribunal under PiS control descends into legal chaos

Immediately after the governing Law and Justice party in Poland established its control over the Constitutional Tribunal, the court has plunged into a whole number of legal imbroglios undermining its authority and calling into question the legality of its verdicts. The new President's nomination is contested even by a supposed ally, and the remaining "old" judges seem to have adopted a strategy of passive resistance. This is probably what Law and Justice wanted to achieve: it is much easier to govern without a strong constitutional court. Continue reading >>
10 January 2017

The Hungarian Constitutional Court and Constitutional Identity

Ever since the 2010 parliamentary elections Hungary has set off on the journey to became an ‘illiberal’ member state of the EU, which does not comply with the shared values of rule of law and democracy, the ‘basic structure’ of Europe. The new government of Viktor Orbán from the very beginning has justified the non-compliance by referring to national sovereignty, and lately to the country’s constitutional identity guaranteed in Article 4 (2) TEU. This constitutional battle started with the invalid anti-migrant referendum, was followed by the failed constitutional amendment, and concluded in early December last year by a decision of the Constitutional Court, in which the packed body in a binding constitutional interpretation rubber-stamped the constitutional identity defense of the Orbán government. Continue reading >>
0
09 January 2017

Der „Anschein der Neutralität“ als schützenswertes Verfassungsgut?

Seit dem (noch nicht rechtskräftigen) Augsburger Richterspruch vom Juni 2016 haben Kopftuchverbote wieder Konjunktur. In dem von mir angestrengten Verfahren vor dem Verwaltungsgericht Augsburg ging und geht es zwar nicht um das Amt des Berufsrichters, sondern um unzumutbare Beschränkungen bereits in meiner Referendarausbildung. Unabhängig von der fehlenden rechtlichen Grundlage, erachte ich ein Kopftuchverbot in der Justizausbildung als einschneidende Verletzung multipler Grundrechte, insbesondere der Ausbildungsfreiheit und der Chancengleichheit, aber auch der Glaubensfreiheit. Dennoch hat das Urteil über die Landesgrenzen hinweg erneut einen Gesetzgebungsaktionismus ausgelöst, diesmal für alle möglichen Bereiche in der Justiz. Continue reading >>
06 January 2017
,

Poland and the European Commission, Part II: Hearing the Siren Song of the Rule of Law

As Poland has careened away from the rule of law, the European Commission has struggled to work out its response. Given Europe’s multiple crises at the moment, the internal affairs of a rogue government or two may seem less critical to Europe’s well being than crises that affect multiple states at the same time, like the refugee crisis, the Euro-crisis or the fallout from Brexit. But the proliferation of governments inside the EU that no longer share basic European values undermines the reason for existence of the EU in the first place. Continue reading >>
0
04 January 2017

Is Article 50 Reversible? On Politics Beyond Legal Doctrine

Can the United Kingdom, once it has declared its withdrawal from the EU, revoke this decision later on? This question is at the core of the ongoing case before the UK Supreme Court on Art. 50 TEU. I argue that revocability fits neatly in the letter and spirit of article 50 because of formal and substantive reasons. I further content that the Supreme Court decision may create a bifurcation in which interpretation of a key TEU provision may become purely an issue of domestic law. However, I further content that actors' political decisions have progressively framed a situation in which revocability does not seem politically possible. Continue reading >>
03 January 2017

Living under the unconstitutional capture and hoping for the constitutional recapture

After the unconstitutional capture of the Constitutional Tribunal in Poland, ordinary courts will have to step in to provide constitutional review. Polish judges are faced with the most fundamental challenge since 1989. Are they ready to be constitutional judges in times of constitutional emergency? Continue reading >>
0
,

Poland and the European Commission, Part I: A Dialogue of the Deaf?

On 21 December 2016, the European Commission adopted an additional Recommendation regarding the rule of law in Poland. Rather than starting the Article 7 sanctioning process, the Commission merely reiterated its old demands, added some new concerns and again held out the threat of Article 7 while apparently moving no closer to actually starting a sanctioning process. It is not that the Commission was unaware of what was happening in Poland. In December, the Commission stood by and watched the Polish government capture the Constitutional Tribunal. The new Recommendation indicates that the Commission simply chose not to act to head off the final stages of the Tribunal’s demise. Continue reading >>
30 December 2016
,

Turkey’s draft constitutional amendments: harking back to 1876?

In the last month of 2016, Turkey’s ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) and the fourth biggest party, the National Movement Party (MHP) unveiled a controversial new draft constitution which aims at a total system change. Initially, the most striking changes include the strengthening of the presidency with several new powers and no accountability to the judiciary. Furthermore, the way is cleared for Mr. Recep Tayyip Erdoğan to rule the country until 2029, and who knows – maybe even longer. Continue reading >>

Toward Hominid and Other Humanoid Rights: Are We Witnessing a Legal Revolution?

On 3 November 2016, an Argentinian judge granted habeas corpus relief to Cecilia, a person held captive in a small cage. Nothing out of the ordinary – except for the fact that Cecilia is not a battered woman or abused girl, but a chimpanzee kept at Mendoza zoo. This 1 % genetic difference turns this into a landmark judgment of potentially revolutionary proportions. For the first time in legal history, a court explicitly declared an animal other than human a legal person who possesses inherent fundamental rights. This judgment marks a radical breach with the deeply entrenched legal tradition of categorizing animals as rightless things (the person’s antithesis), and demonstrates that the previously impenetrable legal wall between humans and animals can be surmounted. The question seems no longer if, but when. Continue reading >>
23 December 2016

Do(n’t) think twice, it’s all right: der EuGH beerdigt die Vorratsdatenspeicherung

2016 – das Jahr der zuvor lange aufgeschobenen Entscheidungen? Die Schwedische Akademie zeichnet den seit gefühlten Ewigkeiten als Kandidaten gehandelten Bob Dylan endlich mit dem Literaturnobelpreis aus. Angela Merkel erklärt, dass sie noch einmal kandidiert. Und der EuGH beerdigt kurz vor Weihnachten im zweiten Anlauf die Vorratsdatenspeicherung. Anders als der Preis für Dylan und die Kandidatur von Merkel überraschte die EuGH-Entscheidung jedoch viele. Continue reading >>
22 December 2016

From Greenland to Svalbard: Scotland’s quest for a differentiated Brexit

On 20 December 2016, the Scottish Government released its blueprint on how Scotland can remain in the European Single Market post-Brexit. From the governing SNP’s point of view, the paper can be seen as a compromise given that it does not advocate Scottish independence. Instead, it proposes that the best outcome for the UK as a whole is to remain in the European Economic Agreement following the ‘Norway model’. It recognises, however, that in the current political constellation this seems unlikely. So, it argues for the continued membership of Scotland in the European Single Market. Continue reading >>
0

Wer ist Flüchtling? Zum Hin und Her der Entscheidungspraxis zu Asylsuchenden aus Syrien

Syrische Flüchtlinge sind die größte Gruppe von Asylsuchenden in Deutschland und erhalten hier Schutz – aber nicht unbedingt einen einheitlichen Status. Das erstaunt zunächst nicht, da Asylanträge individuell zu prüfen sind. Die Frage der Statusgewährung hängt jedoch nicht nur von der persönlichen Situation der Betroffenen ab, sondern maßgeblich von der rechtlichen Wertung, die daraus gezogen wird. Dabei wirft die verfassungsrechtlich nicht weiter spannende Entscheidung des Bundesverfassungsgerichts vom 14. November 2016 (2 BvR 31/14) ein Schlaglicht auf die bemerkenswerten Schlenker der Entscheidungspraxis zu syrischen Flüchtlingen. Continue reading >>
21 December 2016

A Game of Values: Particular National Identities Awaken in Europe

The EU’s legitimacy is thin and this weakness is reflected in its impotence in the face of the drift towards authoritarianism in Central and Eastern Europe. It remains to be seen whether such an authoritarian turn as the Hungarian can happen in old democracies and if their institutions are strong enough to limit the effects of global processes which are shaping the national identities of societies and the impact of Member States on the shared EU framework. Continue reading >>

Nur fragmentarischer Schutz: Asyl wegen sexueller Orientierung und Geschlechtsidentität

In vielen Staaten werden Menschen nach wie vor wegen ihrer sexuellen Orientierung oder Geschlechtsidentität verfolgt. In Deutschland haben sie Anspruch darauf, als Flüchtlinge anerkannt zu werden – so sehen es die Qualifikationsrichtlinie und das deutsche Asylrecht ausdrücklich vor. Dennoch ist die Situation von wegen ihrer sexuellen Orientierung oder Geschlechtsidentität verfolgten„SOGI-Flüchtlingen“ auch in Deutschland nicht rosig. Im Asylverfahren stehen sie vor besonderen Herausforderungen, während des Asylverfahrens werden ihre Rechte nicht immer gewährleistet, und der Zugang zum Schutz ist ohnehin schwer. Continue reading >>
19 December 2016

Constitutional Capture in Poland 2016 and Beyond: What is Next?

2016 will go down in history as fundamental in the institutional history of Polish Constitutionalism. It began with an unprecedented attack on the Constitutional Tribunal, rule of law, checks and balances and judicial independence. It ends with full-blown constitutional crisis. The dramatic events in the Sejm and on the streets only corroborate that Poland is on the slippery slope towards autocracy. Continue reading >>
17 December 2016
,

Der Blockupy-Polizeikessel vor dem Bundesverfassungs­gericht: Mitgefangen, mitgehangen?

In seinem jüngsten Beschluss zum Frankfurter Blockupy-Kessel geht das Bundesverfassungsgericht davon aus, dass bereits die bloße Anwesenheit einer Person in einer Gruppe, in der ein Teil verdächtigt wird, Straftaten begangen zu haben, ausreiche, um einen Anfangsverdacht auch gegen sie zu begründen. Karlsruhe stutzt dabei seinen eigenen verfassungsrechtlichen Maßstab soweit herunter, dass nicht mehr die Demonstration in ihrer Gesamtheit betrachtet, sondern die Versammlung in genehme und nicht genehme Gruppen aufgespalten wird. Continue reading >>
16 December 2016

Towards a Solution for the Ratification Conundrum of the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement?

The ratification process of the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement has been stalled following "No" victory in the Dutch referendum of 6 April 2016. Yesterday, the EU heads of states have adopted a decision addressing the Dutch concerns. The option which is currently on the table is by far the easiest to solve the ratification conundrum while responding to the arguments of the ‘no-camp’ in the referendum campaign. Any alternatives, such as the inclusion of formal reservations or a procedure leading to a Dutch withdrawal from the agreement, entail the risk of long-term legal uncertainty which would only be detrimental for the EU, the Netherlands and Ukraine. Continue reading >>

Collective Expulsion and the Khlaifia Case: Two Steps Forward, One Step Back

The European Convention on Human Rights forbids member states to expulse foreign citizens collectively. Does this mean that they have to conduct individual interviews with refugees before they send them back? Last year, a chamber of the ECtHR, in a case concerning Tunisians landed in Lampedusa in 2011, had concluded that it does. Now, the Great Chamber has reviewed this decision, considerably narrowing the scope of the collective expulsion ban. Continue reading >>
0