07 February 2017
“Unrichtiges Recht” in Slovakia? The Radbruch Formula and Positive Law from the Nineties
While the Slovak Parliament might not be the most obvious place to look for a (modest) rerun of the classic legal dilemma about unjust laws, constitutional enthusiasts might want to tune in for once, as the National Council (the official name of the assembly), was in recent weeks the site of a reinvigorated effort to invalidate amnesties granted in the late 1990s by the once aspiring authoritarian Vladimír Mečiar. The government has not yet reached a consensus but the impending vote holds more promise than the previous seven attempts. Continue reading >>
5 
“Trump’s statements express the same kind of populist opposition to constitutional court judges we have seen elsewhere”
Harvard professor Mark Tushnet on the Trump administration's attacks against the judiciary and whether or not the rule of law is under threat from the new US President. Continue reading >>06 February 2017
In eigener Sache: Assistant Editor gesucht!
Wiebke Fröhlich ist seit über einem Jahr als Redaktionsassistentin am Betrieb [...] Continue reading >>
0
The ‘Elegant Way’ of the Constitution
The Miller judgment will be famous for its affirmation of the rule of law as against an unaccountable and overreaching executive. But it should also be remembered for marking the recognition by the UK courts of the systematic nature of the British constitution. Continue reading >>
0
05 February 2017
Marine Le Pen’s Constitutional Programme on the European Union: Use, Misuse and Abuse of Referenda
Marine Le Pen, the far-right candidate for President of France, was asked in an interview about her constitutional programme should she be elected in May. Her answer can be summarised in one word: referenda. One of them would be, of course, about “Frexit”, the other would include a vast set of amendments to the French Constitution and would take place just after the legislative elections. That, however, would not most likely not be the end of it. Continue reading >>04 February 2017
Trump’s Muslim Ban and its Constitutional Limits
The dramatic executive orders of the newly inaugurated President of the United States, Donald Trump, including, most infamously, his executive order excluding Syrian refugees from entry into the United States, and popularly known as the “Muslim ban,” has raised not only hackles among many outside observers, but also questions about the legality of these orders. The short answer is that some of the matters set out in his executive orders, including those affecting refugees, are almost certainly legal, while other aspects of those orders raise significant issues under the United States constitution. Continue reading >>03 February 2017
The Miller decision: Legal constitutionalism ends not with a bang, but a whimper
Miller was essentially a case which was argued before, and decided by, the court on the basis of the English Imperial constitutional tradition forged in the Victorian age. This judgment has made the political constitution of the devolved United Kingdom as a whole more unstable, more brittle, more fragile and more likely to break-up precisely because it denies the devolved nations’ institutions any legal right to participate in the Brexit process. Continue reading >>
0
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