19 July 2023
Securitizing the Economy
In June 2023, the European Commission presented the European Union’s first Economic Security Strategy. Its publication is in itself a Zeitenwende in the EU’s foreign and economic policy, despite undeniable shortcomings, in particular the lack of a clear definition which opens the door for overly protectionist measures under the guise of security concerns. To succeed, however, it is critical to view economic security as a public good which can benefit the EU, its Member States, and its citizens. Continue reading >>
0 
18 July 2023
Changing Tides in European Election Law
On 15 June, the Bundestag approved a minimum percentage threshold for elections to the European Parliament (EP). Shortly before the summer break, the Bundesrat (Federal Council) also agreed to the clause. German lawmakers already failed twice in this endeavour before the Federal Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht, short BVerfG). This time, the German legislator can refer to a binding EU legal act backing its reform efforts. This means the electoral threshold must now be treated (also by the constitutional court) as determined by EU law – with all consequences. However, even a 2% hurdle is not 100% safe from the BVerfG. Continue reading >>
0
18 July 2023
The Definition of ‘Digital Labour Platform’ in the Proposed Platform Work Directive
On 9 December 2021, the European Commission announced its proposal for a Directive on improving working conditions in platform work—the ‘Platform Work Directive.’ The Directive’s main goals are to reduce false self-employment among persons performing platform work, to regulate algorithmic management on digital labour platforms, and to provide legal certainty for platforms. This blog post focuses on an element of the proposed Directive that has gone relatively unremarked in the scholarly and policy debates so far: the definition of ‘digital labour platform.’ Continue reading >>
0
10 July 2023
Why Europe Must Never Forget about the Polish Constitutional Court
In 2023, we should have been celebrating the 41st anniversary of the establishment of Polish Constitutional Court. “Should” is used advisedly here because as is well known Poland no longer has a constitutional court. Undoubtedly, the technical question of how to rebuild the Court is important, yet we should also understand why its rebuild must be the first order of the day after the present dark days of total capture. I argue, in this respect, that the EU would do well to remember the central role constitutional courts have played in the particular form of constitutionalism that emerged in the aftermath of Europe’s experience with totalitarianism, and the laudable way in which the Polish Constitutional Court took up this task. Continue reading >>08 July 2023
The Dangers of Conflation
On May 17th 2023 Advocate General de la Tour handed down the Opinion in case C-402/22. It addresses the meaning of “particularly serious crime” found in Article 14 (4) (b) of the 2011 Qualification Directive, which sets out the grounds for revocation or refusal to grant refugee status under EU law. This provision refers to “refugees delinquents” and introduces security concerns of states as the ground for depriving persons of their refugee status. In practice, it opens the question of how to treat refugees that committed certain crime(s) after they obtained refugee status. In this blog I detail the AG’s answer to that question and raise one overriding concern regarding Article 14 QD. Continue reading >>
0
06 July 2023
Reform the European Union for Enlargement!
External shocks such as the financial and migration crises, the Coronavirus pandemic, as well as internal and external security threats from terrorism as well as Russia's war against Ukraine emphasise that the EU, which has developed to be more heterogeneous, has become increasingly fragile. In line with a reduced willingness and ability of Member States to integrate further, the EU is becoming incapable of action and therefore is in danger of losing the trust of its citizens. Against this background, it is important not to gloss over the problems and to develop constructive solutions. This blogpost offers several possible solutions. Continue reading >>03 June 2023
Institutional Corsets and the Question of Timing
There has been a lot of noise around whether Hungary should, and legally could, be blocked from taking over the Council presidency in the second half of 2024, considering the state of the rule of law in the country. On 1 June, the European Parliament adopted a resolution, questioning Hungary’s ability to “credibly fulfill” the tasks of a Council presidency and asking the Council to “find a proper solution as soon as possible”, else Parliament could take “appropriate measures”. Such concerns are legitimate, but another question seems to be sidelined in the debate: How much practical damage can the upcoming Council presidency under Hungary actually do in the EU? Continue reading >>01 June 2023
An Honest Broker?
A characteristic of the functioning of the EU is that the Presidency of the Council of Ministers rotates between Member States every six months according to a previously agreed order. The EU Presidency is responsible for driving forward the Council’s work on EU legislation. In the second half of 2024, Hungary will take over the Presidency, followed by Poland in the first half of 2025. Given their rule of law record, it is highly questionable whether they will act in the Council’s general interest. In order to avoid damage, there are three avenues available to the Council and the Member States. Continue reading >>
0
23 May 2023
A New European Enforcer?
As a key piece of the European Commission’s digital agenda, the Digital Services Act (DSA) is drawing a lot of attention from civil society, industry, and regulators. One particularly interesting development in that regard is the Commission’s current transformation from being the institution leading the DSA’s negotiations to the one enforcing it. This article explores the challenges faced by the Commission in this transformation. Continue reading >>
0
12 May 2023
Trading Rights for Responsibility
The newly published compromise text of the Asylum Procedures Regulation (APR) suggests to render border procedures mandatory in some cases, while also permitting first-entry states to derogate from them once their “adequate capacity” is reached. This adaptable approach to the use of border procedures seeks to resolve a long-standing disagreement between central EU countries and first-entry states. While the former consider the obligatory use of border procedures necessary to prevent onwards or ‘secondary’ movement of asylum-seekers, southern EU states argue that their mandatory use would place a further strain on their resources and overburden their capacities for processing asylum claims. This blogpost first explains the problems with border procedures, reviews their role in increasing responsibility of first-entry states, and explains why the new compromise Draft is unlikely to resolve the disagreement between first-entry states and other Members States. Continue reading >>
0