On the Nexus between Separation of Powers and Judicial Power
This exercise in comparative constitutional law shows how, paradoxically, positioning a country on either side of the spectrum of separation of powers structures may lead to similar curtailment of the judiciary’s power, though courts in the two opposing regimes may use very different, and even opposing, judicial doctrines to reach similar non-interventionalist results. Moreover, though scholars typically study these common law judicial doctrines independently of one another, they are all a manifestation of how strong or weak the separation of powers in a given country is. Ultimately, the judicial branch may supplement, but not supplant, the democratically elected political branches, irrespective of the separation of powers in the country in question
Continue reading >>
Law must be enforceable
The Court of Justice of the European Union ruled on 01.08.2022 that administrative decisions refusing family reunification must be open to judicial review with a legal remedy. The decision had been long awaited. The underlying article only provided for a legal remedy “against”, not “for” a transfer decision. The CJEU clearly rejects this view and emphasizes that administrative decisions must generally be subject to judicial review, which is a hindrance to the EU Commission's plans to significantly reduce the number of legal remedies in the revised EU legislation. Continue reading >>
The Dutch Family Reunification Procedure
Being able to reunite with family from abroad falls under the right to family life, one of the fundamental rights every individual is entitled to. Despite this, some Dutch family reunification requirements are potentially at odds with international human rights law standards and the EU Directive 2003/86/EC on the right to family reunification. This problematic state of affairs reflects the ongoing racialization of European borders, and that of Dutch borders in particular. Continue reading >>
Security-vested Institutional Racism
With liminal legal spaces expanding on several domains of non-EU migrants’ lives in Europe, specific populations of third country nationals came to face greater discriminatory treatment. Rules and procedures were being adopted in the name of security and the protection of the public and/or social order against so-called “irregular migration”. We focus on non-EU migrants in Belgium, as they constitute an extremely relevant case to illustrate how institutions of a liberal, democratic European state have transformed and adapted the ways they operate discrimination along racist lines. Continue reading >>