02 July 2025
Externalising Migration Control
On 20th of May 2025, the European Court of Human Rights declared the case of S.S. and others v Italy inadmissible under Art.1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The decision marks a missed opportunity. Instead of addressing the question of functional jurisdiction in the context of externalised migration control, the Court found that Italy does not enjoy extraterritorial jurisdiction over a group of irregular migrants whose ship was wrecked on the high seas near the Libyan coast. The ruling is another illustration of how externalised border control and “pull-back” policies are becoming normalised in Europe. Continue reading >>
0 
15 October 2024
Bridging the CFSP Gap
The CJEU interprets its Common Foreign and Security Policy jurisdiction in light of the objectives set by the Lisbon Treaty, thereby integrating part and parcel of the CFSP into the rest of the European Union acquis. This aligns the CFSP with the general principles and constitutional rules set in the Treaty. As the Court advances the integration of CFSP jurisdiction within the broader EU legal order, the judgements of 10 September 2024 in Neves 77 Solutions and KS and KD v Council and Others serve as landmark ruling for the future of judicial review in CFSP. Continue reading >>
0
02 September 2024
The Hungarian Treeless Treetop Walkway
In the small village of Nyírmártonfalva in northeastern Hungary, there stands a wooden treetop walkway designed for walking among the tree canopies. Yet, there are no trees around. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office initiated proceedings to investigate this allegedly fraudulent appropriation of the EU common budget. In early August 2024, the Hungarian Office of the Prosecutor General rejected EPPO's jurisdiction. Nonetheless, the EPPO has jurisdiction according to the result theory, accepted also in Hungary, due to the place where the result of an offence occurs. Continue reading >>
0
29 July 2024
‘One, No One, One Hundred Thousand’
States use mechanisms such as visas, maritime interdiction operations, pushback practices to unsafe countries to prevent migrants from reaching their shores, applying for asylum, or invoking fundamental rights guarantees. This raises the question of whether and to what extent States have extraterritorial obligations towards migrants who have not yet reached the territory of destination countries. By focusing on recent practices in the Mediterranean, this post addresses this overarching question. Continue reading >>
0
24 February 2024
Accountability for the Crime of Aggression against Ukraine
Two years have passed since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine – an act of aggression which 141 states of the UN General Assembly (UNGA) condemned as such shortly after. This crime of aggression has brought unimaginable suffering to the people of Ukraine. As this blog will highlight in the following, a reform of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) concerning the crime of aggression is necessary and long overdue. The current jurisdictional regime leaves accountability gaps, which have become painfully visible in the past two years. Plausible suggestions for the reform are already out there – it ultimately “all depends on the political will” of the 124 ICC state parties. Continue reading >>06 May 2020
Expelled from Humanity
The decision of the European Court of Human Rights in M.N. and Others v. Belgium will undoubtedly further propel the debate on the scope of extraterritorial state jurisdiction. More importantly, however, it reveals the necessity of addressing the systemic exclusion of refugees from the international legal order. Continue reading >>
0
06 January 2020
When Violations of International and EU Law Overlap
On 11 December 2019, Advocate General Pikamäe issued his Opinion rejecting jurisdiction of the ECJ in an infringement procedure between Slovenia and Croatia (C-457/18). The case raises the question whether the ECJ may engage with asserted violations of EU law which result from Croatia’s non-recognition of the final and binding Arbitral Award determining the border dispute between both Members. The opinion of the Advocate General appears to be fuelled by political rather than legal considerations and the ECJ should not follow it in order to make clear that the EU is able to protect its autonomous legal system and that it stands on its foundational and common legal principles. Continue reading >>10 October 2019
Welche Regeln, welches Recht?
Kaum hatten sich die Gemüter um die Urteile in den Rechtssachen Google LLC. v CNIL und GC and Others v CNIL etwas beruhigt, goss der Gerichtshof der Europäischen Union mit seiner Entscheidung in der Rechtssache Glawischnig-Piesczek v Facebook Ireland Limited vergangenen Donnerstag erneut Öl ins Feuer um die Diskussion zur normativen Gestaltung der Governance von Meinungsäußerungen im Internet. Der Fall führt ein weiteres Mal vor Augen, was fehlt: eine kohärente Theorie der Jurisdiktion und ihrer Grenzen im Cyberspace. Continue reading >>
0
25 September 2018
Unconstitutional “Constitutional Questions” – How Kosovo’s Constitutional Court Expands its Jurisdiction
The “Qeska” case has marked the beginning of a series of misuse of Kosovo’s Constitutional Court from political bodies in the Republic of Kosovo to avoid their constitutional responsibilities. The last two referrals from the President of the Republic of Kosovo submitted to the Court are putting Kosovo’s constitutional justice into question. Continue reading >>
0
03 September 2018
Spanish Jurisdiction at Stake: Puigdemont’s Judge to be Judged by a Belgian Court?
Tomorrow, a new weird chapter opens up in the „affair Puigdemont“: The Spanish Supreme Court Judge Pablo Llarena, who unsuccessfully issued the European Arrest Warrant against former Catalan premier Carles Puigdemont, is cited before a Belgian court. He is object of a civil lawsuit filed by Puigdemont who accuses the magistrate of a lack of impartiality and violating the presumption of innocence as well as his right to reputation. What is the most astonishing about this lawsuit is the fact that it is a Belgian court which shall judge the professional actions of a Spanish judge. Continue reading >>
0