25 January 2022
Time to Rewrite the EU Directive on Combating Terrorism
The adoption of EU Directive 2017/541 on combating terrorism in March 2017 has profoundly changed the landscape of European counter-terrorism law. The primary aim of this Directive was to further harmonise the legal framework under which terrorist offences are prosecuted across EU Member States by establishing minimum rules and standards. However, the adverse consequences for the rule of law and human rights have been overlooked from the very outset by the EU institutions. Now, five years after its adoption, it is time for a thorough revision. Continue reading >>
0
24 January 2022
Taking European Judgments Seriously
Today ends the deadline for stakeholder consultations for the 2022 EU rule of law report. The report is a welcome addition to the EU’s rule of law toolbox but it is missing a vital element: the non-implementation of judgments of international courts, including both the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights. Continue reading >>17 January 2022
Paper Constitutionalism
On January 16, Serbian citizens voted in a referendum on constitutional changes concerning the guarantees of the judicial independence and organization of the judicial sector. According to preliminary results, 57, 4% of citizens voted for the reforms, while 41,6% voted against, with a turnout of not more than 30% of all registered voters. I would argue that constitutional amendments concerning the judiciary should have been postponed for two reasons. Continue reading >>
0
23 December 2021
Why Throw a Constitution out of the Window Instead of Making it Work?
If the constitution-making and amending by Fidesz with their legally obtained two-thirds majority counted as illegitimate, constitutional revision with a simple majority cannot be acceptable. If the sudden redesign of institutions gave reason for serious concern eleven years ago, it cannot be welcomed now. Continue reading >>
0
22 December 2021
Handle with Care
I will, in what follows, seek to answer the overarching question of this symposium, starting from a cautionary Romanian rule of law (RoL) reform tale. Other things being equal, its lessons may be extrapolated to the specific case of hopefully post-Orbánite Hungary. The specific context of Hungary presents, at least apparently, the Romanian problem in reverse, namely, the transition from an authoritarian nationalist regime to a pluralist, European, rule of law order. Continue reading >>
0
17 November 2021
A Tale of Primacy, part III
The third act, but not the end, of the ongoing „game of Courts” between the Romanian Constitutional Court and the European Court of Justice came on 9 November 2021, with a letter by the Romanian Constitutional Court to assist the acting minister of justice with a reply to the EU Commission's concern about primacy of EU law. I will not comment again on the arguments, already developed by the Constitutional Court in its decision, but I will try to emphasize, through relevant quotes, the disregard of the rule of law requirements stated in the CJEU judgment as well as the absence of the capacity of a true dialogue with the European Court. Continue reading >>
0
10 November 2021
The Multiple EU Rule of Law Crises
The European Court of Justice has recently delivered a judgment in the Pinxten case. The decision specifically concerned a question of financial misappropriation at the European Court of Auditors, but its significance goes far beyond this single case. It reveals multiple misfunctions at the top of the European Court of Auditors. Curiously, however, the judgement won't be published and has thus (against the Court’s own rules) not been translated. Most people will therefore never know about it, even though the Court of Justice gathered most exceptionally a full court to deal with this case. Continue reading >>
0
04 November 2021
Yellow Light for Disciplining Inconvenient Judges?
The case of the disciplinary proceedings against the Bulgarian judge Miroslava Todorova (Requête no 40072/13) which has recently been examined by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) caught the eye of those following the rule of law decay in the European Union. On the surface, it appears that the recent ECtHR judgment on Todorova’s case is a mere example of the ‘Justice delayed is justice denied’ legal maxim – after all, the application was submitted in 2013 and the Court ruled against Bulgaria only in 2021. However, a closer look reveals that the ECtHR found in favor of Bulgaria on the two most worrisome questions. Continue reading >>
0
03 November 2021
A(nother) lost opportunity?
The October meeting of the European Council (EUCO) was its first occasion to react to the declaration by the Polish “Constitutional Tribunal” that several provisions of the Treaty on European Union are incompatible with Poland’s Constitution and consequently inapplicable to the country. The express denunciation of fundamental provisions of EU primary law by one of its members (with the support of another), while insisting on his country remaining part of the Union, is a situation the EUCO could hardly overlook. And yet, not a word about the unfolding constitutional crisis was included in the EUCO Conclusions. Various elements may explain the restraint. However, the complete muteness from the EU crisis-manager-in-chief is more questionable and may carry a disquieting message. Continue reading >>
0
02 November 2021
Grinding the Orange Axe
On October 18th, 2021, the Venice Commission adopted its opinion on the Dutch childcare benefit scandal and highlighted, albeit reluctantly, several shortcomings regarding the Netherlands’ adherence to the rule of law: A lack of parliamentary scrutiny, a disrupted flow of information in bureaucratic bodies and the need for constitutional review. Despite the opinion’s inherent potential to provide a thorough substantive addition to the rule of law conversation, it fails at doing so due to its evasiveness and its hesitance to address complicated Dutch customs, such as the current caretaker cabinet. Continue reading >>
0