The Enemy Within? Article 259 TFEU and the EU’s Rule of Law Crisis

IF 1.5 Q1 LAW German Law Journal Pub Date : 2022-10-01 DOI:10.1017/glj.2022.72
G. Íñiguez
{"title":"The Enemy Within? Article 259 TFEU and the EU’s Rule of Law Crisis","authors":"G. Íñiguez","doi":"10.1017/glj.2022.72","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article explores the role which Member State-led infringement proceedings can play in overcoming the EU’s rule of law crisis, and hypothesizes that it can prove helpful in breaking the current impasse. It begins by understanding why the EU’s “traditional” rule of law enforcement mechanisms—such as Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and the recent rule of law conditionality regulation—have failed (Section 2), before exploring how infringement proceedings operate, what their shortcomings are, and why Scheppele’s proposed “systemic infringement proceedings” are important (Section 3). It then seeks to apply said findings to the rule of law crisis, using two recent developments as an example: The oral proceedings of Commission v. Poland (Régime disciplinaire des juges) and a recent vote by the Dutch Parliament compelling its government to take Poland before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) (Section 4). Finally, it explores the broader constitutional implications of relying on Article 259 Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) to overcome the rule of law crisis: It discusses Kochenov’s notion of “biting intergovernmentalism”, what Article 259 illustrates about the European Union’s (EU) hybrid constitution, and how intergovernmental legal instruments can facilitate further European integration (Section 5). It concludes by restating and summing up article’s hypothesis.","PeriodicalId":36303,"journal":{"name":"German Law Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"German Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/glj.2022.72","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract This article explores the role which Member State-led infringement proceedings can play in overcoming the EU’s rule of law crisis, and hypothesizes that it can prove helpful in breaking the current impasse. It begins by understanding why the EU’s “traditional” rule of law enforcement mechanisms—such as Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and the recent rule of law conditionality regulation—have failed (Section 2), before exploring how infringement proceedings operate, what their shortcomings are, and why Scheppele’s proposed “systemic infringement proceedings” are important (Section 3). It then seeks to apply said findings to the rule of law crisis, using two recent developments as an example: The oral proceedings of Commission v. Poland (Régime disciplinaire des juges) and a recent vote by the Dutch Parliament compelling its government to take Poland before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) (Section 4). Finally, it explores the broader constitutional implications of relying on Article 259 Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) to overcome the rule of law crisis: It discusses Kochenov’s notion of “biting intergovernmentalism”, what Article 259 illustrates about the European Union’s (EU) hybrid constitution, and how intergovernmental legal instruments can facilitate further European integration (Section 5). It concludes by restating and summing up article’s hypothesis.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
内部的敌人?第259条TFEU与欧盟的法治危机
摘要本文探讨了成员国主导的侵权诉讼在克服欧盟法治危机方面可以发挥的作用,并假设这有助于打破目前的僵局。它首先要理解为什么欧盟的“传统”执法机制——如《欧盟条约》第7条和最近的法治条件监管——失败了(第2节),然后探讨侵权诉讼是如何运作的,它们的缺点是什么,以及为什么Scheppelle提出的“系统性侵权诉讼”很重要(第3节)。然后,它试图将上述调查结果应用于法治危机,并以最近的两个事态发展为例:委员会诉波兰案的口头诉讼(司法制度)和荷兰议会最近的一次投票,迫使其政府将波兰提交欧盟法院(CJEU)(第4节)。最后,它探讨了依靠《欧盟运作条约》第259条来克服法治危机的更广泛的宪法含义:它讨论了科切诺夫的“尖锐的政府间主义”概念,第259条对欧盟混合宪法的说明,以及政府间法律文书如何能够促进欧洲进一步一体化(第5节)。最后对文章的假设进行了重述和总结。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
German Law Journal
German Law Journal Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
7.70%
发文量
75
期刊最新文献
Demystifying autonomy: tracing the international law origins of the EU principle of autonomy – ERRATUM My Body Is My Temple? Comparing Sexual Crimes and Property Crimes in a Human Rights Tradition – ERRATUM The Diagonal Application of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights: From “Displacement” through “Agency” to “Scope” and Beyond My Body Is My Temple? Comparing Sexual Crimes and Property Crimes in a Human Rights Tradition Regulating Parties by Constitutional Rules in Liberal Democracies
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1