Pub Date : 2022-03-01DOI: 10.1017/S1574019622000098
L. Besselink
Some time ago, on 20 December 2019, the Dutch court of cassation, the Hoge Raad (Supreme Court), ruled that the target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions1 by at least 20% compared to those of 1990 by the end of the year 2020, set by the Netherlands government in accordance with EU minimum targets, infringes the right to life and the right to private and family life under Articles 2 and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.2 Even more significantly, it upheld the order of the District Court of The Hague, and sustained at the Appeals Court, that the State of the Netherlands – appearing in court as a legal person under Dutch civil law – must reduce the joint volume of annual greenhouse gas emissions, or have them reduced, by at least 25% at the end of 2020 compared to the emission level of the year 1990. This Urgenda case has by now generated a huge amount of commentary, in all its three instances, mostly positive; precisely on the
{"title":"The National and EU Targets for Reduction of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Infringe the ECHR: The Judicial Review of General Policy Objectives","authors":"L. Besselink","doi":"10.1017/S1574019622000098","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1574019622000098","url":null,"abstract":"Some time ago, on 20 December 2019, the Dutch court of cassation, the Hoge Raad (Supreme Court), ruled that the target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions1 by at least 20% compared to those of 1990 by the end of the year 2020, set by the Netherlands government in accordance with EU minimum targets, infringes the right to life and the right to private and family life under Articles 2 and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.2 Even more significantly, it upheld the order of the District Court of The Hague, and sustained at the Appeals Court, that the State of the Netherlands – appearing in court as a legal person under Dutch civil law – must reduce the joint volume of annual greenhouse gas emissions, or have them reduced, by at least 25% at the end of 2020 compared to the emission level of the year 1990. This Urgenda case has by now generated a huge amount of commentary, in all its three instances, mostly positive; precisely on the","PeriodicalId":45815,"journal":{"name":"European Constitutional Law Review","volume":"18 1","pages":"155 - 182"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44663733","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-01DOI: 10.1017/S1574019621000407
Nóra Chronowski, A. Vincze
*Professor of Constitutional Law and Senior Researcher, Institute for Legal Studies, Centre for Social Sciences, Budapest, and National University of Public Service Ludovika, Hungary. This study forms part of research project No 128796 funded by the National Research Development and Innovation Office, which is investigating the normative content of the principle of democracy from the perspective of European Union and constitutional law. **Senior lecturer, Judicial Studies Institute, Masaryk University, Brno. The research leading to this article has received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (INFINITY, grant agreement no. 101002660).
{"title":"The Hungarian Constitutional Court and the Central European University Case: Justice Delayed is Justice Denied","authors":"Nóra Chronowski, A. Vincze","doi":"10.1017/S1574019621000407","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1574019621000407","url":null,"abstract":"*Professor of Constitutional Law and Senior Researcher, Institute for Legal Studies, Centre for Social Sciences, Budapest, and National University of Public Service Ludovika, Hungary. This study forms part of research project No 128796 funded by the National Research Development and Innovation Office, which is investigating the normative content of the principle of democracy from the perspective of European Union and constitutional law. **Senior lecturer, Judicial Studies Institute, Masaryk University, Brno. The research leading to this article has received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (INFINITY, grant agreement no. 101002660).","PeriodicalId":45815,"journal":{"name":"European Constitutional Law Review","volume":"17 1","pages":"688 - 706"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47334839","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-01DOI: 10.1017/S1574019621000419
H. Hogan
In a well-known ancient fable, one child topples the myth that has captivated the masses by pointing out: the Emperor has no clothes. Michael A. Wilkinson is here, in his outstanding new book, telling us the unvarnished truth about the European Union. He is one of the first scholars to depict, with devastating clarity, what has been perfectly plain to see all along. The European Union is not the world’s greatest champion of democracy, despite decades of academic contortions to explain why its famous democratic deficit can be mended, or does not exist, or does not matter. The EU’s rhetorical commitment to human rights, or the welfare of the member states, or to any of the abstract political ideals it claims to embody are secondary to its core purpose: to advance the project of economic liberalism. This is a project that has been pursued at all costs, even up to the point of inflicting immense suffering on the populations of the member states it claims to protect. Authoritarian Liberalism and the Transformation of Modern Europe charts the history and development of the organisation now known as the European Union, and traces the corresponding role of legal scholars in providing the theoretical basis for its actions.
{"title":"Shielding the Market from the Masses: Economic Liberalism and the European Union","authors":"H. Hogan","doi":"10.1017/S1574019621000419","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1574019621000419","url":null,"abstract":"In a well-known ancient fable, one child topples the myth that has captivated the masses by pointing out: the Emperor has no clothes. Michael A. Wilkinson is here, in his outstanding new book, telling us the unvarnished truth about the European Union. He is one of the first scholars to depict, with devastating clarity, what has been perfectly plain to see all along. The European Union is not the world’s greatest champion of democracy, despite decades of academic contortions to explain why its famous democratic deficit can be mended, or does not exist, or does not matter. The EU’s rhetorical commitment to human rights, or the welfare of the member states, or to any of the abstract political ideals it claims to embody are secondary to its core purpose: to advance the project of economic liberalism. This is a project that has been pursued at all costs, even up to the point of inflicting immense suffering on the populations of the member states it claims to protect. Authoritarian Liberalism and the Transformation of Modern Europe charts the history and development of the organisation now known as the European Union, and traces the corresponding role of legal scholars in providing the theoretical basis for its actions.","PeriodicalId":45815,"journal":{"name":"European Constitutional Law Review","volume":"17 1","pages":"774 - 788"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42436651","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-01DOI: 10.1017/S1574019621000432
Cecilia Rizcallah, Victor Davio
Requirement that tribunals be established by law – European Convention on Human Rights – EU Charter of Fundamental Rights – Fair trial – Rule of law – Separation of powers – Public trust
{"title":"The Requirement that Tribunals be Established by Law: A Valuable Principle Safeguarding the Rule of Law and the Separation of Powers in a Context of Trust","authors":"Cecilia Rizcallah, Victor Davio","doi":"10.1017/S1574019621000432","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1574019621000432","url":null,"abstract":"Requirement that tribunals be established by law – European Convention on Human Rights – EU Charter of Fundamental Rights – Fair trial – Rule of law – Separation of powers – Public trust","PeriodicalId":45815,"journal":{"name":"European Constitutional Law Review","volume":"17 1","pages":"581 - 606"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45323608","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-01DOI: 10.1017/S1574019621000420
A. Samartzis
Main justifications for regarding common nationality as a necessary condition for holding equal political rights – Critique of collective self-determination, equal stakes, nature of political activity, and stability justifications – Rejection of the incommensurability of legitimacy and justice – Socioeconomic interdependence and liberal democratic values as the normative grounds for equal stakes – Risk of entrenchment of hostility among national groups as a consequence of a competitive conception of political activity – Instrumental value of stability – Stability through democratic inclusion – Possibility of sustainable pluralism through deliberative democracy – Modified version of the equal stakes argument – Equal political rights on the basis of long-term residence – Association of citizenship with nationality in contemporary European states – Redefinition of citizenship as top-down redefinition of nationality – Need to reconceptualise equal political rights independently of citizenship – Legal argument for interpreting references to popular sovereignty in national constitutions in accordance with long-term residence, rather than nationality – Available legal remedies
{"title":"Nationality and Equal Political Rights: A Necessary Link?","authors":"A. Samartzis","doi":"10.1017/S1574019621000420","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1574019621000420","url":null,"abstract":"Main justifications for regarding common nationality as a necessary condition for holding equal political rights – Critique of collective self-determination, equal stakes, nature of political activity, and stability justifications – Rejection of the incommensurability of legitimacy and justice – Socioeconomic interdependence and liberal democratic values as the normative grounds for equal stakes – Risk of entrenchment of hostility among national groups as a consequence of a competitive conception of political activity – Instrumental value of stability – Stability through democratic inclusion – Possibility of sustainable pluralism through deliberative democracy – Modified version of the equal stakes argument – Equal political rights on the basis of long-term residence – Association of citizenship with nationality in contemporary European states – Redefinition of citizenship as top-down redefinition of nationality – Need to reconceptualise equal political rights independently of citizenship – Legal argument for interpreting references to popular sovereignty in national constitutions in accordance with long-term residence, rather than nationality – Available legal remedies","PeriodicalId":45815,"journal":{"name":"European Constitutional Law Review","volume":"17 1","pages":"636 - 663"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48133502","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-01DOI: 10.1017/S1574019622000013
Elena Brodeală, Georgiana Epure
Both authors contributed equally to the writing of this article. *Elena Brodeală holds a PhD in Law from the European University Institute and an LLM from Yale Law School. She is Postdoctoral Researcher at the University of Zurich in the URPP project ‘Human Reproduction Reloaded’ and an Adjunct Lecturer at Sciences Po in France. At the time of writing, she was also an Odobleja Fellow at the New Europe College in Bucharest. **Georgiana Epure holds an MPhil in International Relations and Politics from the University of Cambridge and an MA in Social Sciences Research Methods from the University of Leeds. She is the President of the Association for Liberty and Equality of Gender in Romania. She drafted one of the amici curiae briefs sent to the Constitutional Court in the case discussed in this paper and contributed to the writing of another amicus curiae brief concerning the same case. The authors would like to thank Dr. Michał Krajewski for his timely work as editor as well as the anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments. This work was supported by the University of Zurich’s Research Priority Program ‘Human Reproduction Reloaded’.
{"title":"Nature versus Nurture: ‘Sex’ and ‘Gender’ before the Romanian Constitutional Court","authors":"Elena Brodeală, Georgiana Epure","doi":"10.1017/S1574019622000013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1574019622000013","url":null,"abstract":"Both authors contributed equally to the writing of this article. *Elena Brodeală holds a PhD in Law from the European University Institute and an LLM from Yale Law School. She is Postdoctoral Researcher at the University of Zurich in the URPP project ‘Human Reproduction Reloaded’ and an Adjunct Lecturer at Sciences Po in France. At the time of writing, she was also an Odobleja Fellow at the New Europe College in Bucharest. **Georgiana Epure holds an MPhil in International Relations and Politics from the University of Cambridge and an MA in Social Sciences Research Methods from the University of Leeds. She is the President of the Association for Liberty and Equality of Gender in Romania. She drafted one of the amici curiae briefs sent to the Constitutional Court in the case discussed in this paper and contributed to the writing of another amicus curiae brief concerning the same case. The authors would like to thank Dr. Michał Krajewski for his timely work as editor as well as the anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments. This work was supported by the University of Zurich’s Research Priority Program ‘Human Reproduction Reloaded’.","PeriodicalId":45815,"journal":{"name":"European Constitutional Law Review","volume":"17 1","pages":"724 - 752"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46819368","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-01DOI: 10.1017/S1574019621000444
J. Lindeboom
On Thursday, 11 February 2010, the political leaders of the EU initiated what would turn out to be no less than a constitutional transformation of the Economic and Monetary Union. They declared their joint commitment to the financial stability of the Eurozone and the Union.1 This commitment upgraded the currency union’s central focus on price stability, dating from the Treaty of Maastricht. More fundamentally, however, this transformation brought about a normative change from a currency union based on negative solidarity to one based on positive solidarity between member states. Or so argues Vestert Borger in his The Currency of Solidarity, based on the author’s PhD thesis at Leiden University. When the European Court of Justice had to rule on the legality of the key manifestations of this transformation in Pringle2 and Gauweiler,3 Borger contends, it had no choice but to approve. The constitutional change of the Economic and
{"title":"The Transformation of the Economic and Monetary Union: Solidarity, Stability, and the Limits of Judicial Authority","authors":"J. Lindeboom","doi":"10.1017/S1574019621000444","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1574019621000444","url":null,"abstract":"On Thursday, 11 February 2010, the political leaders of the EU initiated what would turn out to be no less than a constitutional transformation of the Economic and Monetary Union. They declared their joint commitment to the financial stability of the Eurozone and the Union.1 This commitment upgraded the currency union’s central focus on price stability, dating from the Treaty of Maastricht. More fundamentally, however, this transformation brought about a normative change from a currency union based on negative solidarity to one based on positive solidarity between member states. Or so argues Vestert Borger in his The Currency of Solidarity, based on the author’s PhD thesis at Leiden University. When the European Court of Justice had to rule on the legality of the key manifestations of this transformation in Pringle2 and Gauweiler,3 Borger contends, it had no choice but to approve. The constitutional change of the Economic and","PeriodicalId":45815,"journal":{"name":"European Constitutional Law Review","volume":"17 1","pages":"753 - 773"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45681061","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：