皇帝真的有新衣吗?对后里斯本权限划分制度的批判性评估

B. Fekete
{"title":"皇帝真的有新衣吗?对后里斯本权限划分制度的批判性评估","authors":"B. Fekete","doi":"10.5553/HYIEL/266627012013001001005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article argues that the reform of competences introduced by the Lisbon Treaty can be regarded neither a real revolution nor even a considerable evolution, since it is of a strong conservative nature. That being said, the transformation of the legal framework of the vertical division of powers did not establish a qualitatively new regime. It only systematized and codified the achievements of the earlier case law of the European Court of Justice and some former treaty provisions. However, the real achievement of the changes is the introduction of a federal attitude and vocabulary. The text of both the Treaty on the European Union and Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union relies on essential terms rooted in federalism such as for instance ‘exclusive’, ‘shared’ or ‘member state’ competences. Therefore, the distribution of powers between the Union and the member state is articulated in a clear federal way. Indeed, it can be regarded a real novelty compared with the prior-Lisbon regime evolving in the context of delicate and sophisticated political and judicial compromises. Lastly, although the new regime was obviously inspired by a federal mindset, it cannot be equated with a real federative government. The supranational level is incomparably ‘weaker’ and less powerful in substantive terms than the central governmental level of real federations. Many important competences that would make the EU a real and functioning federal state are still lacking.","PeriodicalId":250773,"journal":{"name":"LSN: International & Comparative Law (Topic)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does the Emperor Really Have New Clothes? A Critical Assessment of the Post-Lisbon Regime of Division of Competences\",\"authors\":\"B. Fekete\",\"doi\":\"10.5553/HYIEL/266627012013001001005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article argues that the reform of competences introduced by the Lisbon Treaty can be regarded neither a real revolution nor even a considerable evolution, since it is of a strong conservative nature. That being said, the transformation of the legal framework of the vertical division of powers did not establish a qualitatively new regime. It only systematized and codified the achievements of the earlier case law of the European Court of Justice and some former treaty provisions. However, the real achievement of the changes is the introduction of a federal attitude and vocabulary. The text of both the Treaty on the European Union and Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union relies on essential terms rooted in federalism such as for instance ‘exclusive’, ‘shared’ or ‘member state’ competences. Therefore, the distribution of powers between the Union and the member state is articulated in a clear federal way. Indeed, it can be regarded a real novelty compared with the prior-Lisbon regime evolving in the context of delicate and sophisticated political and judicial compromises. Lastly, although the new regime was obviously inspired by a federal mindset, it cannot be equated with a real federative government. The supranational level is incomparably ‘weaker’ and less powerful in substantive terms than the central governmental level of real federations. Many important competences that would make the EU a real and functioning federal state are still lacking.\",\"PeriodicalId\":250773,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"LSN: International & Comparative Law (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"LSN: International & Comparative Law (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5553/HYIEL/266627012013001001005\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSN: International & Comparative Law (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5553/HYIEL/266627012013001001005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文认为,《里斯本条约》引入的权限改革既不能被视为真正的革命,甚至也不能被视为相当大的演变,因为它具有强烈的保守性。话虽如此,纵向权力划分的法律框架的转变并没有建立一个质的新制度。它只是将欧洲法院早期判例法的成果和一些以前的条约条款系统化和编纂。然而,这些变化的真正成就是引入了统一的态度和词汇。《欧洲联盟条约》和《欧洲联盟运作条约》的文本都依赖于植根于联邦制的基本术语,例如“排他性”、“共享”或“成员国”权限。因此,欧盟和成员国之间的权力分配是以明确的联邦制方式进行的。的确,与在微妙和复杂的政治和司法妥协背景下演变的前里斯本政权相比,它可以被视为真正的新事物。最后,虽然新政权显然受到联邦思维的启发,但它不能等同于一个真正的联邦政府。超国家层面在实质上比真正的联邦的中央政府层面要“弱”得多,权力也小得多。使欧盟成为一个真正运作的联邦国家的许多重要能力仍然缺乏。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Does the Emperor Really Have New Clothes? A Critical Assessment of the Post-Lisbon Regime of Division of Competences
This article argues that the reform of competences introduced by the Lisbon Treaty can be regarded neither a real revolution nor even a considerable evolution, since it is of a strong conservative nature. That being said, the transformation of the legal framework of the vertical division of powers did not establish a qualitatively new regime. It only systematized and codified the achievements of the earlier case law of the European Court of Justice and some former treaty provisions. However, the real achievement of the changes is the introduction of a federal attitude and vocabulary. The text of both the Treaty on the European Union and Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union relies on essential terms rooted in federalism such as for instance ‘exclusive’, ‘shared’ or ‘member state’ competences. Therefore, the distribution of powers between the Union and the member state is articulated in a clear federal way. Indeed, it can be regarded a real novelty compared with the prior-Lisbon regime evolving in the context of delicate and sophisticated political and judicial compromises. Lastly, although the new regime was obviously inspired by a federal mindset, it cannot be equated with a real federative government. The supranational level is incomparably ‘weaker’ and less powerful in substantive terms than the central governmental level of real federations. Many important competences that would make the EU a real and functioning federal state are still lacking.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
La fiscalidad participativa y la economía social y solidaria (The Participatory Fiscality and Social and Solidarity Economy) The Material Study of the Constitutional Order Beneficios tributarios otorgados por las entidades territoriales en el marco del principio de autonomía territorial (Tax Benefits given by Territorial Institutions, following a Territorial Autonomy Principle) Public Policy and Private International Law - Portugal Iraq: Private Ownership of Oil and the Quest for Democracy
×
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