Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Home
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

82 results

Page 1 of 5

  • 7 - The Loss of Face for Everyone Concerned
  • from Part II - Resilience at the European Level
  • Edited by Vladislava Stoyanova, Lunds Universitet, Sweden, Stijn Smet, Hasselt Universiteit, Belgium
  • Book: Migrants' Rights, Populism and Legal Resilience in Europe
  • Published online: 19 May 2022
  • Print publication: 02 June 2022, pp 187-208
    • Chapter
      • You have access
      • Open access
    • PDF
    • HTML
    • Export citation
  • View extract

    Summary

    This chapter focuses on the link between the rule of law and migration in the poisonous context of democratic decay and rule of law backsliding in the EU. The analysis draws on the Hungarian case study, where overall institutional changes introduced since 2010 have led to the establishment of a regime described as ‘illiberal’ and as ‘authoritarian’. The chapter argues that Hungarian asylum policy is essentially designed with one key goal in mind: to deprive people of the right to seek asylum in breach of the international obligations of Hungary and of EU law. This is a direct result of a broader process of rule of law backsliding. The Hungarian case study proves that unresolved issues of rule of law backsliding in some EU Member States affects both the practical implementation of EU basic values (e.g., solidarity) and the proper functioning of EU policies (e.g., asylum policy). The chapter’s conclusion is that the rule of law is not secured sufficiently, either in the EU or by the EU, causing all concerned to lose face.

  • Chapter 13 - Constitutional Populism versus EU Law: A Much More Complex Story than You Imagined
  • from IV - Eu Responses
  • Edited by Martin Krygier, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Adam Czarnota, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Wojciech Sadurski, University of Sydney
  • Book: Anti-Constitutional Populism
  • Published online: 24 March 2022
  • Print publication: 31 March 2022, pp 462-492
  • View extract

    Summary

    The effects of populist narratives have become an increasingly important topic on the European Union (EU) agenda, both political and juridical, because no EU Member State is immune from populist movements, which are ever-popular.1 The last decade demonstrated that domestic constitutional populism has the ability to affect the supranational political entity in myriad ways.2 The rule of law – a fundamental EU value,3 first assumed politically,4 then proclaimed judicially,5 and, finally, codified in the Treaties to initially uncertain effects,6 – became a proxy: graduating into the interface between the populism-affecting domestic constitutional arrangements and the EU legal order.7 The inept reaction of the EU institutions to the rule of law crisis in Member States (Poland and Hungary in particular), ‘illiberalism within’,8 suggests that the constitutional populism undermined the foundations and effectiveness of the EU rule of law. Worse still – the developments over the last decade highlight the fact that the EU might be drifting away from its proclaimed foundations of democracy, rule of law and human rights protection: its very raison d’être stands undermined. Indeed, the added value of the Union as a tool to empower ‘autocratic legalism’,9 uniting states engaged in ‘ruling by cheating’,10 as opposed to a club of rule of law-abiding democracies, is unclear. One thing is certain, however: such a Union cannot have any future.

  • The Commission against the Internal Market and European Union Citizens’ Rights: Trying to Shoot Down Sputnik with the “Digital Green Certificate”?
  • Dimitry Vladimirovich KOCHENOV, Jacquelyn Dietrich VERALDI
  • Journal: European Journal of Risk Regulation / Volume 12 / Issue 2 / June 2021
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 July 2021, pp. 404-414
  • Print publication: June 2021
    • Article
      • You have access
      • Open access
    • PDF
    • HTML
    • Export citation
  • View abstract

    The Digital Green Certificate (DGC) proposed by the European Commission on the basis of facilitating the free movement rights of European Union (EU) citizens will be capable of effectively serving as a COVID-19 passport. In this contribution, we cast doubt on whether the DGC is fit for purpose, highlighting in particular the potential for the DGC to in fact facilitate greater free movement restrictions for a large number of EU citizens, in particular those who have received non- European Medicines Agency (EMA)-approved vaccines such as Sputnik V in compliance with EU law. Under the proposal as amended by the European Parliament, any destination Member State that accepts proof of vaccination “in order to waive restrictions to free movement” must apply the same waiver to any DGC-holder that has received an EMA-approved vaccine and has the option of doing so for vaccines added to the World Health Organization (WHO) Emergency Use Listing; however, such equal treatment is not available for DGC-holders who have received non-EMA/WHO vaccines. While this measure was alleged to be taken on grounds of public health, a convincing public health case has not been put forward. Instead, the DGC proposal as it stands disregards the promise of the internal market and sets the stage for its fragmentation through geopolitics and bilateralism.

  • Amendments to the 1993 Constitution of the Russian Federation Concerning International Law (2020)
  • Paul Kalinichenko, Dimitry Vladimirovich Kochenov
  • Journal: International Legal Materials / Volume 60 / Issue 2 / April 2021
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 March 2021, pp. 341-346
  • Print publication: April 2021
    • Article
      • You have access
      • Open access
    • PDF
    • HTML
    • Export citation
  • View extract

    The Russian Constitution was adopted by a referendum on December 12, 1993. It was inspired by Western constitutional traditions and internationally recognised democratic and human rights values. The Constitution established three core features of the Russian constitutional order, all breaking with the Soviet past:

    • • The Constitutional provisions on the foundations of the constitutional system, the protection of human rights, and constitutional review are unchangeable and cannot be amended, except via the summoning of a new Constitutional Assembly/national referendum (art. 135).

    • • The Constitution established a strongly monist approach to international law, integrating it into the Russian legal order and giving priority to duly ratified international treaties and agreements to override conflicting domestic laws (art. 15(4)).

    • • The Russian Constitutional Court enjoys exclusive competence to interpret the Constitution via binding precedents.

The Internal Market and the Future of European Integration
  • The Internal Market and the Future of European Integration
  • Essays in Honour of Laurence W. Gormley
  • Edited by Fabian Amtenbrink, Gareth Davies, Dimitry Kochenov, Justin Lindeboom
  • Published online: 04 May 2019
  • Print publication: 18 April 2019
  • View description
    This collection marks the rich legacy of Professor Laurence W. Gormley's scholarship in the field of EU internal market law, providing a definitive critical appraisal of all the key aspects of the internal market, with an emphasis on goods and judicial protection; Professor Gormley's expert fields. Forty chapters deal with constitutional aspects of the EU internal market, the free movement of goods, persons and services, EMU, public procurement and competition law, institutional and procedural dimensions, and the EU's external relations, which includes matters relating to Brexit. The broad theme of the book, reflecting the many interests of Professor Gormley, will appeal to scholars, students and practicing lawyers. Dealing with both classic, foundational aspects of the EU internal market as well as highly topical matters, such as Brexit, this book will be a most welcome addition to every engaged legal scholar's library, thereby celebrating the legacy of a mentor and dear friend.

Page 1 of 5