Suchergebnisse

AbstractThe European Union (EU) is a democratic organization but faces severe cases of democratic backsliding. The literature deems the EU a hospitable environment for and reluctant to reign in backsliding. This study focuses on the tactics that backsliding governments employ to preserve this hospitable environment and the conditions under which they succeed. I argue that backsliding governments seek to repurpose the practice of accommodation that permeates EU decision-making for the protection of their backsliding projects. Doing so promises backsliders an escape from their precarious bargaining position in a democratic organization but comes with constraints. Backsliders must limit opposition carefully to a subset of EU competences, backsliding-inhibiting competences, that threaten their backsliding projects the most. Moreover, they can only rely on accommodation in the Council if the democratic member states perceive opposition as justified and remain insulated from political accountability by Europe's parliaments. I present evidence based on quantitative and qualitative analyses of bargaining positions, processes, and outcomes in EU decision-making. The results have implications for understanding the EU's autocratic predicament, the opportunities of backsliding governments, and the role of autocracies in regional and international organizations.

Sample chapters available in Open Access: Judicial Dialogue in Action: Making Sense of the Risk of Absconding in the Return Procedure, Madalina Moraru ; This volume examines the implementation of the Return Directive from the perspective of judicial dialogue. While the role of judges has been widely addressed in European asylum law and EU law more generally, their role in EU return policy has hitherto remained under explored. This volume addresses the interaction and dialogue between domestic judiciaries and European courts in the implementation of European return policy. The book brings together leading authors from various backgrounds, including legal scholars, judges and practitioners. This allows the collection to offer theoretical and practical perspectives on important questions regarding the regulation of irregular migration in Europe, such as: what constitutes inadequate implementation of the Directive and under which conditions can judicial dialogue solve it? How can judges ensure that the right balance is struck between effective return procedures and fundamental rights? Why do we see different patterns of judicial dialogue in the Member States when it comes to particular questions of return policy, for example regarding the use of detention? These questions are more timely than ever given the shifting public discourse on immigration and the growing political backlash against immigration courts. This book will be essential reading for all scholars and practitioners in the fields of immigration law and policy, EU law and public law. ; The book is a continuation of analysis started in the Return directive DIALogue - REDIAL project (2014-2016). REDIAL was co-funded by the European Commission (DG Home) and coordinated by the Migration Policy Centre (MPC), in cooperation with the Centre for Judicial Cooperation (CJC) at the European University Institute and the Odysseus Network. The editors would like to express their gratitude to each of the national judges and academic experts who participated in CONTENTION and REDIAL for providing the contributors to this book with invaluable research data in their respective country reports. The volume has benefited enormously from meticulous proof-reading by Paul McDonough, Justin McCann and by Ellen Lefley, which has been made financially possible by Masaryk University, Odysseus Network and the VU Interdisciplinary Centre for European Studies (VICES). ; Prologue: The Genesis of the EU's Return Policy, Fabian Lutz Introduction: Judicial Dialogue on the Return Directive – Catalyst for Changing Migration Governance?, Galina Cornelisse and Madalina Moraru PART 1: STAGES OF THE EU RETURN PROCEDURE: THE ROLE OF JUDGES IN ENSURING AN EFFECTIVE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RETURN DIRECTIVE, Edited by Madalina Moraru 1. The Scope of the Return Directive: How Much Space is Left for National Procedural Law on Irregular Migration, Galina Cornelisse 2. Return Decisions and Domestic Judicial Practices: Is Spain Different?, Cristina Gortazar Rotaeche 3. Voluntary Departure as a Priority: Challenges and Best Practices, Ulrike Brandl 4. The Legal Requirements of the Entry Ban: The Role of National Courts and Dialogue with the Court of Justice of the European Union, Aniel Pahladsingh 5. Judicial Dialogue in Action: Making Sense of the Risk of Absconding in the Return Procedure, Madalina Moraru 6. Cypriot Courts, the Return Directive and Fundamental Rights: Challenges and Failures, Corina Demetriou and Nicos Trimikliniotis PART 2: IMMIGRATION DETENTION IN THE EU: THE ROLE OF JUDGES IN SHAPING EFFECTIVE STANDARDS OF CONTROL, Edited by Galina Cornelisse 7. Alternatives to Immigration Detention in International and EU Law:Control Standards and Judicial Interaction in a Heterarchy, Evangelia (Lilian) Tsourdi 8. Scope and Intensity of Judicial Review: Which Power for Judges within the Control of Immigration Detention?, Adam Blisa and David Kosar 9. The Civil Judge as Administrator of Return Detention: The Case of Germany, Jonas Bornemann and Harald Dorig 10. The Administrative Judge as a Detention Judge: The Case of Lithuania, Irmantas Jarukaitis and Agne Kalinauskaite 11. Detention of Migrants in Belgium and the Criminal Judge: A Lewis Carroll World, Sylvie Sarolea 12. Can the Return Directive Contribute to Protection for Rejected Asylum Seekers and Irregular Migrants in Detention?The Case of Greece, Angeliki Papapanagiotou-Leza and Stergios Kofinis 13. Can a Justice of the Peace be a Good Detention Judge? The Case of Italy, Alessia Di Pascale 14. Duality of Jurisdiction in the Control of Immigration Detention: The Case of France/Trois Hautes Juridictions Nationales pour une Directive: Une Interaction Judiciaire en Trompe l'oeil, Serge Slama PART 3: RIGHTS AND SAFEGUARDS IN THE APPLICATION OF THE RETURN DIRECTIVE: THE ROLE OF JUDGES IN SAFEGUARDING PROCEDURAL AND FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS PROTECTION, Edited by Madalina Moraru and Galina Cornelisse 15. The Right to be Heard: The Underestimated Condition for Effective Returns and Human Rights Consideration, Valeria Ilareva 16. Impact of Judicial Dialogue(s) on Development and Affirmation of the Right to Effective Legal Remedy from Articles 13 and 14 of the Return Directive, Boštjan Zalar 17. A Lawyer's Perspective on Access to Classified Evidence in Return Cases: A View from Poland, Jacek Bialas 18. The Return of the Children, Carolus Grutters 19. Unremovability under the Return Directive: An Empty Protection?, Jean-Baptiste Farcy 20. The Prohibition of Collective Expulsion as an Individualisation Requirement, Luc Leboeuf and Jean-Yves Carlier

Part I Setting the scene -- Introduction: Individual rights, the public interest and biobank research 4000 (8) -- Genetic data and privacy protection -- Part II GDPR and European responses -- Biobank governance and the impact of the GDPR on the regulation of biobank research -- Controller' and processor's responsibilities in biobank research under GDPR -- Individual rights in biobank research under GDPR -- Safeguards and derogations relating to processing for archiving purposes in the scientific purposes: Article 89 analysis for biobank research -- A Pan-European analysis of Article 89 implementation and national biobank research regulations -- EEA, Switzerland analysis of GDPR requirements and national biobank research regulations -- Part III National insights in biobank regulatory frameworks -- Selected 10-15 countries for reports: Germany -- Greece -- France -- Finland -- Sweden -- United Kingdom -- Part IV Conclusions -- Reflections on individual rights, the public interest and biobank research, ramifications and ways forward. .

This paper argues monetary union stability requires a government banker that manages the bond market and it offers a specific proposal for stabilizing the euro that does not violate the "no country bail-out" clause. There is accumulating evidence that the euro's current architecture is unstable. The source of instability is high interest rates on highly indebted countries which creates unsustainable debt burdens. Remedying this problem requires a central bank that acts as government banker and pushes down government bond interest rates to sustainable levels. That can be accomplished by creation of a European Public Finance Authority (EPFA) that issues public debt which the European Central Bank (ECB) is allowed to trade. The debate over the euro's financial architecture also has significant political implications. That is because the current neoliberal inspired architecture, which imposes a complete separation between the central bank and public finances, puts governments under continuous financial pressures. Over time, that pressure makes it difficult to maintain the European social democratic welfare state. This gives a political reason for reforming the euro and creating an EPFA that supplements the economic case for reform.

The project of creating a Banking Union is designed to overcome the fatal link between sovereigns and their banks in the Eurozone. As part of this project, political agreement for a common supervision framework and a common resolution scheme has been reached with difficulty. However, the resolution framework is weak, underfunded and exhibits some serious flaws. Further, Member States' disagreements appear to rule out a federalized deposit insurance scheme, commonly regarded as the necessary third pillar of a successful Banking Union. This paper argues for an organizational and capital structure substitute for these two shortcomings that can minimize the systemic distress costs of the failure of a large financial institution. We borrow from the approach the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) has devised in the implementation of the "Orderly Liquidation Authority" under the Dodd-Frank Act. The FDIC's experience teaches us three important lessons: First, systemically important financial institutions need to have in their liability structure sufficient unsecured (or otherwise subordinated) term debt so that in the event of bank failure, the conversion of debt into equity will be sufficient to absorb asset losses without impairing deposits and other short term credit; second, the organizational structure of the financial institution needs to permit such a debt conversion without putting core financial constituents through a bankruptcy or other resolution process; and third, a federal funding mechanism deployable at the discretion of the resolution authority must be available to supply liquidity to a reorganizing bank. On these conditions, a viable and realistic Banking Union would be within reach – and the resolution of global financial institutions would be greatly facilitated, not least in a transatlantic perspective.

We examine the number of patent applications for climate change mitigation technologies (CCMT) filed at the European Patent Office and seek to relate it to the oversupply of emission allowances under the European Union Emission Trading System (EU ETS). We use a panel count data approach to show that firms covered by the policy take the oversupply into account when determining their level of innovative activity. We also indirectly demonstrate that the "weak" version of the Porter hypothesis holds for the EU ETS, given the sizable oversupply of allowances in the market. Our results suggest that in order to set the European economy firmly on the low-carbon technology pathway, and to ensure that the ambitious EU climate targets are met, serious policy changes must be undertaken.

The controversy of the Iranian nuclear programme divided the European Union (EU) member states. Whereas some states preferred confrontation, others were in favour of the accommodation. Policy commentators frequently ascribed this difference to diverging economic interests of Europeans, but this link remained underexplored. In this article, the empirical link between the economic interests and positions towards Iran is explored. The analysis rests on the evaluation of both overall and strategic trade flows. The results suggest that while trade played a certain role in the shaping of the policies, the effect of the strength of the alliance with the USA explains a large part of the puzzle. The article thus casts shadow on the established policy narrative of economic interests being the driver of the EU members' Iran policy. In addition, the theoretical implications cast shadow over the applicability of commercial liberalism on instances of confrontation short of war. Adapted from the source document.