Suchergebnisse

Abstract This article argues that only a limited form of EU citizenship is available to transgender people. As the paper demonstrates, transgender Union citizens face numerous difficulties when they exercise their right to free movement, despite such movement being the core of Union citizenship. Rather, transgender individuals only have access to a considerably restricted form of EU citizenship which is guaranteed as part of their fundamental status conferred by EU Treaties. The article points out that the current approach of including transgender discrimination in the purview of discrimination on the grounds of sex fails to tackle the issue because it is conceptually problematic and largely ineffective. As a solution to remedy the issue, the paper suggests overhauling the existent approach to trans discrimination in a way that makes it capable of ensuring that transgender persons enjoy their Union citizenship to its fullest extent.

The concept of citizenship is highly contested. There has always been considerable debate, not only on the European level but also within nations, on what citizenship means and the rights and duties it entails. A vast literature exists dealing with those questions. Most studies on citizenship, however, are to a large extent theory-driven and concentrate on the difference between national and post-national citizenship, the lack of a common identity and the question of whether a demos is needed in order to secure support for an entity that has only a limited statehood. Few look at the actual implementation of the citizenship concept and the practical implications it has on the individual level. This paper tries to fill this gap by analysing the question 'Does the existence of an EU citizenship make a real difference to the lives of the citizens of the European Union?'

Drawing on research conducted during the project, this policy brief examines the current status of mobility and access to rights of residence for European Union citizens and non-European Union citizens. The establishment of European Union citizenship in 1992 entailed the establishment of both the European Union citizen and the 'Third Country National' (the non- European Union citizen). As citizens of European Union member states became European Union insiders, so citizens of non-European Union states were turned into European Union outsiders. However, inclusion and exclusion are, in practice, seldom binaries but marked by shades of difference. Those holding the nationality of a member state may, in principle, all be citizens of the European Union. But they are differentially included in terms of their access to rights under European Union law, including rights to move and reside freely across the member states.1 Similarly, non-European Union citizens are residence in a member state, on which basis they can enjoy many of the rights of citizens of that state (though not rights as European Union citizens). This policy brief focuses on the relationship between citizenship and work. Specifically, it highlights the ways in which mobility and access to rights of residence for European Union citizens and non-European Union citizens is controlled in relation to work and self-sufficiency. This has implications for inequalities between particular groups in terms of their relative inclusion within the labour market, and thus their access to citizenship and residence rights. But it also has much wider implications regarding the extent to which European Union citizenship serves to reinforce divisions and inequalities among Europe's populations or to promote greater solidarity. First, we consider the ways in which work is framed as a right and/or an obligation for European Union and non-European Union citizens in terms of their mobility and access to rights of residence in European Union member states. We highlight the ways in ...

Although the meanings of citizenship, active citizenship and organized crime are still open to debate, we try to show the evaluation of the culture of legality and the investments in social, economic and cultural programs for youth as a major defense for such a capillary phenomenon. There is also general agreement that EU programs for endorsing citizenship and active citizenship represent an effective tool for creating transnational networks of young people committed to EU values. Thus, they perceive the culture of legality as the best form of protection against arbitrary violence with references not only to a developed (and eventually harmonized) system of legal sanctions, but also to the fulfillment of individual and collective freedom. We try to shed light on these concept by teh tools provided by political science and philosophy of language.

First published online: 29 July 2021 ; The judgment delivered by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in Dano made clear that the conditionality of residence for economically inactive EU citizens is in Directive 2004/38 for a reason, and that it can be interpreted strictly. After an analysis of the trajectory of the CJEU in this field, this Note zooms in on grey areas deriving from State practice, in between lawful residence and expulsion. It then contends that these situations can be understood as the result of a tension among different dynamics of opening and closure, which are deeply embedded in the European citizenship project. By bringing to life the restrictive elements of the Directive, the Dano case facilitates the withdrawal of residence rights of certain EU citizens and allows for their expulsion. And yet, their rights to move freely and re-enter the host State immediately upon expulsion remain untouched, rendering the expulsion of the poor and economically inactive futile in practice. These ambiguities not only unveil the paradox of applying the concepts of illegality and expulsion to EU citizens in the context of European integration and internal open borders, but also facilitate the emergence of "non-removed" citizens. This creates an underclass of EU citizens who are simply "present" in the host Member State, staying unlawfully and without access to rights until, or unless, they are granted a valid residence permit or eventually removed.

This book is the first monograph on one of the least studied and most controversial European Union citizenship rights. Despite the importance of consular protection in a globalised world, many EU Member States are reluctant to recognise consular protection for EU citizens abroad as a right, leading to a protracted struggle to place the right to consular protection on a solid legal basis through a directive. This book examines the right to consular protection as an illustrative case in the debate over a multilevel design of EU citizenship combining rules from several different legal systems, w

Drawing on the research conducted during the project, this policy brief assesses the current status of the civil right of free movement as the anchor of European Union citizenship. In democracies, freedom of movement is a core civil right and a privilege of citizens. The European Union is no exception: the nationals of the European Union member states, as European Union citizens, have the right to move and reside in any other member state, and when they do, they should be treated like the nationals of their host states. This mobility and equal treatment paradigm of European Union citizenship, however, is under growing pressure. As the economic crisis hit hard, in particular in Eastern and Southern European states, their people moved to more wealthy European Union states, where they hoped to find work or ways of making a living. Meanwhile, citizens in Western and Northern Europe worried about what they perceived as increased competition for work and social benefits. Terrorist threats, the refugee crisis, and the rise of far-right, anti-foreigners and anti-European Union parties further challenge the unrestricted mobility basis of European Union citizenship. If mobility no longer constitutes the 'substance' of European Union citizenship, then what could replace it? One possible solution is to shift the basis of European Union citizenship from mobility to rights, and rebuild it around the European Union Charter of Fundamental Rights. Such a transformation would flesh up what has so far been criticized as a thin citizenship. This policy brief evaluates the current status of the right to free movement as the anchor of European Union citizenship, and develops two main scenarios for the future of European Union citizenship, one based on the current paradigm of mobility and the other based on rights. It then offers a range of policy options, which seek to preserve mobility, as the more likely, although perhaps not the most desirable, basis for the future development of European Union citizenship.

Migration to and within the European Union has led to a steadily rising number of foreign-born citizens living in EU member states. The naturalization of migrants therefore plays a prominent role in national integration policies. In this article we give an overview of key naturalization figures and facts in EU15 countries and Poland. We compare naturalization numbers and rates and describe the legal regulations for the acquisition of citizenship. We then discuss the controversial case of investor citizenship and conclude by providing evi-dence for the benefits of a facilitated access to citizenship.

Examines the political rights of nationals of European Union countries residing in other member states, and the Maastricht Treaty's attempted solution of the problem of European citizenship.

The subject of the considerations undertaken in the article is the impact of the institution of EU citizenship on the status of migrant citizens. The aim of the study is to demonstrate that the introduction of the institution of EU citizenship into the treaties has definitely strengthened the status of an individual in EU law, and in a special way – in the host country. The inclusion of citizens' rights in the catalogue of fundamental rights has radically changed the way in which one of the citizens' rights – freedom of movement and residence in the territory of the host country – is exercised. A migrant citizen has been granted special protection in contexts where actions aimed at restricting the right of residence are taken. These conclusions will be confirmed in this article by analysis of the evolution of secondary legislation and the interpretation of the Court of Justice of the European Union.