For a long time considered, improperly, a sort of ‘nuclear’ option, Article 7 TEU is the key EU Treaty provision in the field of values enforcement. In the context of the Union’s current rule of law crisis, such a provision deserves the greatest attention, especially after the European Commission’s proposal in December 2017 to trigger the procedure against Poland, under Article 7(1) TEU. This article contributes to understandings of the provision by reviewing its main features and contextualising its deployment in the general Polish rule of law crisis, with the aim of evaluating whether it can now be considered as an operational instrument for values enforcement. Although the Commission’s (late) decision to activate the Article 7(1) TEU procedure should be welcomed as a major effort in restoring the rule of law within the European Union, the (perceived and real) limits of Article 7 TEU and the inertia of the EU institutions cast a shadow over the procedure’s effective implementation.
, Germany), Mr Jean-Claude Scholsem (Substitute Member, Belgium), Mr Jorgen Steen Sørensen (Member, Denmark). The opinion is also reprinted in D. Carrillo (ed.) and others, The Icelandic Federalist Papers, 2018, p. 191–243.
Frymus M., Nyks Ł., Policastro P. (2015), Great Green Wall: Africa for Africa , feature film produced by World Peace Lab and Nyks Media (executive producer), M. Frymus, director, Ł. Nyks, pictures, P. Policastro, scientific supervision.
T. Gylfason, A. Meuwese, Digital Tools and the Derailment of Iceland’s New Constitution, CESIFO working
• Pelizzo Riccardo and Stapenhurst Frederick, 2012, Parliamentary Oversight Tools: A Comparative Analysis , Routledge, London.
• Rasmussen Mette Buskjær and Dionigi Maja Kluger, 2018, ‘National parliaments’ use of the political dialogue: Institutional lobbyists, traditionalists or communicators?’, Journal of Common Market Studies , LVI(5): 1108-1126.
• Rijpma Jorrit, 2014, ‘Institutions and Agencies: Government and Governance after Lisbon’, in Acosta Arcarazo Diego and Murphy Cian (eds), EU Security and Justice Law , Hart
, The Creation of States in International Law , Clarendon Press, Oxford.
• Del Mar Katherine, 2013, ‘The myth of Remedial Secession’, in French Duncan, Statehood and Self-Determination Reconciling Tradition and Modernity in International Law , Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 79-108.
• Ergün, Olgun M. & Dirk Rochtus, 2008, ‘Cyprus: The Belgian ‘Tool Box’ Revisited’, Insight Turkey , X (4): 111-134.
• Erhürman Tufan, 2010. ‘New Set of Negotiations in the Cyprus Problem: Federation for a Stable Democracy’, Ankarabarreview , III(1): 35
territorialisierend dar: Sie blieben die wichtigste Territorialeinteilung Preußens bis zum Ende des Staates 1947. Analog und doch völlig verschieden gestaltete sich eine ›provinzielle Staatsbildung‹ in den Niederlanden. Stefan Couperus, Harm Kaal, Nico Randeraad und Paul van Trigt zeigen in ihrem Beitrag am Beispiel Südhollands, wie sich Provinzialverwaltungen an der Staatsbildung beteiligten, indem sie sich als administrative Institutionen des neuen Einheitsstaates erfanden und mittels ›little tools of knowledge‹ Zu diesem Konzept vgl. Peter Becker / William Clark: »Introduction
Contributions in this special issue argue make a number of points with regard to the urgent need to change the economic governance of the Eurozone, pointing at some tools to increase its spending capacity. The process of potential fragmentation ignited by the recent vote on Brexit make such changes even more urgent, signalling the need to provide concrete responses to citizens, in order to show that the euro area, and the EU at large, are able to satisfy some of their crucial needs. The papers which make up this special issue were presented in Florence, at a meeting held in the framework of a Jean Monnet + Project called MoreEU. The first section deals with the reform of the budget; the second with a further use of quantitative easing and the role of the ECB.
This paper examines the interaction between constitutional design and practice through a case study of Canadian federalism. Focusing on the federal architecture of the Canadian Constitution, the paper examines how subnational units in Canada actually compete with the central government, emphasizing the concrete strategies and tactics they most commonly employ to get their way in confrontations with central authority. The evidence affirms that constitutional design and structure make an important difference in the tactics and tools available to subnational units in a federal system, but that design is not fully constraining: there is considerable evidence of extraconstitutional innovation and improvisation by governments. Furthermore, changes in practice initiated by Canadian subnational actors have produced changes in the allocation of national and subnational authority that are plausibly characterized as constitutional in magnitude. The paper concludes that the design of the Canadian federal system may inadvertently undermine its capacity to stabilize itself at any particular point of constitutional evolution, making it ‘permanently provisional.’
Since it was passed, the Clarity Act has been at the core of any secessionist debate in Canada and abroad. Although contested at home, the Clarity Act has earned worldwide prestige as the democratic standard that must be observed when a secessionist debate arises. In the last fifteen years Spain has experienced successive debates about the need to establish a mechanism of popular consultation to address secessionist claims in the Basque Country and Catalonia. Most political actors in favour of such consultations have expressed their will to import the Canadian Clarity Act as a tool to settle disputes on how to conduct a referendum. However, this deification of the Canadian example is, for the most part, based on a misreading of the Secession Reference, only taking into account certain passages while ignoring others. The emphasis tends to be made on the quantitative clear majority test, disregarding other factors. Hence, the aim of this paper is to study the causes of this deification of the Clarity Act in Spain, and its influence on the treatment of secessionist claims that the country is currently experiencing.
The EBU represents a clear investment in administrative integration with clear implications for the constitutional features of the EU. This paper aims to give an analysis of the administrative arrangements, through which the functions of supervision and resolution are affecting the single financial market. This case study is very interesting because these functions represent a genuine novelty in the history of financial integration since they are pre-ordained to a specific public interest: financial stability. Particularly, they cause a shift in the decision gradient from the technical to the political, as market integrity is less and less the key interest compared to financial stability. However, this wider discretionary power is not adequately counteracted by checks and balances in favour of accountability. As a result, the EBU makes a new contribution to the well-known ‘fragmentation of the executive power’ of the EU by introducing a new governance tool positioned between the Communitarian and Intergovernmental Method, but its development is still full of uncertainties given that constitutional equilibrium is far from being definitively reached.
In the light of the relevant terms of this issue, »state«, »space« and »administration«, this contribution considers the intertwining between representations of order, their administration, and the governance of the subjects in the sovereignty areas of Salzburg and Tyrol in the Zillertal. The different ideas of space – investigated from the perspectives of various groups of the population, of local officials, and of the government centers – changed throughout the examined period. At its beginning, the authorities in the government centers endeavored to keep the borders open for mutual exchange, whereas the local officials used their administrative tools to stage a competition with the officials of the neighboring district, e.g. by blocking and redirecting the subjects’ pathways of movement. In this situation, a more open construction of space confronted a more mistrustful one aimed at enclosure and the guarding of borders. In the context of negotiations for a general border settlement between Tyrol and Salzburg, and on the basis of newly developed conceptions of a state as having a clearly defined sovereignty area, capable of being governed without any foreign influence up to its borders, the interventions of the government centers started to change. Borders were adjusted and a clear assignment of the subjects was demanded. However, the more an exact correspondence between space and sovereignty was pursued, the more obvious the impossibility of this undertaking became. Seemingly well-demarcated border lines appeared vague when regarded closely. Their official description was at odds with the subjects’ construction and usage of spaces. While their spatial behaviors were determined by the norms of the sovereign centers and controlled by the administrative work of the officials, the subjects developed their own strategies for dealing with these interventions in their constructions of space and adjusting to them.