Brexit as constitutional "shock" and its threat to the devolution settlement: reform or bust

The devolution settlement was not designed to withstand such a major shock as Brexit and, furthermore, Brexit has demonstrated key weaknesses in the devolution design (an argument that is even more fundamental for Northern Ireland). This would point to a logical conclusion: to rectify these problems either the devolution design needs to be fundamentally redrawn post- Brexit allowing a distinct Scottish voice to be heard and given force or independence as a solution

Uncertainty Across the Pond: An Evaluation of Equity Market Returns and Currency Fluctuations in Reaction to Key Brexit Events

The citizens of the United Kingdom shocked the world on June 23rd, 2016 when they voted in favor of leaving the European Union. The 3-year aftermath of the Referendum has created a large amount of uncertainty regarding the future of the United Kingdom economy and its post-Brexit relationship with the European Union. The purpose of this research is to explore how the financial markets react to Brexit news headlines, compare the returns of European and non-European exchange-traded funds (ETFs) and currencies, identify common themes, and ultimately shed light on how investors weigh-in on the interconnectedness of the UK, the EU, and the broader global markets. After researching the major milestones in the development of Brexit, twenty-three different events were selected for this study. To look at the financial market’s reaction, UK, EU, Germany, United States, and South African ETFs and currency returns in response to Brexit news were recorded. The results show that positive Brexit news headlines are a universal benefit but generate higher returns for the European Union and Germany as opposed to the United Kingdom itself, and that shared negative returns affect the United Kingdom to a greater extent. Investors are pricing in the uncertain and negative implications of Brexit to the point where the United Kingdom has limited upside and plenty of downside within the realms of the financial markets

The Long Road to Uluru and Beyond

This paper explores the significance of the Uluru Statement from The Heart and its place in the post settlement Indigenous journey. It is also relevant to the nation’s journey towards reconciliation. The initial rejection of the Uluru Statement by the Government was a blow to indigenous Australians, and an examination of the reasons for opposing a constitutional enshrined Voice to Parliament is needed. It is argued that the Voice to Parliament is of value both symbolically and practically. Understanding the reasons why some sections of the Australian community find any constitutional recognition proposition difficult is a key to successfully achieving such recognition

Showing true illiberal colours – Rule of law vs Orbán’s pandemic politics. CEPS Policy Insights No 2020-10 / April 2020

This Policy Insight examines the Hungarian government’s responses to the coronavirus pandemic and their impacts on the rule of law. It argues that the pandemic does not create autocracies, but it shows more clearly their true illiberal colours. The paper assesses the scope of the so-called ‘Enabling Act’ granting the government the power to rule by decree and its damaging implications for the effective democratic control of executive actions and other checks and balances such as media pluralism and freedom of association. The analysis argues that the Hungarian government is unequivocally violating the EU founding principles enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union and its current pandemic politics are making this ever more transparent. The paper recommends more EU centralisation and interinstitutional cooperation in the assessment and scrutiny of all member states’ compliance with the trinity of the rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights. It concretely suggests first, the timely enforcement of EU standards by the European Commission and the Luxembourg Court through rule of law infringement proceedings, and second, the adoption of an interinstitutional EU Periodic Review (EUPR) on the rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights

Democracy and Digital Authoritarianism: An Assessment of the EU’s External Engagement in the Promotion and Protection of Internet Freedom. College of Europe EU Diplomacy Paper 01/2020

The past decade has seen a gradual global increase in digital authoritarianism. Internet shutdowns, online censorship, mass surveillance and violations of privacy rights have all become more frequent in parts of the world where citizens are not guaranteed sufficient digital rights. The task of defending, promoting and protecting internet freedom is becoming increasingly relevant for the European Union (EU) − for internal digital and cybersecurity policies as well as for the EU’s external promotion of democracy and human rights. Whilst much has been written about the various internal policies which establish and protect internet freedom within the European Union and its member states, the EU’s external engagement in this field remains critically under-researched. To what extent does the EU engage externally in the promotion and protection of internet freedom? This paper answers this question by covering a wide variety of policy fields including human rights and democracy promotion, digital policy, enlargement and neighbourhood policy, development cooperation and trade policy. Whereas the EU faces a limited opportunity to shape global norms with regard to internet freedom or to change the course of digitally authoritarian states, it has demonstrated several strengths which deserve not to be overlooked. These include, for example, the externalisation of internal data protection and policies and the provision of direct support and protection for civil society. Despite facing significant obstacles, the promotion and protection of internet freedom has become an important area of the EU’s external action which is only set to become more relevant in the coming years

Maintaining EU-27 citizens’ rights in the UK: a Central and Eastern European Perspective. Bertelsmann Policy Brief | 12.2017

The United Kingdom’s (UK) decision to leave the European Union (EU) has unexpectedly created a situation of uncertainty and insecurity for almost 3.5 million EU27 nationals currently residing in the UK. This is especially the case for Central and Eastern Europeans who took advantage of the EU’s freedom of movement to immigrate to the UK in large numbers after their countries joined the community in 2004 and 2007. The numbers are significant: over 900,000 Poles, 310,000 Romanians, 185,000 Lithuanians, and 93,000 Slovaks are threatened with the loss of rights to freely live and work in the UK.1 Despite political pressure, the British government had repeatedly refused to guarantee migrants’ rights and made it a subject of political negotiations with Brussels. Uncertainty continued, with citizens’ rights being used as leverage in the negotiations between the UK and the European Commission. On December 8, December 2017, an agreement was finally reached between the negotiators of the European Union and the United Kingdom Government, just before the December 2017 European Council Summit

Moving beyond the ‘crisis’: Recommendations for the European Commission’s communication on migration. EPC Discussion Paper, 9 DECEMBER 2019

The year 2015 marked the arrival of an unprecedented number of migrants and refugees in the EU. Soon politicians, policymakers and the press dubbed these events a ‘migration crisis’. With the steep increase in public attention putting migration at the very top of the political agenda, right-wing populist parties saw their chance to capitalise on voters’ concerns in a vast majority of EU member states

The double-facing foreign relations function of the executive and its self-enforcing obligation to comply with international law

How does the international Rule of Law apply to constrain the conduct of the Executive within a constitutional State that adopts a dualist approach to the reception of international law? This paper argues that, so far from being inconsistent with the concept of the Rule of Law, the Executive within a dualist constitution has a self-enforcing obligation to abide by the obligations of the State under international law. This is not dependent on Parliament’s incorporation of treaty obligations into domestic law. It is the correlative consequence of the allocation to the Executive of the power to conduct foreign relations. The paper develops this argument in response to recent debate in the United Kingdom on whether Ministers have an obligation to comply with international law–a reference that the Government removed from the Ministerial Code. It shows that such an obligation is consistent with both four centuries of the practice of the British State and with principle