Rule of law infringement procedures: A proposal to extend the EU’s rule of law toolbox. CEPS Paper on Liberty and Security in Europe, No. 2019-09, May 2019

In this contribution, we propose that the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) introduce ‘rule of law infringement procedures’, having both a fast-track and a freezing component, as part of a wider ‘EU rule of law toolbox’. We show rule of law infringement procedures’ great potential in tackling rule of law backsliding in the Member States, provided that the following rules are applied. First, the European Commission should identify the rule of law problem explicitly. Second, it should not waste time and postpone its legal actions, while a Member State openly violates the rule of law. Third, the CJEU should automatically prioritise and accelerate infringement cases with a rule of law element to avoid more harm being done by those in power. Fourth, interim measures should be used to put an immediate halt to rule of law violations that can culminate in grave and irreversible harm. Fifth, EU institutions should establish a periodic rule of law review. It should help them to determine if there is a systemic threat to the rule of law in a given Member State, and provide additional legitimacy to the European Commission for initiating rule of law infringement actions and to the CJEU for ruling on such matters

Solicitudes de asilo de personas LGBTI – la perspectiva de Europa Central y Oriental

Investigaciones recientes indican que los países de ECO aún están muy rezagados con respecto al resto de Europa en sus prácticas de asilo relacionadas con las solicitudes de asilo de LGBTI. Los bajos niveles de concientización, la falta de orientación y la hostilidad cultural están poniendo en peligro las perspectivas de un trato justo para los solicitantes de asilo

The Rise of Illiberal Democracy and the Remedies of Multi-Level Constitutionalism

Abstract This article begins with a brief overview of the characteristics of illiberal democracy proclaimed in Hungary and followed by Poland, the once 'Musterkinder' of European integration and compliance with the EU values and law. In the second part the weaknesses of multi-level constitutionalism is analyzed by addressing the Hungarian and Polish illiberal turn. The third part consists of a country-specific contextual analysis examining remedies to illiberal democracy in a normative focus

Koncepcja tożsamości konstytucyjnej: wymiar indywidualny, relatywny oraz zbiorowy

 THE CONCEPT OF CONSTITUTIONAL IDENTITY: INDIVIDUAL, RELATIVE AND COLLECTIVE DIMENSIONThis article begins with the supposition that constitutional identity is an attractive legal notion that has been used to legitimize the power of courts in cases that usually arose as a result of the conflict of norms stemming from various legal orders. Whenever judges use constitutional identity rhetoric to justify their decisions, they assume to know the contents of constitutional identity. Ultimately, they do not play the role of the “guardians of the Constitution”, but the “guardians of identity”, and aim to gain, maintain or extend their powers, in particular their authority of the “last word” in the judicial dialogue. The article argues that each constitutional order requires identification of the constitutional subject for its legitimization. It claims, however, that identity of a constitutional subject may develop simultaneously in three dimensions as an individual, relational and collective selves, which remain in constant interaction. While the individual self denotes a particularistic self-perception, the relational and collective selves indicate that identity can mean not only difference, but also sameness or close proximity. THE CONCEPT OF CONSTITUTIONAL IDENTITY: INDIVIDUAL, RELATIVE AND COLLECTIVE DIMENSIONThis article begins with the supposition that constitutional identity is an attractive legal notion that has been used to legitimize the power of courts in cases that usually arose as a result of the conflict of norms stemming from various legal orders. Whenever judges use constitutional identity rhetoric to justify their decisions, they assume to know the contents of constitutional identity. Ultimately, they do not play the role of the “guardians of the Constitution”, but the “guardians of identity”, and aim to gain, maintain or extend their powers, in particular their authority of the “last word” in the judicial dialogue. The article argues that each constitutional order requires identification of the constitutional subject for its legitimization. It claims, however, that identity of a constitutional subject may develop simultaneously in three dimensions as an individual, relational and collective selves, which remain in constant interaction. While the individual self denotes a particularistic self-perception, the relational and collective selves indicate that identity can mean not only difference, but also sameness or close proximity