Civil Society Organizations and Administrative Law

abstrac

Sustainability takes centre stage in public procurement

This article delineates how a shift in the priorities of EU laws can change public procurement’s current centre of gravity from its fixation on the lowest price to that of a more balanced consideration of different societal goals. There is an acknowledgement that public money can meaningfully contribute to support for social justice and the fight against climate change and environmental degradation. To this end, the present EU legal framework, together with more advanced experiences in Italy and in a few other EU Member States, are illustrated before an analysis of the many initiatives currently under consideration by the EU law makers as per the European Green Deal and the Sustainable Products Initiative. The article then highlights the need to reconsider the theory of public procurement law and practice as well as the current EU legislative framework for public procurement (and concessions).This article delineates how a shift in the priorities of EU laws can change public procurement’s current centre of gravity from its fixation on the lowest price to that of a more balanced consideration of different societal goals. There is an acknowledgement that public money can meaningfully contribute to support for social justice and the fight against climate change and environmental degradation. To this end, the present EU legal framework, together with more advanced experiences in Italy and in a few other EU Member States, are illustrated before an analysis of the many initiatives currently under consideration by the EU law makers as per the European Green Deal and the Sustainable Products Initiative. The article then highlights the need to reconsider the theory of public procurement law and practice as well as the current EU legislative framework for public procurement (and concessions)

Główne problemy skutecznych środków ochrony prawnej w zamówieniach publicznych

Public procurement has been regulated by (then) European Economic Community (EEC) secondary law since 1971. Substantive EU rules aim at enforcing non-discrimination in the internal market. To this end, they prescribe competitive and transparent award procedures contracting authorities or entities must follow to choose their partner. Remedies for breaches of substantive procurement rules have been the object of an early codification in (then) EEC law. The recitals in Directive 89/665/EEC clearly state the issue the directive itself is expected to address: existing arrangements at both national and Community levels for ensuring their application are not always adequate to ensure compliance with the relevant Community provisions particularly at a stage when infringements can be corrected. Many remedies, however, are only named without much details being provided on what is required at national level. Moreover, in the past few years, the Court of Justice seems to have become more restrained in adding details to the Remedies Directives, having instead more and more often recourse to the principle of procedural autonomy. This leaves much uncertainty on the standard of review required or appropriate under the Remedies Directives.Zamówienia publiczne stanowią przedmiot regulacji prawa wtórnego (ówczesnej) Europejskiej Wspólnoty Gospodarczej (EWG) od 1971 r. Przepisy unijnego prawa materialnego mają wdrażać zakaz dyskryminacji na rynku wewnętrznym. W tym celu zawierają konkurencyjne i przejrzyste procedury udzielania zamówień, jakich zamawiający muszą przestrzegać przy wybieraniu partnerów. Środki ochrony prawnej przeciw naruszeniom przepisów prawa materialnego były przedmiotem wczesnej kodyfikacji prawa (ówczesnej) EWG. Motywy dyrektywy 89/665/EWG wyraźnie przedstawiają kwestię, którą sama dyrektywa ma rozwiązywać: istniejące rozwiązania w zakresie stosowania tych środków – zarówno na poziomie krajowym, jak i na poziomie wspólnotowym – nie zawsze należycie zapewniały przestrzeganie istniejących przepisów wspólnotowych na etapie, na którym naruszenia można było skorygować. Wiele środków prawnych było jednak jedynie wymienionych, bez wskazania wymagań, jakie miałyby obowiązywać na poziomie krajowym. Ponadto wydaje się, że w kilku ostatnich latach Trybunał Sprawiedliwości stał się bardziej wstrzemięźliwy w uszczegóławianiu dyrektyw o środkach ochrony prawnej, coraz częściej odwołuje się do zasady autonomii proceduralnej. Pozostawia to wiele niepewności w zakresie standardu kontroli wymaganego lub właściwego w świetle dyrektyw o środkach ochrony prawnej

Due Diligence in EU Institutions' Own-Account Procurement:Rules and Practices

This study, commissioned by the European Parliament’s Committee on Budgetary Control (CONT), investigates whether EU institutions implement human rights and sustainability due diligence when they purchase goods and services. Based on documentary analysis and interviews, this study finds that sustainability due diligence is lacking in procurement carried out by the European Parliament, the European Commission and the EU agencies. Accordingly, it makes recommendations to promote better integration of due diligence into the procurement of goods and services by the EU institutions