Constitutional standards of democracy and accountability in differentiated integration

This set of five policy briefs draws the conclusions of five larger studies dealing with the legal feasibility and constitutional acceptability of the various mechanisms of differentiated integration (DI). Those conclusions also reflect on the future prospects for DI from the legal and constitutional perspectives. The policy briefs deal, in turn, (i) with the conditions set by the European treaties for the various mechanisms of differentiated integration, (ii) with the consequences of DI for democracy and the institutional balance in the EU, (iii) with the question whether, or to what extent, fundamental rights and the rule of law can be the object of DI, (iv) with the practical constraints imposed on DI by national constitutional laws; and (v) with the particular legal and institutional characteristics of DI in the relation with third countries

Citizens and EU Administration: Direct and Indirect Links

This briefing note focuses on the legal and non-legal avenues by which transparency and participation have been ensured in EU law and practice. Transparency and participation have produced the main recent changes in the way the EU administration relates to its citizens. We provide an overview of the current law and practice and their strengths and weaknesses post-Lisbon. In addition, reference is made to the European Ombudsman and the right to petition the European Parliament

EEAS 2.0: draft recommendations for the 2013 EEAS Review

This document offers recommendations for the amendment of Council Decision 2010/427/EU establishing the organisation and functioning of the European External Action Service (hereinafter ‘EEAS Decision’). These recommendations have been distilled from discussions between academics and practitioners during a two-day workshop held at the European University Institute in March 2013 in the framework of the so-called ‘EEAS 2.0’ project. This research project is a collaboration between independent scholars brought together by SIEPS, the EUI and CEPS. In February 2013, the team published a legal commentary on the EEAS Decision, available on the websites of the participating research centres. The current paper and its recommendations should be read in the light thereof. In formulating the recommendations, attention has been paid to policy papers, non-papers and recommendations that have been initiated by EU institutions, member states, think tanks and academia, notably in the context of the on-going review. As such, we hope to be able to inform, in a precise and legal way, the discussions in preparation of the High Representative’s own report. The current paper is work in progress and will be revisited for publication after the summer, taking into account the High Representative’s report of July and feedback from other stakeholders The current paper sheds light on possible adjustments in the operation of the Decision/Service ‘à droit constant’, but also includes proposals that could be considered in the context of an amendment of the EEAS Decision. With regard to the latter, several levels of revision may be envisaged: (i) a mere toilettage (e.g. deleting out-dated provisions and securing terminological consistency), (ii) technical changes in the text without reopening the political discussion that predated the adoption of the Decision and (iii) a more ambitious revision that could require more extensive legal modifications of collateral secondary measures (e.g. Staff and/or Financial regulations), if not of the founding treaties

Constitutionalising the Security Union: Effectiveness, Rule of Law and Rights on Countering Terrorism and Crime. CEPS Paperback, 21 November 2017

This collective volume offers a multidisciplinary examination of the critical issues and challenges associated with the EU’s initiative to build a Security Union, particularly in relation to common policies adopted at the member state level aimed at countering terrorism and crime. It delves into the EU’s efforts to support cross-border investigations, the exchange of information and international cooperation, taking stock of the effects on freedom and privacy. The various authors offer key research findings, which contributed to the European Commission’s 2017 Comprehensive Assessment of EU Security Policy. They identify and explore the main constitutional dilemmas facing the Security Union concerning EU standards enshrined in the Lisbon Treaty and the commitments undertaken in the context of the EU Better Regulation agenda. Hence, this timely examination of EU security policies sheds light on their effectiveness, proportionality, fundamental rights and societal implications

Openness, transparency and the right of access to documents in the EU : in-depth analysis

Upon request of the PETI Committee, the Policy Department on Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs commissioned the present analysis, which examines the situation in relation to openness, transparency, access to documents and information in the EU. Case law and developments in the jurisprudence of the CJEU are examined, notably for legislative documents, documents relating to administrative proceedings, to Court proceedings, infringement proceedings and EU Pilot cases, protection of privacy and international relations. Current and future challenges, as well as conclusions and policy recommendations are set out, in order to ensure compliance with the Treaties’ and Charter of Fundamental Rights’ requirements aimed at enhancing citizens’ participation in the EU decision-making process, and consequently stronger accountability and democracy in the EU

Interstitial data secrecy in Europe's security assemblage

This chapter highlights a growing phenomenon rarely discussed in the literature – the accelerated spreading of a security ‘of the interstice’. This phenomenon includes security practices that do not operate top-down through supranational power structures or executive decisions but work to govern the gaps and fissures of European space. An important part of the challenge relates to the inter-operability of ever more European-level databases that are set up for different purposes with access being granted to an ever increasing range of (street-level) actors and bodies. The secrecy is interstitial and thus largely unassailable for outsiders. Security practices are taking shape not only as part of the future but also of an intensified present. They are crafted and inter-linked largely below the radar of law and, as actual and projected operational activity, often quite invisibly. This kind of information sharing and processing may be systemically beyond the law or political or administrative accountability in a manner that is arguably new and, if true, highly problematic in its generality. Moreover, it is extremely challenging to understand and tailor rules and practices of transparency or information control more generally to this novel context. This chapter aims to raise the issue and explain the complexity both in normative terms and in terms of institutional architecture