The Current Status and Prospects of the 'Strategic Partnership' between the EU and China: Towards the Conclusion of a Partnership and Cooperation Agreement

Abstract: This article aims to evaluate legal aspects of the content and implementation of the ‘strategic partnership’ between the EU and the People's Republic of China. In the absence of a category of ‘emerging countries’ in international economic law, the Union must adapt its foreign policy with regard to this major economic and commercial power. Relations between the European Community and China are currently governed by a second‐generation agreement from 1985. However, a new dynamic has been set in motion since 2003, by the drawing up of preparatory documents by both parties and joint declarations at annual summits bearing on the ‘strategic partnership’. Seen in a long‐term perspective, this partnership helps provide a measure of predictability in relations between the two partners, through combining elements of ‘soft law’ and ‘hard law’. If the insertion of political dialogue into the strategic partnership seems to alter the coherence of the Union, notably with regard to the difficulties of implementing the dialogue on human rights, the added value of the partnership lies essentially in its economic and commercial aspects, through not only the putting into place of non‐binding ‘economic dialogues’ which cover a large spectrum of the relationship, but also by the multiplication of sector‐based accords in numerous areas (maritime transport, customs cooperation, etc.). This constant development has thus allowed parties, at the last annual summit, to envisage the conclusion of a new framework agreement: this is the origin of the mandate given to the Commission in December 2005 to conclude a partnership and cooperation agreement. This article will sketch out a forecast of the legal framework, measured against the yardsticks of Asiatic regional reconfigurations and the law of the World Trade Organisation (WTO). The commercial risks of the relationship could imply the integration of the domains known as ‘WTO plus’ into the future agreement, notably in the field of investments and intellectual property rights, which would introduce a greater variety into the agreement. That being the case, the negotiations risk being equally fragile at the political level, in particular concerning the insertion of a clause of democratic conditionality in the future agreement. Also, any clash between the values and the interests of the EU would be uncomfortably highlighted during negotiations.     

后“SchremsⅡ案”时期欧盟数据跨境流动法律监管的演进及我国的因应

“SchremsⅡ案”对以隐私权和数据保护为核心构建的欧盟数据跨境流动规则体系产生重大影响,它要求无论使用何种数据跨境流动工具,都必须确保第三国能够提供与欧盟同等的保护水平。在该案的影响下,《欧盟基本权利宪章》在数据保护领域的地位进一步提高,保障措施的适用愈发严苛,欧洲数据保护委员会在数据保护领域将扮演更重要的角色,数据跨境流动欧盟法规则与国际贸易法的不兼容问题日益凸显。欧盟虽然结合SchremsⅡ案的判决完善了对数据跨境的法律监管,但依然没有减少外界对其监管合理性的质疑。我国对数据跨境流动的监管存在着配套立法不健全、规则可操作性差、多元价值失衡、缺乏内外联动的“中国方案”等问题。对此,应完善我国相关立法,加强中欧国际合作,共同引领构建数据跨境流动的国际规则。     

New Regulatory Approaches in 'Greening' EU Policies

European environmental policy has been long characterised by traditional regulatory policy approaches. In recent years, however, the EU has begun experimenting with new forms of governance. In particular, the task of environmental policy integration (EPI) into sectoral policies has invited more flexible and participatory regulatory forms, emphasising at the same time the role of procedural guidance. This article traces the history of the EPI principle and links its effectiveness to specific governance characteristics. It argues that effective EPI is dependent on a combination of political leadership and public participation. While both terms appear in the EU's vocabulary on sustainable development and new governance, the EU is only slowly finding the appropriate forms to put them into practice. Coming from a tradition of governance by political élites, EU policy-makers are still relying too naïvely on the mobilisation capabilities of societal groups and on the power of 'good ideas'.     

China and the EU: Where next in bilateral trade and investment relations?

Trade and investment relations between China and the European Union (EU) have reached a momentous significance. China is the EU’s No. 1 supplier of goods and its second-largest export market. In turn, the EU is China’s largest trading partner. Not only goods but also services trade has large potential to grow, even as China undergoes a structural transition and the EU’s single market faces headwinds from a surge in state-centric political forces within Europe. Transport and trade-related services are bound to expand significantly as China’s integration into the world economy continues. Moreover, Chinese tourists have been flocking to Europe in ever greater numbers, giving a boost to related business. Foreign direct investment (FDI) is becoming the next engine of the China–EU partnership. While the EU is a long-standing investor in China, Chinese direct investment accounts for <1 % of the EU’s total inbound FDI stock. Investment relations have seen tremendous dynamism in line with Chinese companies’ outward expansion and Chinese M&A deals vis-à-vis the EU have grown rapidly in magnitude, scope and sophistication. Finally, plenty of headroom exists for greater adoption of the use of the Chinese Renminbi (RMB) in Europe, supporting financing of both investment and trade. The Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) currently in negotiation between China and the EU as well as growing rather than declining interdependence of trade and investment highlight the future potential for a comprehensive free trade agreement between the EU and China.

     

Gender Equality, Citizenship, and the EU's Constitutional Future

Abstract:  While gender equality has been a matter of some concern for EU law and policy makers over the past half century, this concern has tended, at least historically, to focus upon equal treatment in employment and has not yet materialised into the delivery of a broader package of civil, political, and social rights for women. Taking the concept of EU citizenship as a framework within which to view the promotion of gender equality, this article assesses the debate on the constitutional future of the EU. This is with a view to examining the possible amelioration of women's social position through the exploitation of opportunities that the constitutionalisation of EU law presents. Looking at women's citizenship through the lens of political rights to participate in the debate on the EU's future, together with examining substantive aspects of the Constitutional Treaty for their gender equality content, the article suggests that a more comprehensive endeavour by all institutional actors to engage in gender mainstreaming is needed in order to give effect to a broader form of equality between women and men.     

A Preliminary Perspective of Negotiations of EU–China PCA: A New Bottle Carrying Old Wine or New Wine or Both?

The EU–China Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA) is a relatively new type of agreement between the EU and a third country, and its negotiation and conclusion will bring about a new landscape for the comprehensive strategic partnership between the two sides. However, owing to the broadness, importance and complexity of EU–China relations, and the unique multiple-level governance within the EU itself, the negotiation and conclusion of the new PCA deems to be a hard and time-consuming process. In light of the EU internal aspects, the new PCA seems to be related to several treaty-making competences and procedures, thus probably with the form of a mixed agreement as the final outcome. In terms of substantive issues, market access, transparency, intellectual property rights, China's full market economy status, abandonment of embargo on arms sales and high-tech trade, democracy, human rights, rule of law, good governance and dispute settlement clauses, etc are all inevitably the tough and core issues. Nevertheless, it is believed that both sides will strive to lay down a systematic, stable and sustainable treaty law basis for a comprehensive EU–China strategic partnership in the spirit of seeking commonality, mutual respect and trust, and equal consultation.     

Juridification, medicalisation, and the impact of eu law: patient mobility and the allocation of scarce NHS resources

This article explores the relationship between EU Law and the allocation of scarce NHS resources in the context of the EU's objective of facilitating access to health care for patients within the EU. Focusing on the Watts case and the recently adopted EU Patients' Rights Directive, the article addresses the political and economic aspects of the implications of EU Law for, inter alia, domestic law, medicine, and the NHS. It does so through developing an analytical framework comprising the notions of juridification and medicalisation. Those notions, which are drawn here from the work of Jürgen Habermas, Ivan Illich, and Sheila McLean, are not only helpful as means of thinking through the nature of the specific EU laws considered in the article; by virtue of their broader focus on, and critique of, the welfare state, they offer an opportunity to reflect more generally on the implications of these laws for the role of the welfare state and medical and legal professionals in the development of the EU's internal market in health care services. Having undertaken this analysis, the article argues that, in order to capture the developments and implications of EU Law on patient mobility, it is necessary to update and partially reformulate the notions of medicalisation and juridification.     

The European Union and Human Rights: Towards A Post-National Human Rights Institution?

There is growing evidence that the European Union (EU) is becomingmore involved in human rights protection and has the capacityto turn into an unprecedented post-national human rights protectioninstitution. Based on that evidence, this article suggests differentarguments in favour of a further development in this direction.These arguments stem not only from a general global justiceapproach to post-national institutions’ responsibilities,but also from the concept of human rights itself and the specificneeds of human rights protection at the post-national level.The EU's institutional framework presents advantages that fitthe general criteria of institutional design in the human rightscontext. Of course, many doubts and critiques may be raisedagainst an entity which started primarily as a functional andeconomic institution, and important reforms, some of which areventured in the present article, are still needed to get theEU closer to this institutional ideal. More generally, the articleemphasises the unique example and precedent the EU may constitutefor normative institutional thinking about global justice atthe post-national level.     

Mental health law and the EU: the next new regulatory frontier?

Over the last decade the EU's engagement with health law and policy has rapidly increased and there is now a growing body of literature highlighting this evolution and the impact of legal and regulatory structures in this area. In contrast the specific impact of EU law and policy in relation to the area of mental health remains the subject of comparatively little engagement. The aim of this paper is to examine whether mental health law and policy will become a major site for EU policy and law in the future. It examines the development of EU policy in this area. It sets this in the context of related legal developments such as the Charter of Fundamental Rights and the new EU Patients Rights Directives. It suggests that while it might be at present premature to envisage that a single body of EU mental health law itself may be unlikely that nonetheless the EU presents what is a potentially very influential site for regulation, law and policy in this area in the years to come.     

Risk Regulation and Deliberation in EU Administrative Governance—GMO Regulation and Its Reform

The article analyses the problems of EU risk regulation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) through the lens of deliberative theories of EU law and governance, such as deliberative supranationalism and experimentalist governance. Previous research had suggested that the GMO issue is not conductive to deliberation within EU institutions because of its high politicisation. This article argues that another equally salient factor is the scientification of the GMO authorisation process. Scientification stands for the Commission's overreliance on epistemic legitimacy as the basis for risk management. Given the deadlock of comitology in this field, scientification is exacerbated by a reversion to top‐down regulation by the Commission. As a result, political responsibility for GMO authorisations gets lost. This article argues that both scientification and politicisation are mutually accelerative processes ultimately leading to a break down of dialogue at the EU level. This contradicts the assumption that deliberation is fostered by technocratic ‘behind closed door’ decision‐making. In the GMO case, the top‐down imposition of epistemic authority has only increased politicisation contributing to the de‐legitimation of all EU institutions involved in GMO regulation. The recent EU reform on national opt‐outs is not sufficient to address this problem. A successful reform should mitigate the negative effects of both politicisation and scientification.     

Strategic communication of EU affairs: an analysis of legislative behaviour on Twitter

An influential literature underlines how much parliamentary communication of European Union (EU) affairs could offer to democracy in the EU. Yet members of parliaments (MPs) seem unmoved by their potential. MPs are strategic about their communication, and this study questions the suitability of EU affairs to their re-election strategies. Analysing the messages posted on Twitter by regional and national MPs from Ireland and the United Kingdom over a four-month period, this article shows that clear electoral safety and strong political responsibility increase the communication of EU affairs. This suggests that the low electoral benefits and the high political complexity of EU affairs are significant deterrents to parliamentary communication of these affairs. As a result, the voices of Eurosceptic MPs echo disproportionately louder on Twitter.     

Human Rigghts: A Culture of Controversy

Many arguments in favour of constitutionally entrenched Bills of Rights are undermined by the inherently controversial nature of human rights with respect to their content, their form, and their valence. Even in the case of civil and political rights, the concretization of rights at the level of specificity required to decide particular cases must always be politically and morally controversial. There is no accepted moral or legal method that can be utilized to give the requisite objectivity to the value choices inherent in human rights jurisprudence. Positivization of human rights increases their utility but compromises their moral status. It follows that legitimate articulation of human rights requires ongoing democratic dialogue and decision-making. Although perceived as a stop-gap measure, the Human Rights Act 1998 could facilitate an enduring partnership between courts and parliaments, placing human rights more firmly on the political agenda and establishing a proper balance between the inputs of courts and parliaments which recognizes that the development of positivized human rights must be primarily located in electorally-based politics.     

EU Relations with European Micro‐States. Happily Ever After?

Abstract:  The last decade has seen the EU striving to bring uniformity into its relations with its immediate neighbours. Such endeavor has led the EU to adopt the European Neighbourhood Policy towards countries with no immediate prospects of accession and to follow more or less similar pre-accession strategies towards candidate and to-be candidate countries. However, European micro-states (Andorra, Liechtenstein, San Marino and Monaco—the Vatican not being the subject of this article) have always occupied an exceptional position in the EU's web of external relations. This article provides a brief but concise overview of the international legal framework governing the bilateral relations of the EU with these small countries. Through the examination of their peculiar historical, social, geographic and economic attributes, it is argued that the advantages that micro-states have been able to reap so far from the unique position they enjoy in the EU and the global economy may not be easily reconcilable in the future with the EU's ever-increasing appetite to unify, standardise and harmonise.     

How Can the European Union Contribute to a COP-6 Agreement? An Overview for Policy Makers

During the 6th Conference of Parties (COP-6) in The Hague, the Netherlands, November 2000, crucial progress on a number of outstanding issues related to the Kyoto Protocol will have to be made to open the way for its early ratification, if not to save it from complete failure. Given the present lack of internal US political support for the Kyoto Protocol, the EU may play a pivotal role in making the Kyoto Protocol agreement a reality even without initial ratification of the US, if its able to provide sufficient leadership. In this overview article we discuss the main issues under negotiation, the problems of finding agreement and opportunities for the EU to catalyse a compromise agreement at COP-6, building on key scientific papers as included in this issue and discussions at the European Forum on Integrated Environmental Assessment Climate Policy Workshop in Amsterdam. Key elements are the inclusion of sinks, the use of the Kyoto Protocol mechanisms as a supplement to domestic action and the international compliance system. Domestic implementation of climate policy is a major factor for the EU's credibility.     

The Role of Flexibility Mechanisms in EU Climate Strategy: Lessons Learned and Future Challenges?

The main objective of this paper is to examine the evolution of European Union (EU) climate strategy, scrutinising in particular developments in EU's views on the so-called flexibility or Kyoto mechanisms. In brief, the paper argues that there has been a gradual change in EU's views, from the role of a sceptic in the run-up to Kyoto towards becoming more of a frontrunner on emissions trading in recent years. The need to 'save Kyoto' and the protracted development of EU climate policy are highlighted as two of the most important drivers behind this process of change. This paper also discusses some of the lessons learned from international negotiations and the development of EU climate policy. Finally, and drawing upon the lessons learned, the paper explores key future challenges for the further development of EU climate strategy.     

The WTO Legality of the EU's GSP+ Arrangement

In EC—Tariff Preferences, the Appellate Body held thatthe WTO Enabling Clause permitted developed countries to grantbetter tariff treatment to some developing countries than toothers, subject to certain conditions. It held further thatthese conditions were not met by the EU's so-called ‘drugsarrangement’, a system of additional preferences (normallyduty free treatment) for certain countries which the EU haddetermined were in need of special tariff preferences, thanksto their involvement in combating the production and traffickingof narcotics. In response to this ruling, when the EU renewedits GSP programme in 2005, it replaced its drugs arrangementand two similar, though less generous, labour and environmentarrangements with a new arrangement popularly known as the ‘GSP+arrangement’. Under this arrangement, additional tariffpreferences (normally duty free treatment), were made availableto developing countries committing to ratify and implement alist of human rights and good governance conventions. Accordingto the EU, the GSP+ arrangement complies with the AppellateBody's interpretation of the Enabling Clause. This article arguesthat it does not. This is primarily because of the substantivecriteria chosen by the EU to select GSP+ beneficiaries, whichdo not meet the Appellate Body's criteria for differential tarifftreatment of developing countries. Second, it is because theEU's requirement that would-be beneficiaries must have appliedby a certain date, replicates the problem of the ‘closedlist’ of beneficiaries that was fatal to the earlier incarnationof the EU's GSP program. The article concludes with some suggestionsfor designing a GSP+ arrangement more likely to meet the AppellateBody's conditions than the EU's present arrangement.     

The environment as a strategic priority in the European Union–Brazil partnership: is the EU behaving as a normative power or soft imperialist?

In 2007, Brazil entered the European Union’s (EU) list of strategic partners; a token of recognition of the place Brazil occupies in current global affairs. Although promoting bilateral environmental convergence is a stated priority, cooperation between the EU and Brazil in this policy field is largely under-researched, raising interesting questions as to whether the current state of play could support EU claims for the normative orientation of its external environmental policy. Through an analysis of partnership activities in the fields of deforestation and biofuels, we suggest that while normative intentions may be regarded as a motivating force, critically viewing EU foreign environmental policy through a ‘soft imperialism’ lens could offer a more holistic understanding of the current state of bilateral cooperation. While the normative power thesis can be substantiated with regard to deforestation, we argue that by erecting barriers to shield its domestic biofuels production, the EU is placing trade competitiveness and economic growth above its normative aspirations. Subsequently, the partial adoption of sustainable development as an EU norm leads to policy incoherence and contradictory actions.     

The Legality of the EU's Stand-Alone Approach to the Climate Impact of Aviation: The Express Role Given to the ICAO by the Kyoto Protocol

The aviation sector is not yet covered by the European Union's Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS). Taking into account the fact that aviation increasingly contributes to climate change, the European Commission adopted a proposal for legislation to include aviation in the EU ETS. The proposal foresees the inclusion of internal EU flights as well as external flights to and from the Union within the EU ETS. On 20 December 2007, EU Environment Ministers reached political agreement in the Environment Council on the basis of a new compromise text tabled by the Presidency. However, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), as well as various stakeholders, does not consider that the EU has the competence to include aviation within the EU ETS. A crucial point concerning the legality of including aviation in the EU ETS is the fact that Article 2(2) of the Kyoto Protocol states that the parties 'shall pursue limitation or reduction of emissions of greenhouse gases not controlled by the Montreal Protocol from aviation . . . working through the International Civil Aviation Organization . . .'. This article reviews the legality of the EU's stand-alone approach, focusing on the European and international legal framework and taking into account the express role given to the ICAO by the Kyoto Protocol.