EMU and the Shift in the European Labour Law Agenda: From ‘Social Policy’ to ‘Employment Policy’

This article examines the interaction between EMU and the European Union (EU) employment strategy and its implications for law. It focuses on the importance of EMU as a catalyst in the development of the EU's social and employment policy in the years following the Treaty on European Union in 1992, up to the inauguration of a new employment policy in the Treaty of Amsterdam. In analysing the EU's discourse on labour market regulation, it is arguable that a shift has occurred in the EU's position on the ‘labour market flexibility’ debate: that the EU institutions are more readily accepting of the orthodoxy that labour market regulation and labour market institutions are a major cause of unemployment within EU countries and that a deregulatory approach, which emphasises greater ‘flexibility’ in labour markets, is the key to solving Europe's unemployment ills, along with macroeconomic stability, restrictive fiscal policy and wage restraint. As the EU's employment strategy has matured, this increased emphasis on employment policy has come to displace discourses around social policy. This change in emphasis has important implications for EMU since it signals a re‐orientation from an approach to labour market regulation which had as its core a strong concept of employment protection and high labour standards, to an approach which prioritises employment creation, and minimises the role of social policy, since social policy is seen as potentially increasing the regulatory burden.     

EU–China Competition Dialogue: A New Step in the Internationalisation of EU Competition Law?

EU has been the protagonist in promoting the internationalization of competition laws based on EU competition law norms. The development of China's Antimonopoly Law shows that EU has succeeded so far in establishing itself as the main reference point for China's competition regulation. The success can be mainly attributed to the EU‐China Competition Dialogue (Dialogue), a new initiative set up by EU and China in 2004. The paper reviews the internationalization of EU competition law and its characteristics. It then examines the Dialogue and how EU exported its competition law norms to one of the latest AML secondary legislations on Antimonopoly Pricing. It argues that the Dialogue's informal nature, EU's routinized technical assistance to Chinese competition authorities and its China‐oriented strategy in communication have been highly important in ensuring that the EU Competition Law becomes the main reference point for the AML. However, the paper argues that it is for the same reasons that EU faces weakness in controlling the reception of EU competition law norms by China. Based on this, the paper further illustrates that EU's understanding of competition law internationalization as reflected under the Dialogue has not undergone fundamental changes.     

Constitutional Review in the Mega‐Leviathan: A Democratic Foundation for the European Court of Justice

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) serves, among other things, as a constitutional court for the EU. This means that it possesses the legal right to strike down both EU and national laws it deems irreconcilable with treaty provisions. In the present article, we shall draw on Hans Kelsen's theory of democracy to argue that the ECJ's competence to review and invalidate legislation is, in fact, indispensable for the democratic legitimacy of the EU's legal system as a whole.     

The Troika: The Interlocking Roles of Commission v. Luxembourg and Belgium,Van Gend en Loos and Costa v. ENEL in the Creation of the European Legal Order

Through comparisons with dispute resolution procedures in the North American Free Trade Area's Side Agreements, and with the debate over the direct effect of World Trade Organization obligations in the European legal order, this paper demonstrates that three of the European Court of Justice's most important decisions—Commission v. Luxembourg and Belgium, Van Gend en Loos and Costa v. ENEL—should be understood as combining to reorganise general international law's relationship between the EU Member States by substituting national court application of European obligations for the use of interstate retaliation as an enforcement mechanism, and thus providing the foundations for the EU's distinctive legal order.     

A Mediator on the World Stage?—How the EU's Commitment in Foreign Affairs is Portrayed by New Zealand and Australian Media

Abstract: ‘European identity’ is as much a contested concept as is the role of the European Union in foreign affairs. This article combines the two concepts and introduces a third variable, ‘the Other’, in order to address the following questions: How do non‐Europeans perceive the EU on the world stage? Is a tentative identity as a mediator in foreign affairs conveyed in the EU's conduct of foreign policy? Analysing 10 newspapers, 4 television bulletins, and 830 public surveys from Australia and New Zealand in the first half of 2004, this article argues that the EU's efforts to further democracy and peace are often marginalised in Australian and New Zealand perceptions. Nevertheless, subtle traces of perceptions of the EU as a potent global actor promoting human rights and environmental sustainability and challenging unilateral US policy courses were detected.     

Mixed Messages and Mixed Results: The EU's Promotion of Human Rights in Turkey

In spite of the fact that human rights appear, based on proclamations made by EU representatives, to be of critical importance in the EU's negotiations with Turkey, human rights reform has not been a primary target of pre‐accession aid to Turkey. Why is human rights reform not a central priority in the EU's allocation of aid in this case? First, Commission representatives and Members of the European Parliament disagree over the relative importance of the status of human rights in the pre‐accession reform process. Second, the format of the aid allocation process magnifies inconsistencies in the EU's approach to human rights reform.     

EU Accession to the ECHR: Between Autonomy and Adaptation

After the European Union's accession to the European Convention on Human Rights the EU will become subject to legally binding judicial decisions of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and participate in statutory bodies of the Council of Europe (Parliamentary Assembly; Committee of Ministers) when they act under the Convention. Convention rights and their interpretation by the ECtHR will be directly enforceable against the EU institutions and against Member States when acting within the scope of EU law. This will vest the ECHR with additional force in a number of Member States, including Germany and the UK. All Member States will further be subject to additional constraints when acting under the Convention system. The article considers the reasons for, and consequences of the EU's primus inter pares position under the Convention and within the Council of Europe, and the likely practical effect of the EU's accession for its Member States.     

The Perils of ‘As If’ European Constitutionalism

This review article offers thoughts on Kaarlo Tuori's recent book, European Constitutionalism, and more particularly on what he calls the ‘disciplinary contest over the legal characterisation of the EU and its law’. As the book's title suggests, Tuori privileges the constitutional perspective in that contest, so much so—he freely admits—that his analysis ‘predetermine[s] how the EU and its law will be portrayed’. And therein also lies the book's main weakness. Tuori's predetermined ‘constitutional’ interpretation, like so much of the dominant legal discourse in the EU today, ultimately obscures the core contradiction in EU public law. National institutions are increasingly constrained in the exercise of their own constitutional authority but supranational institutions are unable to fill the void because Europeans refuse to endow them with the sine qua non of genuine constitutionalism: the autonomous capacity to mobilise fiscal and human resources in a compulsory fashion. The EU's lack of constitutional power in this robust sense derives from the absence of the necessary socio‐political underpinnings for genuine constitutional legitimacy—what we can call the power‐legitimacy nexus in EU public law. To borrow Tuori's own evocative phrase, the EU possesses at best a ‘parasitic legitimacy’ derived from the more robust constitutionalism of the Member States as well as from the positive connotations that using ‘constitutional’ terminology evokes regardless of its ultimate aptness. The result is an ‘as if’ constitutionalism, the core feature of which is an increasingly untenable principal‐agent inversion between the EU and the Member States, one with profound consequences for the democratic life of Europeans. The sustainability of integration over the long term depends on confronting these adverse features of ‘European constitutionalism’ directly, something that legal elites—whether EU judges, lawyers, or legal scholars—ignore at their peril.     

EU Climate Change Litigation,the Role of the European Courts,and the Importance of Legal Culture

The purpose of this article is to show it is only in light of legal culture that climate change jurisprudence in the European Union can be explained. Examining the case law concerning the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, this article demonstrates that climate change proceedings in the European Union raise questions that stand at the heart of the EU legal order; that is, they demand that the boundaries of the EU's regulatory competences are drawn. In effect, the EU courts focus on ensuring that EU climate change laws are in accord with the rule of law or, in the context of EU law, the borders of the EU's environmental regulatory powers. As such, this article shows that attention needs to be given to the interaction between climate change laws and the constitutional role of the EU judiciary. These interactions are considered here together with the contingency of EU climate change litigation on EU legal culture.     

The Human Rights Clause in the European Union's External Trade and Development Agreements

Abstract: Since 1992, the European Union (EU) has included in all its agreements with third countries a clause defining respect for human rights and democracy as an ‘essential element’ of its external relationship. A Council decision of May 1995 spells out the basic modalities of this clause, with the aim of ensuring consistency in the text used and its application. The human rights clause is unique to the EU's bilateral agreements, and now applies to over 120 countries. It represents a new model for EU external relations as well as for international cooperation. The EU plays a leading role in the WTO and international economic relations. The human rights clause will have implications for the development of international rules concerning trade‐related human rights policy.     

The Proposed ‘Common European Sales Law’: Legal Framework and the Agreement of the Parties

The European Commission's Proposal for a Regulation on a Common European Sales Law (‘CESL’) seeks to create a European scheme of contract law available for parties to choose to govern cross‐border contracts for the sale of goods, supply of ‘digital content,’ and for the supply of related services. This article explains the background to the Proposal, sketches out the purposes and scope of the CESL, and considers and criticises its legal framework (and in particular its relationship with private international law) and the key requirement of the parties’ agreement. In the author's view, the CESL scheme remains an unconvincing basis for the achievement of its economic purposes and, as regards consumer contracts, puts too much reliance on the agreement of the consumer as a justification for the loss of their existing protection under EU private international law rules.     

The Unemployment–Output Tradeoff in Transition Economies: Does Okun's Law Apply?

This paper investigates whether an Okun-type relationship between output and unemployment is taking hold in formerly planned economies as they move towards the market. Using a first-differences variant of Okun's Law, we test for its presence in 25 transition countries divided into groups of ``reform leaders'' and ``reform laggards.'' For leaders, represented by the 10 European Union (EU) accession countries, Okun's Law is detected in both 1991–94 and 1995–2000 periods. For laggards, represented by the remaining group, it is present only for the later period and only when countries affected by wars are removed from the sample. A comparison of unemployment–output elasticities and unemployment levels in EU candidates and EU members themselves indicates that their labor markets might be converging.     

欧盟核安全立法的新发展及其对中国的启示

欧盟一直重视核安全立法,《建立欧洲原子能共同体条约》缔造了欧盟成员国和平利用核能的合作框架,它在一个集中的监控系统下保证了欧盟核能的供应安全。欧盟在2011年3月福岛第一核电站事故后,加快推进核安全方面法律和政策的制定进程,尤其在放射性废物和核废料安全、辐射防护基本安全方面都采取了最新的立法措施,确保欧盟核能在保证安全的基础上正常发展。我国应借鉴欧盟经验,坚持国际核安全标准,加强核废料和放射性废物安全管理立法,建立较为完善的核安全法律框架。     

The Proposed Framework for Environmental Strict Liability in Europe: The Polluter Pays…Possibly

On January 23, 2002, the European Union took a bold step toward developing a common approach to environmental liability, one that imposes a strict liability standard aimed at ensuring that the “polluter pays”. However, opinion is divided both on the merits of this standard and on the approach taken at the EU level. This article examines how the EU's proposal and the imposition of environmental strict liability may herald a new era for environmental experts, insurers, and lawyers across Europe.     

The EU and Issues of Human Rights Protection: Same Solutions to More Acute Problems?

Academic literature repeatedly calls for the EU's accession to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950 (hereinafter Convention 1 ). Similarly, the Lisbon Treaty provides that the EU must accede to the Convention. [Correction made here after initial online publication.] This might seem odd as the European Court of Justice (hereinafter ECJ 1 ) has over the years developed abundant case‐law on human rights protection in the EU, and the EU has not so long ago adopted a, albeit non‐binding, catalogue of human rights (the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU (hereinafter Charter)). But after all these years, cases, and Treaty amendments, the EU is in fact going back to the ECJ's 1996 landmark opinion which recommended the EU's formal accession to the Convention, 1 already proposed in 1979 by the Commission. 1 One reason for this might be that, in the meantime, human rights issues have multiplied in the application of EU law, especially in areas such as the Second and Third Pillars where—at least initially—fewer human rights protection guarantees were foreseen.     

Bringing European Democracy Back In—Or How to Read the German Constitutional Court's Lisbon Treaty Ruling

This article critically examines the democratic theory that informs the German Federal Constitutional Court's Lisbon Treaty ruling. This is needed because the ruling is ambiguous with regard to which type of democracy applies to which type of Union. In order to analyse the ruling we establish three models of what European democracy possibly can amount to: audit democracy based on the EU as a derivative of the Member States; a multinational federal state; or a regional cosmopolitan polity? The court's depiction of the EU does not fit as well as we would expect when labeled as a derivative entity due to the important legislative role of the European Parliament. The EU's legal supranationalism points in the direction of a federation, but the court's argumentation does not lend support to this notion. The court models democracy on a rather specific set of institutional presuppositions that are derived from the parliamentary model of democracy associated with the sovereign nation state. At the same time, the court operates with a conception of a changing state sovereignty that unfolds more in line with cosmopolitan rather than with classical Westphalian statist principles.     

Self‐Determination in the Constitutional Future of the EU

This article analyses three prominent proposals for the functional and political transformation of the EU from a constitutional perspective. It argues that existing EU reform proposals, to varying degrees, entrench rather than reverse the challenges to individual and political self‐determination brought about by the EU's response to its Euro crisis. As the article will conclude, challenging ‘authoritarian liberalism' in an EU context may require the development of a constitutional structure for the Union able to contest, rather than set in stone, the EU's existing economic and political goals.     

The Effectiveness of the EU's Ozone Policy

Has the EU's ozone policy been effective? In other words: What caused the 90 per cent phase-out of ozone depleting substances (ODS) within the EU? Was it due to an EU-wide regulatory approach, to national circumstances, or to the Montreal Protocol? As EU's environmental policy has not been overly successful so far, it would interesting to know why ozone policy is an area where the EU and its Member States have reached targets effectively over a relatively short time. We suggest that the effectiveness of EU's ozone policy is due to two factors that together secured this rapid phase-out. First, the ozone policy was enacted by means of an EU regulation – rather than by directives – which required all Member States and all larger ODS-generating corporations to implement a ban simultaneously. Second, with the US administration making a u-turn and the increased availability of ODS-substitute chemicals, Europe saw a political opportunity to speed up the phase-out process. A limited study of the phase-out of ODS in Spain supports this argument. While the EU's ozone policy has been effective, its success owes much to particular economic and political circumstances associated with the issue of ozone depletion.     

Open Arms Behind Barred Doors: Fear,Hypocrisy and Policy Schizophrenia in the European Migration Crisis

In 2015, over one million refugees and migrants arrived in Europe, laying bare the limitations of the EU's common border control and burden‐sharing systems. This article examines consequences of the EU's disjoint, schizophrenic and, at times, hypocritical responses to what has become known as the European migration crisis. It explains how unilateral, national‐level responses have made the EU as a whole particularly susceptible to a unique brand of coercive bargaining that relies on the threat (or actual generation) of mass population movements as a non‐military instrument of state‐level coercion. After outlining who employs this kind of foreign policy tool, to what ends, and under what circumstances, the article offers an illustration of this kind of coercion in action, by analyzing the March 2016 deal between the EU and Turkey. The article concludes with a discussion of broader consequences of the deal and implications both for the displaced and for the EU going forward.     

"Anti-Westernism" as a Strategy: Distinctive Behaviors of the Contemporary Russian Elite

The authors analyze the content of anti-Russian rhetoric in the European Union (EU) as it pertains to Russian economic strategy, domestic policy, and foreign policy. They explain its causes mainly in terms of divergent economic interests and the EU's internal needs for identity and consolidation.