Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
"Breakdown of the rule of law" presupposes uniformity of laws, their interpretation by legislators, and application to similarly situated disputes in all courts of the member-states.

That is not the case among member-states. That has not been the case among member-states. Nationalism celebrates deviance. Execution of ECU Council directives is elastic, member-states' legislatures interpret ECU directives to enact statute, and EU "law enforcement" (EC) of civil rights and commerce is irregular.

The ECJ --political forum of "last resort"-- exists by member agreement to end factual disputes between deviants: between persons (including corporations), persons and states, states and states, and international governments. Mistrust and "mutual recognition" of incongruent statutes and enforcement practices provokes members to defer to ECJ judgment.

Germany's highest court, the Federal Court of Justice (BGH), found on Thursday the interpretation of European law, over which the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in Luxembourg has sole legal authority, was central to the case.
It would be another argument altogether were the author's proposition, Uniformity of laws among EU member-states is a political goal of EU government. At the very least, readers would be required to acknowledge the intellectually, uncomfortable opposition of supranational "norms" to customary national "norms" --particularly with respect to the legitimacy of Polish and Hungarian gov actions within their respective constituencies and whether or not those "norms" actually impair ECU interstate business. That is, after all, the customary mandate of EU government authority, regulating trade practices.

Sovereignty is not the issue contested by political factions is Poland or Hungary. EU gov has not moved to  regulate trade practice, but presumably to punish with its meager police powers eg. fines (1) international civil rights violations by states' bureaucracies and (2) re-assert supremacy of ECJ "norm" setting.

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.

by Cat on Fri Sep 14th, 2018 at 10:44:22 PM EST
The issue before the Irish High Court is a relatively simple one: Will Artur Celmer receive a fair trial if extradited to Poland? The issue would be a lot more emotive still if Artur Celmer were an Irish National: Irish Courts and law enforcement agencies would have to be satisfied that an Irish Citizen would enjoy the same rights and protections if tried in Poland. That is the basis of trust on which much of the EU is built. Why would you subject your citizens to a judicial regime you suspect is tainted by fascist or nationalist political considerations?

Polish authorities have a duty of care to ensure other EU member states can execute European Arrest Warrants without fear of those extradited being subjected to a tainted judicial process. That duty of care is reciprocally shared by all member states. This has nothing to do with trade and everything to do with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and other relevant Treaties. The ECJ is not a "political forum of "last resort"", but an agreed judicial forum to enforce those rights.

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Sat Sep 15th, 2018 at 09:37:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Thank you for restating what I wrote, although the particularities of the case before any Irish court are irrelevant to the thesis.
Uniformity of laws among EU member-states is a political goal of EU government.
So, yes, the ECJ, understood to be the sole, final interpreter of ECU Council directives --addressed to member legislatures to enact conforming civil or criminal code-- and arbiter of disputed legal codes is a "political forum of last resort."

Thank you for not asking, What is the first political forum? I have asked the question, and it is not some generalized expectation or expression of "trust" that the conduct of persons will | should | could be uniform and predictable; or that the conduct of all persons has been or is known to be perforce socially acceptable and harmless to others.

To the contrary: The knowledge, primordial and current, that personal conduct is not uniform, predictable, and necessarily harmless to others provokes people to erect institutions of law said to codify socially acceptable and socially unacceptable conduct as well as law enforcement among people to compel their obedience to such rules and combinations thereof (algorithms) for purported "civilized" behavior.

These institutions together are called government.

And howsoever government is formed by people, the people's discourse and agreement to its terms, rewards, and punishments is the first political forum.

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.

by Cat on Sat Sep 15th, 2018 at 03:16:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series