Saving Europe 'Under Strict Conditionality': A Threat for EU Social Dimension?

Francesco Costamagna 

Università degli Studi Torino
February 12, 2013

LPF Working Paper, no. 7, 2012 
Abstract:      
This paper looks at the compatibility of EU anti-crisis measures with some key elements of the EU legal system. In particular, it focuses on the financial assistance programmes devised to rescue some EU Member States that, due to their unsustainably high public debts, came under severe pressure from the financial markets. In all these cases, recipient States have been invariably required to adopt draconian austerity measures in order to have access to the financial help. This paper argues that some of the conditions attached to the assistance packages raise doubts as to their compatibility with a number of basic social principles and objectives that represent the foundations of the EU social dimension. This is the case with regard to the social objectives enshrined in the Treaties, the allocation of competences between the EU and Member States in the social field and, lastly, some of the social rights contained in the Charter of Fundamental Rights.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 25

Keywords: sovereign crisis, conditionality, EU social dimension, social rights

Full text available at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2230329

The EU's Stricter Economic Governance: A Step Towards More Binding Coordination of Social Policies?

Sonja Bekker 

Tilburg Law School
March 6, 2013

ReflecT Discussion Paper No. 13/001 
Abstract:      
This paper sets out to explore the changes in the EU’s coordination of employment and social policies after the introduction of stricter economic governance. It hypothesises that new economic governance has introduced characteristics of hard law into the soft law coordination cycles of employment and social policies. The paper analysis such steps towards hard law by exploring two routes. The first route is the introduction of new instruments in the coordination cycles of Europe 2020 and the Stability and Growth Pact and the implementation of two new coordination cycles, being the Euro Plus Pact and the Macro-economic Imbalances Surveillance. The second route stems from the integration of policy fields which leads to ambiguity concerning what policy items fall within the scope of which coordination method. The paper therefore analyses the coordination elements that have been introduced as of 2010 and assesses their place on the continuum of hard and soft law coordination. Then, the paper explains the ambiguities that arise concerning the appropriateness of coordination instruments and how this ambiguity may bring employment and social policy elements within the range of hard law surveillance. Subsequently, the paper analyses the actual interaction between the EU and four member states by comparing national reports of 2009 and 2011 as well as the EU’s assessment of national policies. The paper concludes that whereas stricter economic coordination has increased the precision of soft governance as well as introduced more obligation and delegation into hybrid coordination methods, countries still have ample leeway to respond to EU level targets. In addition, ambiguity still exists concerning which coordination method applies to what policy items, leaving employment and social policies as potential subjects for hard law assessment via economic and financial coordination processes.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 17

Keywords: EU Economic Governance, Europe 2020, European Semester, European Employment Policy

Full text available at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2229161

Messianism, Mission or Realpolitik? Some Concluding Observations on the Union's Role in Shaping the International Legal Order

Fabian Amtenbrink 

Erasmus University Rotterdam - Erasmus School of Law; European Center for Financial Integration Studies (ECFIS)

Dimitry Kochenov 

University of Groningen - Faculty of Law
March 5, 2013

Forthcoming, in D. Kochenov and F. Amtenbrink (eds.), 'European Union's Shaping of the International Legal Order' (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013) 
Abstract:      
These are the conclusions to an edited volume compiled to test the feasibility of an active paradigm of the study of EU's engagements with the international legal order. The work aims at analysing how the EU shapes its environment and creates rules and practices for the world, reshaping – or at least attempting to reshape – international law. The book does more than simply visiting a range of essential fields of EU’s engagement. It offers an ethical perspective on the Union’s actions, shedding light on some underlying motivations, which are at times more complex than what the official documents would suggest. This collection advocates what we refer to as an ‘active paradigm’ of the study of the EU in the international legal context, approaching the Union as an active co-creator of the international legal order.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 14

Keywords: EU, external relations, law, international relations, international law, values, export of aquis, raison d'etre, legitimacy

Full text available at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2229731

Still the Committee of ‘Legislative Regions’? On Heterogeneity, Representation and Functionality of the Committee of the Regions after 2004

Thomas Alexander Vandamme 

University of Amsterdam
March 7, 2013

Amsterdam Centre for European Law and Governance Working Paper Series 2013 - 03 
Abstract:      
This article attempts to draw the picture of the Committee of the Regions after Treaty of Lisbon and the 2004 and 2007 enlargements of the European Union. The Committee of the Regions has received several new legal tools to influence EU decision taking, such as an increase in mandatory consultation rights and for the first time locus standi before the ECJ. Yet, the main reason to revisit the Committee was to assess the impact of the recent enlargements on its composition.

The composition of the Committee has been a thorny issue from the outset. According to some authors it has always been the main handicap of this advisory body of the EU. To what extent have the 2004 and 2007 enlargements upset the delicate balance between the local and regional players in the Committees (if such a balance was there to begin with)? In this study that question was tackled by using the 'legislative regions' of the Union as a ‘prism for research’. This research approach was based on the fact that the legislative regions were the main driving force behind the Committee’s establishment and on the premiss that their continued interest and support are vital for the 'institutional survival' of the Committee.

In a series of interviews with members of the Committee representing ‘legislative regions’ (Belgian and Spanish entities) as well as with members representing local authorities (Dutch provinces and municipalities) the question on the (continued) importance of the Committee as a channel for influencing EU decision taking for the Union’s legislative regions was discussed.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 34

Keywords: European union, committee of the regions, legislative regions, federalism, territorial subdivision, enlargement, heterogeneity, descriptive representation, subsidiarity, proportionality, administrative capacity

Full text available at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2229734

Sovereigntism's Twilight

Peter J. Spiro 

Temple University - James E. Beasley School of Law
2013

Berkeley Journal of International Law (BJIL), Vol. 29, 2013 
Abstract:      
Sovereigntism is having a good run in the academy and the courts. Scholars skeptical of international law succeeded in prompting a searching reexamination of the Restatement (Third) of Foreign Relations Law and the conventional wisdom it had come to represent. Sovereigntist positions have found a receptive audience in recent decisions of the Roberts Court, with additional victories just over the horizon.

But sovereigntism is bound to fail. Massive material changes in the nature of global interaction will overwhelm sovereigntist defenses, which (notwithstanding their constitutional pedigree and apparent gravity) are in the end incapable of stemming the tide. International law is insinuating itself into U.S. law through multiple channels. In the end, globalization is not a quantity to be rejected, accommodated, or accepted as a policy option. The Constitution will not be able to plug the gaps.

This essay considers four clusters of cases that appear to evidence sovereigntism’s continued ascendancy, relating to self-execution, the Alien Tort Statute, the detention of terror suspects, and the use of international law in constitutional interpretation. Although these clusters appear to vindicate sovereigntist perspectives, short-term victories are likely to be reversed by material forces of globalization. The Constitution will inevitably and radically adapt to the changed international context.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 21

Keywords: foreign relations law, globalization, international law

Full text available at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2225923

THE LUISS SCHOOL OF GOVERNMENT WORKING PAPER SEMINAR SERIES

The LUISS School of Government aims to produce cutting-edge work in a wide range of fields and disciplines through publications, seminars, workshops, conferences that enhance intellectual discourse and debate. Research is carried out using comparative approaches to explore different areas, many of them with a specifically European perspective. The aim of this research activities is to find solutions to complex, real-world problems using an interdisciplinary approach. LUISS School of Government encourages its academic and student community to reach their full potential in research and professional development, enhancing career development with clear performance standards and high-quality. Through this strong focus on high research quality, LUISS School of Government aims to understanding and influencing the external research and policy agenda.

This working paper series is one of the main avenues for the communication of these research findings and opens with these contributions.

Here you can find the papers: http://sog.luiss.it/2013/02/06/workingpapers/

Kölling and Serrano Leal on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2014-20

Abstract
The Multiannual Financial Framework is an extremely important tool for the EU’s long-term budgetary planning and stability. It determines the way in which the EU budget will be spent, to what political priorities it will be devoted and how it will be financed. The negotiations on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2014-20 (MFF 2014-20), which had reached a deadlock since the first attempt to reach an agreement in November 2012, were again placed on the agenda of the extraordinary European Council of 7-8 February 2013. After 26 hours of negotiations, the heads of state and government of the EU member states reached a political agreement on the maximum figures for EU-28 expenditure for 2014-20.[1] The EU Council’s President, Herman Van Rompuy, announced via Twitter: ‘Deal done! EU has agreed on MFF for the rest of the decade. Worth waiting for’. However, shortly afterwards he admitted that the MFF 2014-20 is ‘perhaps nobody’s perfect budget but there’s a lot in it for everybody’.

Full text available at: http://www.realinstitutoelcano.org/wps/portal/rielcano_eng/Content?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/elcano/Elcano_in/Zonas_in/ARI7-2013-Kolling-Serrano-MFF-MFP-Spain