11 April 2017, 11.00-16.30, "Constitutional Homogeneity and Rule of Law in the European Union: An Interdisciplinary Dialogue"

STALS (Sant’Anna Legal Studies) seminars

www.stals.sssup.it

Within the Jean Monnet Modules

“Eur. Publ. ius- European Public Law-ius” and “The EU’s Responses to the

Challenges of its Neighborhood”

Constitutional Homogeneity and Rule of Law in the European Union: An Interdisciplinary Dialogue

11 April 2017, 11.00-16.30

Scuola Sant'Anna, Pisa

Aula magna storica

Full programme here 

Comparing Judicial Activism – Can We Say that the US Supreme Court is More Activist than the German Constitutional Court?

Nuno M. Garoupa 

Texas A&M University School of Law; Catholic University of Portugal (UCP) - Católica Global School of Law

December 19, 2016

Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia (RPF), Special Issue on Democracy in Question, vol. 72 (4), 2016 

Abstract:    
Although widely used, “judicial activism” is a diffused and, to some extent, an empty concept. However, if it is to be useful in comparative law and politics, a transparent and consistent definition of “judicial activism” has to be developed. We assess different approaches and the consequent comparative implications. We conclude that, at some levels, we can answer whether or not the US Supreme Court is more activist than the German Constitutional Court. Nevertheless, such question cannot be addressed satisfactorily once we understand the complexities of “judicial activism.”

Number of Pages in PDF File: 16

Keywords: judicial activism, constitutional review, constraint, restraint

Full text available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2887650

Convergence, Compatibility or Decoration: The Luxembourg Court's References to Strasbourg Case Law in its Final Judgments

Fan Jizeng 

Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Students; Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna di Pisa - Faculty of Law

October 21, 2016

Pécs Journal of International and European Law, 2016, no.2, pp.38-67 

Abstract:      

Although the EU is not a Contracting Party to the European Convention yet, the ECHR and its Strasbourg Case-law do have an impact on the EU legal order. Before the Lisbon Treaty came into effect, the Court of Justice of the EU and the drafters of the Maastricht Treaty recognized that the ECHR and the ECtHR case law had a special significance for the EU legal order and regarded them as one part of the general principle of EU law. The Lisbon Treaty entitles the EU Charter on Fundamental Rights the primary legislation from which the Court could depart in its deliberation. According to Art.53(3) and the relevant Official Explanation, the Court of Justice should take the Strasbourg jurisprudence into account when it needs to define the scope and meaning of fundamental rights borrowed from the ECHR and its case-law. Although the CJEU still lacks a set of uniform rules on the reference to the Strasbourg case-law, and even the European judges motivations on the Strasbourg case-law reference are varied, this method can be regarded as one of the best resolutions on the elimination of the jurisprudential conflicts between the two European Courts. From a functional perspective, the function of the Strasbourg case-law reference can be divided into four categories: authoritative guidance, legitimate guidance, reference “by analogy”, and decorative reference. In particular, the function of legitimate guidance can even be re-divided into three sub-functions: guidance, conformation to legitimacy, and warning the member states against the undermining of the Strasbourg jurisprudence as well as a comparative analysis of similarity and difference between EU law and ECHR.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 30

Keywords: case-law reference, Luxembourg judgments, fundamental rights, comparative law, Strasbourg case law.

Full text available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2884664

¿Pueden Haber Enmiendas Constitucionales Inconstitucionales? Una Mirada Al Derecho Comparado (Can There Be Unconstitutional Constitutional Amendments? A Comparative Perspective)

Joel I. Colón-Ríos 

Victoria University of Wellington - Faculty of Law

2008

42 Rev. Jur. U.I.P. 207 (2008) 

Abstract:    
Spanish Abstract: Este artículo tiene tres objetivos principales. Primero, analizar las bases teóricas de la doctrina de los límites implícitos al poder de reforma. Segundo, examinar las maneras en que dicha doctrina a sido tratada en diversas jurisdicciones (incluyendo Estados Unidos, Alemania, India, y Colombia). Finalmente, considerar la doctrina la luz del ordenamiento jurídico puertorriqueño.

English Abstract: This article has three main objectives. First, to analyze the theoretical bases of the doctrine of the implicit limits to the power of constitutional reform. Second, to examine the ways in which this doctrine has been treated in various jurisdictions (including the United States, Germany, India, and Colombia). Finally, to consider the doctrine the light of the Puerto Rican legal system.



Number of Pages in PDF File: 53

Keywords: Constitutional Law, Comparative Law

Full text available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2883901

Global Constitutionalism - A Critical View

Jaakko Husa 

University of Lapland - Faculty of Law

December 1, 2016

Maastricht European Private Law Institute Working Paper No. 2016/11 

Abstract:    
Drawing on comparative law scholarship this paper discusses global constitutionalism from a critical point of view. Many contemporary authors seem to presume that the idea of constitutionalism must be universal. In agreement with this thinking the commitment to the rule of law, democracy and human rights has arguably become a defining global factor. Allegedly, constitutionalism is regarded as relevant not only in the context of States but also when we assess and interpret development of law beyond the State. This paper analyses underlying themes and calls the universality of global constitutionalism into question.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 19

Keywords: Constitutionalism, Global Law, Globalization, Comparative Law

Full text available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2885490

La Corte Oltre Lo Specchio: Un Dialogo Tra Giudici Costituzionali, Con Sabino Cassese E Daria De Pretis (The Court Through the Looking-Glass - A Dialogue between Constitutional Justices: An Interview with Sabino Cassese and Daria de Pretis)

La Corte Oltre Lo Specchio: Un Dialogo Tra Giudici Costituzionali, Con Sabino Cassese E Daria De Pretis (The Court Through the Looking-Glass - A Dialogue between Constitutional Justices: An Interview with Sabino Cassese and Daria de Pretis)

Giacomo Rugge 

Max Planck Society for the Advancement of the Sciences - Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law

Valentina Volpe 

Max Planck Society for the Advancement of the Sciences - Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law

2016

Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law & International Law (MPIL) Research Paper No. 6/2016 

Abstract:    
Italian Abstract: La seguente intervista ai professori Sabino Cassese e Daria de Pretis, rispettivamente giudice emerito e giudice della Corte costituzionale italiana, si è svolta il 12 novembre 2015 nell’ambito dei Dialoghi Italiani, il discussion group del Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law (MPIL) di Heidelberg dedicato al mondo politico e istituzionale italiano.

L’incontro - in lingua italiana e rivolto a un pubblico di accademici italiani e stranieri - ha seguito il formato della doppia intervista toccando alcuni dei temi più attuali che investono la Corte costituzionale italiana: dalla tutela dei diritti acquisiti all’introduzione della dissenting opinion, dalle dinamiche decisionali interne, al ruolo della comparazione e dei network informali di giudici nell’adozione delle decisioni. Il risultato è stato un vivo scambio d'idee e di opinioni, a tratti convergenti a tratti divergenti, ma sempre alte e preziose per comprendere il vero significato dell’attività della Corte.

Il titolo dell’incontro si è ispirato al seguito di Alice nel Paese delle Meraviglie1, il cui incipit vede Alice domandarsi davanti allo specchio se davvero l’immagine riflessa della stanza corrisponda al vero e cosa si nasconda invece in quello squarcio nascosto alla vista dell’osservatore. Questo dialogo-intervista è nato dalla stessa curiosità di Alice per ciò che si vede e per ciò che non si vede e siamo grati ai giudici costituzionali Sabino Cassese e Daria de Pretis e ai direttori del MPIL, Armin von Bogdandy e Anne Peters, per aver consentito la sua realizzazione, contribuendo a svelare la Corte oltre lo specchio.

English Abstract: The following interview with professors Sabino Cassese and Daria de Pretis, Emeritus Justice and Justice, respectively, of the Italian Constitutional Court, took place on 12 November 2015 as part of Dialoghi Italiani, the discussion group of the Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law (MPIL) in Heidelberg dedicated to examining significant developments in the Italian political and institutional world.

The meeting - held in Italian and addressed to both Italian and international academics - followed the format of a double interview. Focusing on the most relevant issues that affect the functioning and working methods of the Italian Constitutional Court, it touched on the protection of acquired rights, the introduction of the dissenting opinion, internal decision-making dynamics and the role of comparison and informal networks of judges in the decision-making process. The result was a lively exchange of ideas and opinions - at times convergent, at times divergent - but always highly informative and precious for an understanding of the true nature and role of the Court.

The title was inspired by the sequel to Alice in Wonderland, whose incipit depicts Alice standing in front of a mirror, wondering if the reflection of the room she sees indeed corresponds to reality and what lies beyond her view. This dialogue-interview originated from the same curiosity that inspired Alice to ponder what she saw and what the mirror did not reveal.

Note: We are grateful to Justice Sabino Cassese and Justice Daria de Pretis as well as to the Directors of the MPIL, Armin von Bogdandy and Anne Peters, for allowing us to conduct this interview and thus observe the Court through the looking-glass.

Downloadable document is available in Italian.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 19

Keywords: Italian Constitutional Court, constitutional justice, comparative law, dissenting opinion

Full text: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2865686

Mayoral, In the CJEU Judges Trust: A New Approach in the Judicial Construction of Europe JCMS

In the CJEU Judges Trust: A New Approach in the Judicial Construction of Europe

Juan A. Mayoral

This article aims to highlight the relevance of judicial trust in international courts, focusing on national judges' trust in the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). EU scholars have put a great deal of effort into explaining how legal and political factors affect the use of preliminary references by national courts. However, there is still a gap in the literature on the development of trust as a functional principle encouraging co-operation between national and international courts. This article explores the nature, causes and potentials of judicial trust for the EU judicial system. A theory is offered in the article, which links national judges' trust in the CJEU to their corporatist identification and profile, to their attitudes towards the EU, and to their beliefs about the CJEU's ability to provide decisions that: 1) offer a clear guidance on European Union law, and 2) will not undermine Member States' legal order.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/wol1/doi/10.1111/jcms.12488/abstract