Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Solidarity in the European Union pp 37–45Cite as

Solidarity as a Legal Concept

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Abstract

The chapter of Markus Kotzur examines solidarity as a legal concept. Whereas the Treaty of Lisbon contains manifold references to the notion of solidarity, Kotzur argues that a precise meaning of or conceptual framework for this notion is anything but clear. The question of which overall expectations, moral obligations, political assumptions and normative forces can be attributed to “solidarity” needs, therefore, to be addressed. Against this backdrop, the chapter aims, firstly, to introduce conceptual approaches to solidarity on the national, regional and international planes; secondly, to identify text-based legal substantiations of solidarity within the EU and beyond; and, finally, to frame solidarity as a constitutional paradigm. In doing so, the paper follows a leitmotif once expressed by Jacques Delors in the saying “solidarity mechanisms are not based on pure generosity, but on enlightened self-interest”.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See, e.g., Giegerich et al. (2014), Häberle and Kotzur (2016, pp. 939).

  2. 2.

    As to the Union’s value orientation R. Geiger, in: id./D.-E. Khan/M. Kotzur, European Union Treaties. A Commentary, 2015, Art. 2 TEU para 1 et subsequent.

  3. 3.

    The following reflections on solidarity are partly based upon Kotzur and Schmalenbach (2014, pp. 68).

  4. 4.

    See Theresa May’s Brexit-Speech on Jan. 17, 2017: “A little over six months ago, the British people voted for change. They voted to shape a brighter future for our country. They voted to leave the European Union and embrace the world” (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/full-text-theresa-may-brexit-speech-global-britain-eu-european-union-latest-a7531361.html, last visit on Jan. 19, 2017).

  5. 5.

    Christopoulos and Souvlis (2016).

  6. 6.

    Wiener (2014).

  7. 7.

    Schmalenbach, et al. (2016) and below footnote 16.

  8. 8.

    Häberle (1990, pp. 35).

  9. 9.

    É. Durkheim, De la division du travail social, 1893; see A. v. Bogdandy, Opening Address, in: R. Wolfrum/Ch. Kojima (eds.), Solidarity: A Structural Principle of International Law, 2010, pp. 1 at 1.

  10. 10.

    For reference see ibidem.

  11. 11.

    Giddens (2007, p. 112).

  12. 12.

    Krüger (1971, pp. 249).

  13. 13.

    U. Haltern, Finalität, in: v. Bogdandy/Bast, Europäisches Verfassungsrecht, 2nd ed. 2009, pp. 279 at 323 (with reference to ICJ, case C-184/99—Grzelczyk, ibidem para 44).

  14. 14.

    D. Senghaas, Weltinnenpolitik—Ansätze für ein Konzept, in: Europaarchiv 1992, pp. 643 speaks of a global “Schicksalsgemeinschaft” (p. 646 and subsequent).

  15. 15.

    Mavelli and Wilson (2016).

  16. 16.

    Weiler (2000).

  17. 17.

    Ross (2010, p. 23).

  18. 18.

    Wellens and R. St. J. Macdonald (2005); Wellens (2010); for further orientation: Volkmann (1998); aus der (europarechtlichen) Literatur A. v. Bogdandy, Europäische Prinzipienlehre, in: ders. (ed.), Europäisches Verfassungsrecht, Berlin u. a. 2003, 149 ff., 182 ff.; vorher bereits Ch. Tomuschat, Solidarität in Europa, in: Capotorti u. a. (ed.), Liber Amicorum P. Pescatore, Baden-Baden 1987, S. 729 ff.; R. Bieber, Solidarität als Verfassungsprinzip, in: v. Bogdandy/Kadelbach (ed.), Solidarität und Europäische Integration, München 2002, 38 ff.

  19. 19.

    http://www.uni-salzburg.at/portal/page?_pageid=465,1835853&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL (last visit May 15, 2016).

  20. 20.

    A term introduced by K. Popper in his famous 1945 work on “The Open Society and its Enemies”.

  21. 21.

    D. Campanelli, Solidarity, Principle of, in: MPEIL 2012 para 5; in general U. Volkmann, Solidarität—Programm und Prinzip der Verfassung, 1998, pp. 52.

  22. 22.

    Ibidem.

  23. 23.

    Wellens (2010, pp. 3 at 4); M. Virally, Le rôle des “principes” dans le développement du droit international, in: Recueil d’études de droit international en hommage à Paul Guggenheim, 1968, pp. 531 at 542/543; more generally J. E. Viñuales, ‘The Secret of Tomorrow’: International Organization through the Eyes of Michel Virally, in: he European Journal of International Law Vol. 23 (2012), pp. 543.

  24. 24.

    Peters (2006, pp. 579 at 601).

  25. 25.

    Ross (2010, pp. 23).

  26. 26.

    Wolfrum, (2006, pp. 1087).

  27. 27.

    Ross (2010, pp. 23).

  28. 28.

    Wellens (2010, pp. 3 at 4).

  29. 29.

    Wolfrum (2006, pp. 1087), Wellens (2010, pp. 3 at 13).

  30. 30.

    R. Geiger, in: id./D.-E. Khan/M. Kotzur, European Union Treaties. A Commentary, 2015, Art. 2 TEU para 4; Ch. Calliess, Europa als Wertegemeinschaft—Integration und Identität durch europäisches Verfassungsrecht?, JZ 2004, pp. 1033; Ch. Mandry, Europa als Wertegemeinschaft, 2009.

  31. 31.

    On the current debate, see the examples discussed in: A. Héritier (ed.), Common Goods: Reinventing European and International Governance, 2002.

  32. 32.

    On the humankind orientation of Kantian legal theory: I. Kant, Metaphysik der Sitten, 1797, Einleitung in die Metaphysik der Sitten. For Kant it is the quality of being part of humankind that gives the individual his or her inalienable freedom. However, already for Kant the personal freedom of the individual was in practical need for an “allgemeines Gesetz” that could harmonize the spheres of freedom of the various individuals: “Tritt in einen Zustand, worin Jedermann das Seine gegen jeden Anderen gesichert sein kann”, the so-called “Lex iustitiae”, ibid. Eintheilung der Rechtslehre, lit. A.

  33. 33.

    von Bogdandy (2009, pp. 13 at 69–71); furthermore Lais (2007).

  34. 34.

    Smith (2008).

  35. 35.

    Regelsberger and Kugelmann (2012). It is this very interdependence of solidarity and loyalty that make the Union a “Solidargemeinschaft”, see Häberle and Kotzur (2016, pp. 82).

  36. 36.

    E. Regelsberger/D. Kugelmann, in: R. Streinz (ed.), EUV/AEUV, 2nd ed. 2012, Art. 31 TEU para 6.

  37. 37.

    Myrdal and Rhinard (2010); J. Wouters/S. Bijlmakers/K. Meuwissen, The EU as a Multilateral Security Actor after Lisbon: Constitutional and Institutional Aspects, Leuven Centre for Global Governance Studies, Working Paper no. 80, February 2012, pp. 9; in general S. v. Kielmannsegg, Die Verteidigungspolitik der Europäischen Union, 2005.

  38. 38.

    Kotzur (2015).

  39. 39.

    See, e.g., U. Häde, Die Wirtschafts- und Währungsunion im Vertrag von Lissabon, EuR 2009, pp. 200; id., Haushaltsdisziplin und Solidarität im Zeichen der Finanzkrise, EuZW 2009, pp. 399.

  40. 40.

    J. F. Braun, EU Energy Policy under the Treaty of Lisbon Rules: Between a new policy and business as usual, in: Politics and Institutions, EPIN Working Papers, No. 31/2011.

  41. 41.

    For the general scope of EU disaster preparedness, disaster response and civil protection, see also the Statements of the Commission, e.g. COM (2010) 600 final.

  42. 42.

    Myrdal and Rhinard (2010, p. 6).

  43. 43.

    Pernice (1999, 2009).

  44. 44.

    Walker (2002, pp. 317), Maduro (2001, p. 21).

  45. 45.

    Lüder (2009, pp. 251).

  46. 46.

    Biscop (2005, p. 124).

  47. 47.

    Hatje (2001, pp. 16).

  48. 48.

    Weiler (1991).

  49. 49.

    Report of the International Law Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS) (2001), UN Doc. GA/Res. 60/1 (2005), Stahn (2007, pp. 99), von Arnauld (2009, pp. 11).

  50. 50.

    Konstantinides (2011, p. 7).

  51. 51.

    Slaughter (2005, pp. 619).

  52. 52.

    Already a classic is C.W. Jenks, The Common Law of Mankind, London, 1958; more recently Antônio A. Cançado Trindade, International Law for Humankind: Towards a New Jus Gentium, 2010.

  53. 53.

    Delors (2012).

References

  • Biscop, S. (2005). The European security strategy: A global agenda for positive power (p. 124). Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christopoulos, D., & Souvlis, G. (2016). Europe’s solidarity crisis: A perspective from Greece. Last visit January 19, 2017, from https://roarmag.org/essays/europe-refugee-solidarity-crisis-greece/

  • Delors, J. (2012). In S. Fernandes & E. Rubio (Eds.), Solidarity within the Eurozone: How much, what for, for how long? Report by Notre Europe. Retrieved May 16, 2012, from http://www.notre-europe.eu/uploads/tx_publication/SolidarityEMU_S.Fernandes-E.Rubio_NE_Feb2012.pdf

  • Giddens, A. (2007). Europe in the global age (p. 112). Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giegerich, T., Gstrein, O. J., & Zeitman, S. (Eds.). (2014). The EU between “an ever closer union” and inalienable policy domains of member states. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Häberle, P. (1990). 1789 als Teil der Geschichte, Gegenwart und Zukunft des Verfassungsstaates. JöR, 37, 35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Häberle, P., & Kotzur, M. (2016). Europäische Verfassungslehre (8th ed., pp. 939). Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatje, A. (2001). Loyalität als Rechtsprinzip der EU (pp. 16).

    Google Scholar 

  • Konstantinides, Th. (2011). Civil protection in Europe and the Lisbon “solidarity clause”. A genuine legal concept or a paper exercise (Uppsala Faculty of Law Working Paper no. 3, p. 7).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kotzur, M. (2015). In R. Geiger, D.-E. Khan, & M. Kotzur (Eds.), European Union treaties. A commentary (Art. 80 TFEU para 1).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kotzur, M., & Schmalenbach, K. (2014). Solidarity among Nations. Archiv des Völkerrechts, 52(2014), 68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krüger, H. (1971). Brüderlichkeit—das dritte, fast vergessene Ideal der Demokratie. In Festschrift Maunz (pp. 249).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lais, M. (2007). Das Solidaritätsprinzip im europäischen Verfassungsverbund. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lüder, S. R. (2009). Katastrophenschutz in der Europäischen Union und seine Auswirkungen auf das nordrhein-westfälische Recht. In NWVBl (pp. 251).

    Google Scholar 

  • Maduro, M. (2001). Contrapunctual Law: Europe’s constitutional pluralism in action. In N. Walker (Ed.), Sovereignty in transition (p. 21). Portland: Hart Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mavelli, L., & Wilson, E. (Eds.). (2016). The refugee crisis and religion. Secularism, security, and hospitality in question. London: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Myrdal, S., & Rhinard, M. (2010). The European Union’s solidarity clause: Empty letter or effective tool? (UI Occasional Papers no. 2, p. 6).

    Google Scholar 

  • Pernice, I. (1999). Multilevel constitutionalism and the treaty of Amsterdam: European constitution-making revisited. Common Market Law Review, 36, 703.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pernice, I. (2009). The treaty of Lisbon: Multilevel constitutionalism in action, Columbia. Journal of European Law, 15, 349.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, A. (2006). Compensatory constitutionalism: The function and potential of fundamental international norms and structures. Leiden Journal of International Law, 19, 579 at 601.

    Google Scholar 

  • Regelsberger, E., & Kugelmann, D. (2012). In R. Streinz (Ed.), EUV/AEUV (2nd ed. Art. 31 TEU para 6).

    Google Scholar 

  • Report of the International Law Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS) (2001) The Responsibility to Protect.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, M. (2010). Solidarity—A new constitutional paradigm for the EU. In M. Ross & Y. Borgmann-Prebil (Eds.), Promoting solidarity in the European Union (pp. 23). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmalenbach, K., Puntscher Riekmann, S., & Wydra, D. Last visit May 15, 2016., from http://www.uni-salzburg.at/portal/page?_pageid=465,1835853&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL

  • Slaughter, A.-M. (2005). Security, solidarity and sovereignty: The grand themes of UN reform. The American Journal of International Law, 99, 619.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, K. (2008). European Union foreign policy in a changing world (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stahn, C. (2007). Responsibility to Protect. Political Rhetoric or Emerging Legal Norm. The American Journal of International Law, 101, 99.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Doc. GA/Res. 60/1 (2005 world Summit and Outcome)

    Google Scholar 

  • Volkmann, U. (1998). Solidarität—Programm und Prinzip der Verfassung. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Arnauld, A. (2009). Souveränität und die responsibility to protect. Die Friedenswarte, 84, 11.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Bogdandy, A. (2009). Grundprinzipien. In: A. von Bogdandy & J. Bast (Eds.), Europäisches Verfassungsrecht (2nd ed., pp. 13 at 69–71). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, N. (2002). The idea of constitutional pluralism. Modern Law Review, 65, 317.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiler, J. H. H. (1991). The transformation of Europe. Yale Law Journal, 100, S. 2403 ff., at 2471.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiler, J. (2000). Federalism and constitutionalism: Europe’s Sonderweg (Jean Monnet Working Paper 10/00, p. 14).

    Google Scholar 

  • Wellens, K. (2010). Revisiting solidarity as a (re-)emerging constitutional principle: Some further reflections. In R. Wolfrum & C. Kojima (Eds.), Solidarity: A structural principle of international law (pp. 3 at 4). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wellens, K. (2005). Solidarity as a Constitutional Principle: Its Expanding Role and Inherent Limitations. In Ronald St. J. Macdonald & D. M. Johnston (Eds.), Towards world constitutionalism: Issues in the Legal Ordering of the World Community (p. 775). Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiener, A. (2014). A theory of contestation. Berlin: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wolfrum, R. (2006). Solidarity amongst states: An emerging structural principle of public international law. In P.-M. Dupuy (Ed.), Völkerrecht als Weltordnung. Festschrift für Christian Tomuschat (pp. 1087).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany

    Markus Kotzur

  2. Europa-Kolleg Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany

    Markus Kotzur

Authors
  1. Markus Kotzur
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Markus Kotzur .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Political Science, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany

    Andreas Grimmel

  2. Institute for Political Science, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany

    Susanne My Giang

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Kotzur, M. (2017). Solidarity as a Legal Concept. In: Grimmel, A., Giang, S. (eds) Solidarity in the European Union. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57036-5_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation