Skip to main content

The Multilevel Rule of Law System of the European Union: Eked Out, Contested, Still Unassured

Abstract

This chapter analyses the establishment of a “multilevel rule of law system” that encompasses the supranational political system of the EU and several interdependent national levels of governance. We show how the principle of the rule of law in the EU has been set up by primary law and rulings of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) based on different traditions of the EU’s member states. We argue that the doctrines of primacy and direct applicability, both developed through ECJ case law, are a manifestation of the principle of legal certainty and focal to the multilevel character of the EU’s principle of the rule of law. We analyse two different kinds of resistance of the national level against the EU’s rule of law system: First, we look into the case law by higher national courts striving to protect “their” national, constitutional principles and, therefore, tending to accept the primacy of EU law only to a limited degree. Secondly, we analyse the current violations of the EU principle of the rule of law in Hungary and Poland. In the final chapter, we discuss the possibilities of the EU’s institutions to react, especially with regard to the Art. 7 TEU procedure, the EU’s “Justice Scoreboard” and the Commission’s new mechanism for prearranging Art 7 procedures.

Keywords

  • Multilevel Rules
  • Supranational Political Systems
  • Justice Scoreboard
  • Legal Certainty
  • BVerfGE

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

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.

    ECJ, C-294/83, Les Verts/Parliament, 23.

  2. 2.

    ECJ, C-9/56, Meroni/High Authority of the European Coal and Seel Community.

  3. 3.

    ECJ Costa/ENEL, 6/64, EU:C:1964:66.

  4. 4.

    Committee on Legal Affairs and Citizensʼ Rights (1997): Report on the relationships between international law, Community law and the constitutional law of the Member States.

  5. 5.

    ECJ, 26/62, 1963, van Gend & Loos.

  6. 6.

    BVerfGE 123, 267.

  7. 7.

    BVerfGE 89, 155; BVerfGE 126, 286.

  8. 8.

    BVerfGE 126, 286.

  9. 9.

    https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/rep/1/2013/EN/1-2013-47-EN-F1-1.Pdf COM(2013) 47 final (04.03.2018).

  10. 10.

    ECJ C-286/12, Commission /Hungary, recital 5.

  11. 11.

    The original statement about “illiberal democracy” was made by Orbán in a July 2014 speech. One of the key sections is: “We needed to state that a democracy is not necessarily liberal. Just because something is not liberal, it still can be a democracy. (…) We have to abandon liberal methods and principles of organizing a society the world. (…) in this sense, the new state that we are building is an illiberal state, a non-liberal state. It does not deny foundational values of liberalism, as freedom, etc. But it does not make this ideology a central element of state organization, but applies a specific, national, particular approach in its stead.”, cf. http://budapestbeacon.com/public-policy/full-text-of-viktor-Orbáns-speech-at-baile-tusnadtusnadfurdo-of-26-july-2014/10592 (28.03.2018).

  12. 12.

    Cf. http://www.zeit.de/news/2016-07/05/fluechtlinge-ungarn-setzt-referendum-ueber-eu-fluechtlingsquoten-an-05112005 (13.2.2018).

  13. 13.

    ECJ, C-647/15, Hungary/Council oft he European Union (02.12.2015); ECJ, C-643/15, Slovac Republic/Council of the European. Hungary argued that the Council changed major details of the legislative proposal and didn’t rehear the Parliament thereafter.

  14. 14.

    Cf. http://www.handelsblatt.com/politik/international/ungarn-orbn-ignoriert-ungueltiges-eu-referendum/14634784.html (09.2.2018).

  15. 15.

    https://ec.europa.eu/germany/news/20171220-polen_de (13.2.2018).

  16. 16.

    European Commisson – Fact Sheet: College Orientation Debate on the recent developments in Poland and the Rule of Law Framework: Questions and Answers. http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-16-62_en.htm (09.2.2018).

  17. 17.

    ECJ, C-286/12, Commission/Hungary.

  18. 18.

    Cf. http://www.zeit.de/politik/ausland/2017-12/eu-kommission-verklagt-ungarn-tschechien-und-polen (13.2.2018).

  19. 19.

    Promoting the Rule of Law in the European Union, 4th Annual FRA (European Unions Agency for Fundamental Rights) Symposium, Vienna, 7 June 2013.

  20. 20.

    Cf. https://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/de/themen/aktuelle-meldungen/2017/september/rechtsstaat-in-polen-und-ungarn-unter-beschuss-unsere-grundwerte-werden-angegriffen (14.2.2018).

  21. 21.

    Ibid.

  22. 22.

    www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P8-TA-2015-0286 (27.09.2016).

  23. 23.

    European Commission, «Communication from the Commisson to the European Parliament and the Council: A new EU Framework to strengthen the Rule of Law».

  24. 24.

    https://ec.europa.eu/germany/news/20171220-polen_de (14.02.2018).

  25. 25.

    Future of European Department/Foreign and Commowealth, “Review of the Balance of Competences between the United Kingdom and the European Union: EU Enlargement” December 2014, recital 2.116.

  26. 26.

    Legal Service of the Council of the European Union “Opinion of the Legal Service, Subject: Commision’s Communication on a new EU Framework to strengthen the Rule of Law 10296/14”, 27.5.2014, recital 24.

  27. 27.

    Legal Service of the Council of the European Union “Opinion of the Legal Service, Subject: Commision’s Communication on a new EU Framework to strengthen the Rule of Law 10296/14”, 27.5.2014, recital 28.

References

  • Adrowitzer, R., & Gelegs, E. (2013). Schöne Grüße aus dem Orbán-Land: Die rechte Revolution in Ungarn. Vienna: PRF Styria Premium.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bellamy, R. (2011). Constitutionalism. In B. Badie, D. Berg-Schlosser, & L. Morlino (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of political science (Vol. 2, pp. 16–421). London: SAGE Knowledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benz, A. (2009). Politik in Mehrebenensystemen. Wiesbaden: Springer.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Bieber, R., de Gucht, K., Lenaerts, K., & Weiler, J. H. H. (Eds.). (1996). Au nom des peuples européens – In the name of the peoples of Europe, Un catalogue des droits fondamentaux de l’Union européenne – A catalogue of fundamental rights in the European Union. Nomos, Baden-Baden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blauberger, M. (2016). Europäischer Schutz gegen nationale Demokratiedefizite? Leviathan, 44(2), 280–302.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Blauberger, M., & Kelemen, R. D. (2017). Can courts rescue national democracy? Judicial safeguards against democratic backsliding in the EU. Journal of European Public Policy, 24, 321–336.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Bogdandy, A., & Ionnidis, M. (2014). Systemic deficiency in the rule of law: What it is, what has been done, what can be done. Common Market Law Review, 51(1), 59–96.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Bugarčić, B. (2014), Protecting deocracy and the rule of law in the European Union: The Hungarian Challenge. London School of Economics (LSQS) Paper No. 79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calliess, C. (2004). Europa als Wertegemeinschaft – Integration und Identität durch europäisches Verfassungsrecht. JuristenZeitung, 21, 1033–1044.

    Google Scholar 

  • Capelletti, M., Seccombe, M., & Weiler, J. H. H. (1986). Integration through law, Europe and the American Federal Experience. In Methods, Tools and Institutions (Vol. 1). Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter and Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conant, L. (2001). Justice constained: Law and politics in the European Union. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craig, P. (1997). Formal and substantive conceptions of the rule of law: An analytical framework. Public Law, 467, 467–487.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geiger, R., Khan, D.-E., & Kotzur, M. (2010). EUV/AEUV, Vertrag über die Europäische Union und Vertrag über die Arbeitsweise der Europäischen Union. München: C.H. Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haltern, U. (2012). Integration durch Recht. In H.-J. Bieling & M. Lerch (Eds.), Theorien der Europäischen Integration (pp. 339–358). Wiesbaden: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hassel F. (2016, July 14) Neuer Gesetzentwurf: Polen in schlechter Verfassung. In Süddeutsche Zeitung.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horster, D. (2014). Rechtsphilosophie. Stuttgart: Reclam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hummer, W. (2015). Ungarn erneut am Prüfstand der Rechtsstaatlichkeit und Demokratie, Wird Ungarn dieses Mal zum Anlassfall des neu konzipierten „Vor Artikel 7 EUV“-Verfahrens? Europarecht, 50(5), 625–640.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutton, W. (2018, Jan 7). Beware the illiberal alliance of Poland and Hungary, a grave threat to the EU. In The Guardian.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kochenov, D., & Pech, L. (2015). Monitoring and enforcement of the rule of law in the EU: Rhetoric and reality. European Constitutional Law Review, 11(03), 512–540.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kochenov, D., & Pech, L. (2016). Better late than never? On the European Commission’s rule of law framework and its first activation. Journal of Common Market Studies, 54(5), 1062–1074.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Körösényi, A., Fodor, G., & Dieringer, J. (2010). Das Politische System Ungarns. In W. Ismayr, S. Richter, & M. Söldner (Eds.), Die politischen Systeme Osteuropas (pp. 357–418). Wiesbaden: Springer.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Krygier, M. (2012). Why the rule of law is too important to be left to lawyers. Prawo y Wiez, 2(2), 30–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lesser, G. (2016, July 14). Polen: Zurück zu Zensur und Denkverboten. In Der Standard.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacCormick, D. N. (1984). Der Rechtsstaat und die rule of law. JuristenZeitung, 39(2), 65–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mager, A. M. (2016). Cracks in the foundations: Understanding the great rule of law debate in the EU. Journal of Common Market Studies, 54(5), 1050–1061.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Mak, E., & Taekema, S. H. (2016). The European Union’s rule of law agenda: Identifying its core and contextualizing its application. Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 8(1), 25–50.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Maurer, A. (2016). Das Europäische Parlament. In W. Weidenfeld & W. Wessels (Eds.), Jahrbuch der Europäischen Integration. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • May, C. (2014). The rule of law: The common sense of global politics. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, G. (2017, Apr 28). Chancen für die CEU schwinden. In Der Standard.

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller, J.-W. (2014). Europe’s other democracy problem: the challenge of protecting democracy and the rule of law within EU member states. Juncture, 21(2), 151–157.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Müller, J.-W. (2015). Should the EU protect democracy and the rule of law inside member states? Europan Law Journal, 21(2), 141–160.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Müller-Graf, P.-C., & Reichel, A. (1998). Die Europäische Integration aus der Sicht der Rechtsprechung nationaler Verfassungsgerichte. In M. Jopp, A. Maurer, & H. Schneider (Eds.), Europapolitische Grundverständnisse im Wandel (pp. 365–418). Bonn: Europa Union Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oberreuter, H. (1999). Gewaltenteilung und Legitimität. Verfassungspolitische Leitideen im Kontext der Europäischen Union. In Landeszentrale für politische Bildungsarbeit/Akademie für Politische Bildung (Ed.), Legitimation – Transparenz – Demokratie. Fragen an die Europäische Union (pp. 126–132). München: Landeszentrale für politische Bildung.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, P., & Stefanelli, J. (2016). Strengthening the rule of law in the EU: The council’s inaction. Journal of Common Market Studies, 54(5), 1075–1084.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Oppermann, T., Classen, C. D., & Nettesheim, M. (2016). Europarecht: Ein Studienbuch. München: C.H. Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfordten, D. (2013). Rechtsphilosophie: Eine Einführung. München: C.H. Beck.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Ranacher, C., Staudigl, F., & Frischhut, M. (2015). Einführung in das EU-Recht. Wien: UTB.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Ruffert, M. (2016). Art. 7. In C. Callies & M. Ruffert (Eds.), EUV/AEUV: Mit Europäischer Grundrechtscharta, Kommentar. München: C.H. Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scharpf, F. W. (1985). Die Politikverflechtungs-Falle: Europäische Integration und deutscher Föderalismus im Vergleich. Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 26(4), 323–356.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schepperle, K. L. (2010). What can the European Commission do when member states violate basic principles of the European Union? Columbia Journal of European Law, 16(3), 385–426.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schorkopf, F. (2016). Art. 7 EUV. In E. Grabitz, M. Hilf, & M. Nettesheim (Eds.), Das Recht der Europäischen Union: EUV/AEUV. München: C.H. Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schroeder, W. (2013). Grundkurs Europarecht. München: C.H. Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selznick, P. (2003). Law in context’ revisited. Journal of Law and Society, 30(2), 30–52.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Shklar, J. N. (1987). Political theory and the rule of law. In A. C. Hutchinson & P. Monahan (Eds.), The rule of law: Ideal or ideology (pp. 1–16). Toronto: Carswell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sólyom, L. (2016). Verfassungsgerichtsbarkeit in Europa: Institutionen. In A. Bogdandy, P. Huber, C. Grabenwarter, & A. Farahat (Eds.), Ius Publicum Europaeum (Vol. VI). Heidelberg: Ius Publicum Europaeum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sturm, R., & Pehle, H. (2012). Das neue deutsche Regierungssystem, Die Europäisierung von Institutionen, Entscheidungsprozessen und Politikfeldern in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (3rd ed., pp. 132–155). Wiesbaden: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tamanaha, B. Z. (2004). On the rule of law, history, politics, theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • von Heinegg, W. H. (2012). Art. 2 EUV. In C. Vedder & W. H. von Heinegger (Eds.), Europäisches Unionsrecht, EUV, AEUV, Grundrechte-Charta, Handkommentar. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiler, J. H. H. (1991). The transformation of Europe. Yale Law Journal, 100, 2405–2483.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Annegret Eppler .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Eppler, A., Hackhofer, A., Maurer, A. (2019). The Multilevel Rule of Law System of the European Union: Eked Out, Contested, Still Unassured. In: Antoniolli, L., Bonatti, L., Ruzza, C. (eds) Highs and Lows of European Integration. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93626-0_5

Download citation