From the Banana saga to a sugar saga and beyond: Could the post-communist constitutional courts teach the EU a lesson in the rule of law?

Common Market Law Review

Volumn 47, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 791-829

  Albi, Anneli ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KENT   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77957252214     PISSN: 01650750     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (104)

1. Some of the key works include MacCormick, Questioning Sovereignty: Law, State, and Nation in the European Commonwealth (OUP, 1999).
2. Walker, "The Idea of Constitutional Pluralism", 65 MLR (2002), 317-359.
3. Kumm, "The jurisprudence of constitutional conflict: Constitutional supremacy in Europe before and after the Constitutional Treaty", 11 ELJ (2004), 262.
4. Poiares Maduro, "Contrapunctual Law: Europe's Constitutional Pluralism in Action" in Walker (Ed.), Sovereignty in Transition (Hart Publishing, Oxford, 2003), pp. 523-524.
5. See also, in this Review, Cloots, "Germs of pluralist judicial adjudication: Advocaten voor de wereld and other references from the Belgian Constitutional Court", 000-000.
6. Chalmers, Hadjiemmanuil, Monti and Tomkins, European Union Law (Cambridge University Press, 2006), p. 198 et seq.
7. Sadurski, "'Solange, Chapter 3': Constitutional Courts in Central Europe", EUI Law Work ing Paper 2006/40, at 2-4.
8. As cited in Craig and de Burca, EU Law. Texts Cases and Mate rials, 4th ed. (OUP, 2008), at pp. 373-374.
9. Internationale Handelsgesellschaft (Solange I), [1974] 2 CMLR 540, 549.
10. For an overview of the literature, see Douglas-Scott, Constitutional Law of the European Union (Pearson Education, 2002), pp. 460-461 and pp. 454-458.
11. For an overview of the German literature, see Herdegen, "The origins and development of the general principles of Community Law" in Bernitz, Nergelius (Eds.), General Principles of European Community Law (Kluwer, 2000), at pp. 10-12.
12. Coppel and O'Neill, "The European Court of Justice: Taking Rights Seriously?", 29 CML Rev. (1992), at 670 et seq. and 692.
13. See e.g. Everling, "Will Europe Slip on Bananas? The Bananas Judgment of the Court of Justice and National Courts", 33 CML Rev. (1996), at 401.
14. Decision of 7 June 2000, 2 BvL 1/97; BVerfGE 102, 147.
15. Wünsche Handelsgesellschaft (Solange II), [1987] CMLR 225.
16. Elbers, Urgan, "The Order of the German Federal Constitutional Court of 7 June 2000 and the Kompetenz-Kompetenz in the European Judicial System", 7 EPL (2001), 21.
17. Case C-280/93, Germany v. Council, [1994] ECR I-4973.
18. De Witte, "The Past and Future Role of the European Court of Justice in the Protection of Human Rights" in Alston (Ed.), The European Union and Human Rights (OUP, 1999), at pp. 878-879.
19. O.J. 2004, L 9/8.
20. Case T-324/05, Estonia v. Commission, judgment of 2 Oct. 2009, nyr. Appeal (Case C-535/09) pending.
21. See infra note 69 and the accompanying text.
22. Case C-36/02, Omega, [2004] ECR I-9609.
23. Case C-112/00, Schmidberger, [2003] ECR I-5659.
24. Joined Cases C-402/05 P & C-415/05 P, Kadi and Al Barakaat v. Council and Commission, [2008] ECR I-6351.
25. O.J. 2003, L 293/3.
26. O.J. 2004, L 9/8.
27. Case T-258/04, Poland v. Commission, Order of 10 June 2009, nyr. Under appeal as Case C-336/09, Poland v. Council, pending. In Case C-273/04, Poland v. Council, Judgment of 23 Oct. 2007, the ECJ completely ignored a similar doubt as to admissibility on grounds of time, and ruled directly on the substance.
28. Joined Cases T-300/05 & T-316/05, Cyprus v. Commission, judgment of 2 Oct. 2009, nyr.
29. O.J. 2005, C 271/24.
30. O.J. 2006, L 314/35-36.
31. Appeal brought by the Government of Estonia on 18 Dec. 2009, Case C-535/09 P.
32. Bobek, "On the Application of European Law in (Not Only) the Courts of the New Member States: 'Don't Do as I Say'?", (2007) Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies, 10 and 21.
33. Procházka, "Prekážka rozhodnutej veci-judikatúra Súdného dvora ES a jej dopad na konanie vnútroštátnych súdov" (Res iudicata -the Case law of the Court of Justice and its Impact on the Procedure before National Courts) 10 Justič ná revue (2007), 1240, at 1248.
34. For relevant case law, see Chalmers, Hadjiemmanuil, Monti and Tomkins, European Union Law (CUP, 2006), pp. 436-437.
35. Barents, "Recent developments in Community case law in the field of agriculture", 34 CML Rev. (1997), 811, at 841.
36. Groussot, 44 CML Rev. (2007), at 772.
37. Tridimas, The General Principles of EU Law (OUP, 2006), at p. 315.
38. Concurring Opinion of Judge Ress, Bosphorus v. Ireland, 45036/98, [2005] ECHR 440.
39. Groussot, General Principles of Community law (Europa Law Publishing, 2006), pp. 202-212.
40. Case C-345/06, Heinrich, judgment of the Court of Justice (Grand Chamber) of 10 March 2009, nyr.
41. See case note on Heinrich by Bobek, 46 CML Rev. (2009), 2077.
42. Concurring Opinion of Judge Ress, and Joint Concurring Opinion of Judges Rozakis, Tulkens, Traja, Botoucharova, Zagrebelsky and Garlicki, to judgment Bosphorus v. Ireland.
43. See Besselink, "Entrapped by the maximum standard: On fundamental rights, pluralism and subsidiarity in the European Union", 35 CML Rev. (1998), at 634 et seq.
44. Chalmers, "Judicial Authority and the Constitutional Treaty", 3 International Journal of Constitutional Law (2005), 448, at 451-452.
45. Weatherill, Law and Integration in the European Union (OUP, 1995), at p. 106.
46. Case C-183/95, Affish, [1997] ECR I-4315.
47. Steyger, National Traditions and European Community Law: Margarine and Marriage (Ashgate, 1997), p. 190 et seq.
48. Ojanen, "The Impact of EU Membership on Finnish Constitutional Law", 10 EPL (2004), at 542 and 545.
49. Case C-303/05, Advocaten voor de Wereld, [2007] ECR I-3633; for discussion see below section 4.2.
50. See Sadurski (Ed.), Constitutional Justice, East and West. Democratic Legitimacy and Constitutional Courts in Post-Communist Europe in a Comparative Perspective (Kluwer, 2002).
51. Schwartz, The Struggle for Constitutional Justice in Post-Communist Europe (University of Chicago Press, 2000).
52. Priban, Roberts and Young (Eds.), Systems of Justice in Transition. Central European Experiences since 1989 (Ashgate, 2003).
53. Sadurski, Rights Before Courts: A Study of Constitutional Courts in Postcommunist States of Central and Eastern Europe (Springer, 2005).
54. Prochazka, Mission Accomplished: On Founding Constitutional Adjudication in Central Europe (CEU Press, Budapest, 2002).
55. Sajó, "Learning Co-operative Constitutionalism the Hard Way: The Hungarian Constitutional Court Shying Away from EU Supremacy", 2 Zeitschrift für Staatsund Europawissenschaften (2004), 351, at 371.
56. For the two categories of constitutions, see Besselink, "The Dutch Constitution, the European Constitution and the Referendum in the Netherlands" in Albi and Ziller (Eds.), The European Constitution and National Constitutions: Ratification and Beyond (Kluwer, 2006), p. 113 et seq.
57. Albi, EU Enlargement and the Constitutions of Central and Eastern Europe (Cambridge University Press, 2005), p. 22 et seq.
58. Dupré, Importing the Law in Post-Communist Transitions. The Hungarian Constitutional Court and the Right to Human Dignity (Hart, 2003), at p. 20.
59. Solyom, "On the Co-operation of Constitutional Courts: Introduction to the 10th Conference of European Constitutional Courts", www.mkab.hu, p. 25.
60. Schwartz, "Eastern Europe's Constitutional Courts", 9 Journal of Democracy (1998), 100, at 104.
61. Scheppele, "The New Hungarian Constitutional Court", 8 East European Constitutional Review (1999), No. 4.
62. Aaviksoo, "Kohtulik activism põhiseaduslikkuse järelevalve funktsioonina. Kui aktivistlik on Eesti põhiseaduskohus?" [Judicial activism as a function of constitutional review. How activist is the Estonian Constitutional Court?] 5 Juridica (2005), 295, at 296.
63. Sadurski, "Constitutional Courts in the Process of Articulating Constitutional Rights in the Post-Communist States of Central and Eastern Europe. Part IV: Restrictions on Constitutional Rights", EUI Law Working Paper No. 2003/10, at 18.
64. See Albi, "Ironies in human rights protection in the EU: Pre-accession conditionality and post-accession conundrums", 15 ELJ (2009), 46-69.
65. Decision 17/2004 (V. 25) AB.
66. Judgment No. 3-3-1-33-06 of 05 Oct. 2006, Hadleri Toidulisandite AS, in Estonian at www.nc.ee.
67. Case C-560/07, Balbiino, judgment of 4 June 2009, nyr.
68. Laulhé Shaelou, "'Back to reality': The implications of EU membership in the constitutional legal order of Cyprus" in Łazowski (Ed.), Brave new world: Application of EU law in the new Member States (T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague, forthcoming 2010).
69. Pl. ÚS 50/04, 8 March 2006; English translation available at.
70. See Albi, "Supremacy of EC law in the new Member States: Bringing Parliaments into the equation of 'Co-operative constitutionalism'", 3 EuConst (2007), 25.
71. I am grateful to Michal Bobek for highlighting this point.
72. To borrow an expression used by Everling.
73. See e.g. Baquero Cruz, "The Legacy of the Maastricht-Urteil and the Pluralist Movement", (2008) ELJ, 389 et seq.
74. Eijsbouts and Besselink, "'The Law of Laws'-Overcoming Pluralism", (2008) EuConst, 95-398.
75. For a summary of the debate, see Avbelj and Komàrek, "Four Visions of Constitutional Pluralism", (2008) EuConst, 524-527.
76. Kadi and Al Barakaat v. Council and Commission.
77. O.J. 2002, L 190/1, in Advocaten voor de Wereld.
78. Sarmiento described the judgment as "disappointing", as the Court "refused to make any comment on much-contested issues" and made "little effort to engage with the Court's national counterparts".
79. Sarmiento, "European Union: The European arrest warrant and the quest for constitutional coherence", (2008) International Journal of Constitutional Law, at 177-178.
80. Among voluminous literature, see e.g. Komarek, "European Constitutional Pluralism and the European Arrest Warrant: Contrapunctual Principles in Disharmony", Jean Monnet Working Paper No. 10/05, .
81. Siegel, "Courts and Compliance in the EU: the European Arrest Warrant in National Constitutional Courts", Jean Monnet Working Paper No. 5/2008, .
82. van Sliedregt, "The European Arrest Warrant: Extradition in Transition", 3 EuConst (2007), 244.
83. Hinajeros Parga, "Bundesverfassungsgericht Decision of 18 July 2005 on the German European Arrest Warrant Law", 43 CML Rev. (2006), 43, at 583-595.
84. Pollicino, "European Arrest Warrant and Constitutional Principles of the Member States: A Case Law-Based Outline in an Attempt to Strike the Right Balance Between Legal Systems", 9 German Law Journal (2008), 1313.
85. Fichera, "The European Arrest Warrant and the Sovereign State: A Marriage of Convenience?", 15 ELJ (2009), at 81-82, etc.
86. Marin, "The European Arrest Warrant in the Italian Republic", 4 EuConst (2008), at 268-9.
87. The Fair Trials International has used the story of Andrew Symeou as a "spotlight case": Symeou, a 19-year old London student, was extradited to Greece without any opportunity to defend himself. He was accused of manslaughter in a nightclub while having been on holiday in Greece; however Symeou maintains that he had arrived at the club 3 hours after the incident. He had been implicated by witnesses after the police had beaten and threatened them for eight hours, denying them food and water; the statements had been retracted afterwards. Five of the victim's friends, who had witnessed the incident, described the perpetrator as tall, blond, clean shaven and wearing a blue polo shirt.
88. Photos of Symeou at the time show him having dark hair, a beard and a yellow t-shirt. Fair trials international, .
89. For example, a UK national Theresa Daniels, who was sentenced to 10 years in prison in Spain, had assumed until the end of the proceedings (where no translation was provided) that she had been in the process as a witness. Fair Trials International submission to the EU Justice and Home Affairs Council Working Group, 9 July 2009, http://www.fairtrials.net/campaigns.
90. Justice Report 'The European Arrest Warrant Briefing and Suggested Amendments', September 2009, www.justice.org.uk, paras. 46-47.
91. E.g. theft of a mobile phone, a theft of wardrobe doors, and traffic offences.
92. see 'Door Thief, Piglet Rustler, Pudding Snatcher: British Courts Despair at Extradition Requests', The Guardian, 20 October 2008.
93. 'Extradited for 'stealing' a mobile phone', Times Online, 13 August 2009, http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article6792237.ece.
94. 'UK grandmother 'wanted' by France', BBC News, 26 July 2009, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8169357.stm.
95. See e.g. the case of Jan Tabbers, highlighted by Fair Trials International, http.://fairtrials.net.
96. Fair Trials International submission to the EU Justice and Home Affairs Council Working Group, 9 July 2009, http://www.fairtrials.net/campaigns, p. 4.
97. O.J. 2006, L 105/54.
98. Judgment of 2 March 2010. For an English summary, see .
99. Decision No. 12581 of Oct. 2009, English translation available at .
100. See anno ta tion by Murphy in this Review, at 000-000.
101. Case C-301/06, Ireland v. Parliament and Council, [2009] ECR I-82.
102. See Statewatch Report "The Shape of Things to Come", 11 Sept. 2008, .
103. See with regard to Germany, Von Bogdandy, "A birds-eye view on the science of European Law: Structures, debates and development prospects of basic research on the law of the European Union in a German Perspective", 6 ELJ (2000), 210.
104. In France, the divide appears to be between "integrationists" and "souverainists".