Monday

17th Jun 2019

Opinion

The arrogant judges in Luxembourg and what it is actually about

It has become a kind of a sport for certain European politicians to criticise the European Court of Justice (ECJ) for acting beyond its competences. Prominent examples include former Austrian chancellor Wolfgang Schüssel and Danish prime minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen.

The argument goes that the Court in Luxembourg is interfering with the competences of the member states by systematically ruling on issues which do not form part of the EU's remit. In other words, the ECJ is being accused of creating new law instead of applying existing law.

Read and decide

Join EUobserver today

Support quality EU news

Get instant access to all articles — and 18 year's of archives. 30 days free trial.

... or join as a group

  • "Judges make good targets for public bashing because they do not shoot back" (Photo: Xavier Deweer)

Mr Schüssel in several interviews claimed that the ECJ had "in the last couple of years systematically expanded European competences," mentioning as an example the Austrian universities judgment of the ECJ of July 2005. In that case, the ECJ struck down an Austrian law restricting access of foreign students to Austrian universities.

Let us have a closer look at the case. Austrian legislation (the Universitäts-Studiengesetz) foresaw the following for students who had obtained their secondary education diploma in a member state other than Austria, and who intended to pursue their higher education (including university studies) in Austria: They were not only required to produce that diploma, but also to prove that they fulfil the conditions of access to higher studies in the EU member state where they obtained their diploma.

By this additional criterion, the Austrian government basically tried to get rid of the influx of German students in medical schools who for a couple of years had started to study at Austrian universities, many of them after having failed to get access to German medical schools.

Austrian universities case: the Court was right

The case concerned the free movement of persons, a principle fundamental to the internal market, which among other things gives students the right to reside and to attend studies in another EU country. Moreover, the 1992 Maastricht Treaty introduced EU citizenship, hereby further strengthening the free movement of persons principle.

The ECJ based its judgment on the provisions relating to vocational training in the EC Treaty (Art. 149 and 150). Among other objectives these provisions state that European Community action shall aim to facilitate access to vocational training and encourage mobility of students and teachers, particularly of young people.

The concept of 'vocational training' comprises any form of education, including at university level, which prepares for a profession, trade, or employment, the ECJ had already made clear in rulings in the 1980s.

The Court thus strictly followed the underlying logic of the internal market. Moreover, another article in the EC Treaty (Art. 12) for its part prohibits any discrimination on grounds of nationality.

The ECJ was obviously right to find that indeed this particular issue touched on European Community competences and that the Austrian legislation was in breach of the EC Treaty by discriminating students from EU member states other than Austria.

As the ECJ put it very clearly: the opportunities of the free movement of persons "are not fully effective if a person is penalised merely for using them". Interestingly enough, the only intervening member state in this case, Finland, did not support the Austrian government's position but that of the European Commission.

Danish and Norwegian complaints

What then lies behind the political astonishment in question? Danish Prime Minister Rasmussen, in a general criticism of the ECJ, was cited in the Austrian daily Der Standard as follows: "We all easily have the feeling that [at the ECJ], decisions are being taken of which the basis of the judgments do not fully correspond with what we have agreed as the political basis of the development of the EU."

Meanwhile, the sister court of the ECJ, the Court of the European Free Trade Association (which has jurisdiction over Iceland, Norway, and Liechtenstein), has faced criticism of engaging in illegitimate judicial activism, too.

In a recent case against Norway concerning its public gaming monopoly, the agent of the Norwegian government alluded to the possibility that his country would not implement a negative judgment from the court. Norway was of the opinion that if the gaming market is to be opened up, then this should not come about from the EFTA Court judges.

Mushy treaty language

A conference in May 2007 in Salzburg chaired by Professor Carl Baudenbacher, President of the EFTA Court in Luxembourg and a prominent scholar in that field, dealt with the subject of "acceptance and criticism of judgments". It brought together legal experts from EU and EFTA countries and elsewhere. One of the speakers, Ian Forrester, an eminent Brussels-based practising lawyer, made interesting remarks regarding the historical and political background of the criticism on the ECJ.

When the Rome Treaties were drafted between 1956 and 1957, the small group of diplomats in charge of the draft camouflaged gaps of understanding and of agreement by using mushy language. Well aware of what they were doing, they "overcame" the underlying political disagreements by using this fudging technique.

After the adoption of the Treaties, the British Embassy in Paris put forward a long list of questions regarding the actual legal effect of numerous Treaty provisions to the French Foreign Ministry. Shortly after this, in July 1958 the European Commission, having been informed about the issue, acknowledged the uncertainties and promised to clarify them as soon as possible.

Unsurprisingly, this never happened because it would have meant re-opening the negotiations on sensitive political issues on which the member states had been unable to agree!

Hence, the interpretation of those provisions was left to the ECJ which was supposed to find answers in a legal framework which was far from being clear and carefully drafted. In that situation, the ECJ followed a way of interpretation which is determined by the purposes and objectives of European integration – as they were defined in the preamble and the introducing Treaty provisions by the political leaders themselves: "To create an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe."

Judges as bashing targets

Politicians have their own agenda and it is common knowledge that it is always easier for a national politician to blame somebody else for a situation, especially if this somebody is an anonymous court far away in Luxembourg, without a face known from the media.

It is furthermore common ground that politicians want to get re-elected and it is of course not easy to sell the constraints posed by treaties to the public at home. In the Austrian university case, the proper solution would have actually been to find a political agreement at the European level on the impact for the national (social and educational) budgets caused by the free movement of persons provisions.

Yet, instead of addressing this obvious issue at the political level it was again left to the Court to find answers to uncomfortable questions.

Judges have the task of interpreting the law and rendering judgments. They do not comment on their judgments in the media nor do they shoot back when being criticised. This is exactly what makes judges such good targets for public bashing – unlike politicians who will loudly fire back when being attacked.

Simon Planzer is a Zurich-based attorney at law and research fellow in European and international business law at the University of St.Gallen

Disclaimer

The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author's, not those of EUobserver.

Catalonia MEPs are a judicial, not political, issue

Carles Puigdemont and Toni Comin currently live outside Spain. They were prosecuted for the serious crimes, and they have fled justice. It is not possible to judge in absentia in Spain, where the justice system protects the rights of defendants.

Letter

MDIF responds to Orban criticism

In his response, Dr Zoltan Kovacs does not even try to refute my main point about Hungary: that most Hungarian news media have been captured by the state, and that this anti-democratic trend is spreading across Eastern Europe.

Letter

Right of reply from the Hungarian government

A right of reply on behalf of the Hungarian government to the opinion piece "Orban-style 'media capture' is spreading across Europe" published on 6 June.

EU report recognises Albania's achievements

Albania currently faces a serious crisis, which it would be foolish for all actors in the international community to ignore. Yet we must ask that our partners in Europe read Federica Mogherini's report carefully and recognise accomplishments.

'A Europe that protects': what does that actually mean?

Current challenges to the rule of law, an independent civil society, and the equal treatment of minorities are just as much in need of tackling as are the challenges of globalisation, migration, and digitalisation.

News in Brief

  1. Swiss stock exchange could lose EU access in July
  2. Austria's Strache will not take up EU parliament seat
  3. Tanker attacks pose questions for EU on Iran deal
  4. Johnson skips TV debate for UK prime ministership
  5. Slovakia's first female president takes office
  6. Irish immigration officers flew back business class
  7. Catalan MEP denied taking seat in European Parliament
  8. EU plans to restructure eurozone bonds

Six takeaways on digital disinformation at EU elections

For example, Germany's primetime TV news reported that 47 percent of political social media discussions were related to the extreme-right AfD party, when in fact this was the case only for Twitter - used by only four percent of Germans.

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. Nordic Council of MinistersNo evidence that social media are harmful to young people
  2. Nordic Council of MinistersCanada to host the joint Nordic cultural initiative 2021
  3. Vote for the EU Sutainable Energy AwardsCast your vote for your favourite EUSEW Award finalist. You choose the winner of 2019 Citizen’s Award.
  4. Nordic Council of MinistersEducation gets refugees into work
  5. Counter BalanceSign the petition to help reform the EU’s Bank
  6. UNICEFChild rights organisations encourage candidates for EU elections to become Child Rights Champions
  7. UNESDAUNESDA Outlines 2019-2024 Aspirations: Sustainability, Responsibility, Competitiveness
  8. Counter BalanceRecord citizens’ input to EU bank’s consultation calls on EIB to abandon fossil fuels
  9. International Partnership for Human RightsAnnual EU-Turkmenistan Human Rights Dialogue takes place in Ashgabat
  10. Nordic Council of MinistersNew campaign: spot, capture and share Traces of North
  11. Nordic Council of MinistersLeading Nordic candidates go head-to-head in EU election debate
  12. Nordic Council of MinistersNew Secretary General: Nordic co-operation must benefit everybody

Latest News

  1. Spain's Garcia set to be next Socialist leader in parliament
  2. Erdogan mocks Macron amid EU sanctions threat
  3. The most dangerous pesticide you've never heard of
  4. 'Russian sources' targeted EU elections with disinformation
  5. Top EU jobs summit dominates This WEEK
  6. EP parties planning 'coalition agenda' ahead of jobs summit
  7. MEP blasts Portugal over football whistleblower
  8. Catalonia MEPs are a judicial, not political, issue

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. Platform for Peace and JusticeMEP Kati Piri: “Our red line on Turkey has been crossed”
  2. UNICEF2018 deadliest year yet for children in Syria as war enters 9th year
  3. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic commitment to driving global gender equality
  4. International Partnership for Human RightsMeet your defender: Rasul Jafarov leading human rights defender from Azerbaijan
  5. UNICEFUNICEF Hosts MEPs in Jordan Ahead of Brussels Conference on the Future of Syria
  6. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic talks on parental leave at the UN
  7. International Partnership for Human RightsTrial of Chechen prisoner of conscience and human rights activist Oyub Titiev continues.
  8. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic food policy inspires India to be a sustainable superpower
  9. Nordic Council of MinistersMilestone for Nordic-Baltic e-ID
  10. Counter BalanceEU bank urged to free itself from fossil fuels and take climate leadership
  11. Intercultural Dialogue PlatformRoundtable: Muslim Heresy and the Politics of Human Rights, Dr. Matthew J. Nelson
  12. Platform for Peace and JusticeTurkey suffering from the lack of the rule of law

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. UNESDASoft Drinks Europe welcomes Tim Brett as its new president
  2. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic ministers take the lead in combatting climate change
  3. Counter BalanceEuropean Parliament takes incoherent steps on climate in future EU investments
  4. International Partnership For Human RightsKyrgyz authorities have to immediately release human rights defender Azimjon Askarov
  5. Nordic Council of MinistersSeminar on disability and user involvement
  6. Nordic Council of MinistersInternational appetite for Nordic food policies
  7. Nordic Council of MinistersNew Nordic Innovation House in Hong Kong
  8. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic Region has chance to become world leader when it comes to start-ups
  9. Nordic Council of MinistersTheresa May: “We will not be turning our backs on the Nordic region”
  10. International Partnership for Human RightsOpen letter to Emmanuel Macron ahead of Uzbek president's visit
  11. International Partnership for Human RightsRaising key human rights concerns during visit of Turkmenistan's foreign minister
  12. Nordic Council of MinistersState of the Nordic Region presented in Brussels

Join EUobserver

Support quality EU news

Join us