Prospects, Needs and Pitfalls of Constitutionalization of the EU and the EAEU
Associate Professor, Department of International and European Law, Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University, firstname.lastname@example.org
elibrary_id: 289726 | ORCID: 0000-0003-1495-3227 | RESEARCHER_ID: E-4806-2018
Senior Researcher, Institute of Europe, Russian Academy of Sciences; Senior Researcher, National Research University Higher School of Economics, email@example.com
elibrary_id: 802154 | ORCID: 0000-0003-4198-4870 |
Professor, Head of Department of European Law, MGIMO University, firstname.lastname@example.org
elibrary_id: 540593 | ORCID: 0000-0001-9562-8340 |
Sooner or later all integration associations using mechanisms of supranational legal regulation, decision-making process and execution face problems of constitutionalization. They need to build a coherent and consistent system of relations between supranational, intergovernmental and national authorities, between supranational and national sources of law. They need to overcome the obstacles that lie in the way of building a common economic space, to remove the contradictions caused by the need to ensure the four basic freedoms of the common market. Constitutionalization provides both the theoretical basis and the necessary tools. The European Union first encountered this problem. He followed the path of hierarchization of relations and law. The European Union has formed a separate legal system giving the internal legal order of association a set of qualitative characteristics that are considered to be classical to some extent. Priority attention was given to the development of fundamental values that are now of a high importance for the EU and to the gradual promotion of the legislative process to the forefront of such a supranational body as the European Parliament. The experience gained by the EU in this area can be of great benefit to the Eurasian Economic Union that is also formed according to the patterns of supranational institutional and legal construction. This experience is of particular importance in view of the crisis experienced by the EU since only the EU was able to develop institutional and legal solutions that can work within the framework of the integration association and which should be discarded. The article shows that the EAEU differs from the EU in a wide range of parameters, its goals and principles of functioning. It argues that the recipes of constitutionalization in the form they were used by the EU it is not suitable for the EAEU. At the same time the technical tools of constitutionalization developed by the EU may be suitable for the EAEU to solve the current tasks of self-assertion, consolidation and positioning in the international arena.
European Union Law. 2017. Ed. by C. Barnard, S. Peers. London, New York: Oxford University Press. 853 p.
Habermas J. 2012. The Crisis of the European Union in the Light of a Constitutionalization of International Law. – The European Journal of International Law. Vol. 23. No. 2. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chs019
Hartley T.C. 2010. The Foundations of European Union Law. London, New York: Oxford University Press. 501 p.
Hrestic M.-L. 2014. The Consequences of the “Constitutionalization” of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. – Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences. Vol. 149. P. 404-408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.08.198
Klabbers J. 2016. Sui Generis? The European Union as an International Organization. – A Companion to European Union Law and International Law. Ed. by D. Patterson, A. Södersten. Wiley-Blackwell. P. 3-15. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119037712.ch1
Klamert M. 2017. The Autonomy of the EU (and of EU Law): Through the Kaleidoscope. – European Law Review. Vol. 42. No. 6. P. 815-830.
Rittberger B., Schimmelfennig F. 2005. The Constitutionalization of the European Union: Explaining the Parliamentarization and Institutionalization of Human Rights. Austin, Texas. URL: http://aei.pitt.edu/3301/1/EUSA_Rittberger_%26_Schimmelfennig.txt (accessed 16.05.2019).
Rittberger B., Schimmelfennig F. 2008. The Constitutionalization of the European Union. Paper prepared for presentation at the workshop. – Global Constitutionalism: Process and Substance, 17-19 January 2008, Kandersteg, Switzerland. 33 p.
The Constitutionalization of the European Union. 2008. – Journal of European Public Policy Special Issues as a Book. Ed. by Rittberger B., Schimmelfennig F. Taylor & Francis Ltd. Imprint Routledge. 180 p.
Ziegler K.S. 2016. The Relationship between EU Law and International Law. – A Companion to European Union Law and International Law. Ed. by D. Patterson, A. Södersten. Wiley-Blackwell. P. 42-61. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119037712.ch4
Afontsev C. 2014. New Regionalism. – Postnauka. (In Russ.) URL: https://postnauka.ru/longreads/26527 (accessed 16.05.2019).
K Soyuzu Еvropy [To the Union of Europe]. 2010. Analiticheskij doklad rossijskoj gruppy Mezhdunarodnogo diskussionnogo kluba “Valdaj” [Analytical Report of the Russian Group of the International Discussion Club “Valdai”]. Saint Petersburg – Kizhi – Valaam, Moscow. August 31 – September 7, 2010. (In Russ.)
Entin M.L., Entina E.G., Tnelm N.I. 2018. V poiskakh partnerskikh otnoshenii – VII: Rossiya i Evropeiskii Soyuz v 2017 – pervoi polovine 2018 godov [In Search of Partnership – VII: Russia and the European Union in 2017 – the First Half of 2018]. Moscow: Zebra E. 816 p. (In Russ.)
Ispolinov A.S. 2013. Court of Justice of the EU, Yassin Kadi and the Article 103 of the UN Charter. – Russian Juridical Journal. Vol. 93. No. 6. P. 27-35. (In Russ.)
Ispolinov A.S. 2015. Second Veto of the Court of Justice of the European Union on the Accession of the European Union to the European Convention of Human Rights. – International Justice. Vol. 13. No. 1. P. 118-134. (In Russ.)
Kashkin S.Yu. 2010. Constitutionalization of European Law in the Light of the Lisbon Treaty. – Yuridicheskaya nauka i obrazovanie. No. 3. P. 227-240. (In Russ.)
Kaveshnikov N.Yu. 2017. Institutional and Political Development of the European Union: Systemic Crisis and Transformation Options. – Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya. Vol. 61. No. 5. P. 14-24. (In Russ.)
Neshataeva T.N. 2014. Integration and Supranationalism. – Perm University Herald. Juridical Sciences. Vol. 24. No. 2. P. 243-248. (In Russ.)
Potemkina O.Yu. 2018. European Parliament 2019: Preparations for Elections. – Sovremennaya Еvropa. Vol. 83. No. 4. P. 35-45. (In Russ.)
Sokolova N.A. 2017. Eurasian Economic Union: Legal Nature and Nature of Law. – Lex Russica. No. 11. P. 47-57. (In Russ.)
Strezhneva M.V. 2016. Supranationality and Subsidiarity Principle in the European Union and Beyond. – Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya. Vol. 60. No. 6. P. 5-14. (In Russ.)
Human rights as subject of political science and as interdisciplinary conception. – Polis. Political Studies. 2010. No6
Verlaine M., Shashkova A.V., Kudryashova E.V.,
Amendments to Russian Constitution and International Institutions Decisions: EAEU Prospective. – Polis. Political Studies. 2020. No5
Legal-Institutional Freedom in a Changing Society. – Polis. Political Studies. 1996. No6
The demon of law. Russian law as escaping reality. – Polis. Political Studies. 2011. No2
Individual, group, collective and general rights under the conditions of multiculturalism. – Polis. Political Studies. 2010. No6