(under publication in 'European Review of Public Law'). The power of dissolution has undoubtedly evolved over the past century. Through its tactical use, it has nowadays become an important party weapon leading to a great concentration of power in the hands of the Prime Minister both in the UK and in Greece. The present article,… Read More »
Volumes of legal work, among which also pages of excellent legal refinement, have been mobilized to convince the good old times to come back. It didn’t help. There is no grumble in this statement; it’s just the acknowledgment that, in conditions of the extremity of the actual crisis, something else precedes and law follows. In… Read More »
Le recours à l’intérêt public est une constante dans la pratique constitutionnelle de la Grèce durant la crise économique. Le législateur et le juge l’invoquent -dans de différentes versions (important, national, supérieur, suprême)- pour justifier une politique censée nécessaire à la survie de l’État, ainsi que des mesures législatives qui affaiblissent la protection des droits… Read More »
The serious impact of current globalization can be detected both on national and global level, as it challenges the state sovereignty and territoriality, alters the form and character of political community, and raises serious questions about the proper scope of democracy and the locus of effective political power. Although there is a demand for global… Read More »
In conditions of severe economic crisis such as the one greek society is experiencing during the last 3 years, social tension and antagonism tend to sharpen, quite obviously revealing, how all forms of violence are being created and reproduced. Under these conditions, intensified gender-based violence, that permeates social relations of gendered subjects, would inevitably occur. This essay… Read More »
Οι αποφάσεις του Δικαστηρίου της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης (Δ.Ε.Ε.) στις υποθέσεις Laval και Viking έχουν προσελκύσει και ακόμη προσελκύουν έντονο ενδιαφέρον, καθώς αγγίζουν τον πυρήνα του προβληματισμού, που διέπει τη ρύθμιση των εργασιακών σχέσεων σε επίπεδο Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης. Η μελέτη επιχειρεί να σχολιάσει τις αποφάσεις Laval και Viking από τη σκοπιά τόσο του εργατικού όσο και του συνταγματικού δικαίου. Παρουσιάζονται κριτικά τα βασικά επιχειρήματα του Δικαστηρίου και εντοπίζονται οι ανακολουθίες και αντιφάσεις του δικανικού συλλογισμού. Η προσοχή της συγγραφέως εστιάζεται στη μεθοδολογία που ακολούθησε το Δικαστήριο, καθώς και στις γενικές θεωρητικές – δικαιικές παραδοχές που διέπουν παρόμοιες αποφάσεις. Υποστηρίζεται ότι και στις δύο σχολιαζόμενες αποφάσεις κυριάρχησε η διπολική, τυπική, λογική «κανόνας – εξαίρεση», στην οποία η οικονομική ελευθερία λογίζεται ως κανόνας και τα συνδικαλιστικά δικαιώματα ως εξαίρεση. Υπογραμμίζεται ότι ο δικανικός συλλογισμός οργανώθηκε στη βάση μιας τυπικής προσέγγισης, η οποία, αφενός είναι ακατάλληλη για την αντιμετώπιση σχετικών δικαιικών αντιπαραθέσεων και, αφετέρου, υποθάλπει μια προβληματική, προ-ερμηνευτική, αποδοχή που στηρίζει μια αφηρημένη αξιακή ιεράρχηση των θεμελιωδών δικαιωμάτων από την πλευρά του Δικαστηρίου).
In this article the recent jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights of Person is examined regarding the matter of conflict between the privacy of public figures and the rights to freedom of expression and press, as guaranteed in the Art. 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights. More specifically, the cases Mosley and MGN Ltd versus United Kingdom (2011) are analyzed as well as their impact in the British legal order and in the jurisprudence of the ECtHR. As it is argued these cases reflect a new era for the high level of protection that the ECtHR provided for the freedom of expression (Art. 10 ECHR) due to the new endangerments that the tabloids and the paparazzi pose for the privacy of public figures. Finally, instead of conclusion, five fundamental principles for the balancing between freedom of expression and privacy are proposed, specifically adopted to resolve public figure cases.
This paper aims at highlighting the inadequacy of two draft European Directives on the family reunification of same-sex partners. The category “family members” is defined in a sense wider than in existing law to include unmarried partners. This applies only, however, if the national law of the Member State concerned treats unmarried partners as being equal to married ones. The draft Directives generate no harmonisation in these cases: they reinforce the principle of equal treatment between nationals and other EU citizens but allow for differentiated treatment in different Member States. Under such a provision, European citizenship appears to supersede national barriers but to tolerate discrimination based on sex and sexuality. Homosexual and bisexual Europeans remain invisible in the law and European citizenship remains divisible when it comes to preferences related to the personal and intimate life of individuals.
Im Rahmen der Bestimmung ihres Binnenraums können die Parteien auch Quoten (z.B. Frauenquoten) aufnehmen, um den geringeren Anteil der quotierten Gruppe (bei Frauenquoten: an Frauen) an den Parteiorganen und Parlamenten zu erhöhen, und den Frauen eine gerechte Position und tatsächliche Gleichstellung zu versichern. Diese Arbeit überprüft und, schließlich, bejaht die Frage der Verfassungsmäßigkeit der innerparteilichen Quotenregelungen.
If we choose freedom of religion as a subjective right over freedom of a religion to impose itself on the subjects, then normatively, we need to accept that children, since they lack the moral and cognitive skills to make an informed and free choice of religion, should not be indoctrinated and adhere to a specific religion before they are mature enough to do so. We need furthermore to accept that parents do not have the right to choose their children’s religion and decide about their religious education. Freedom of religion for adults can only be realised if children have already enjoyed it, in its special manifestation as freedom from religion.
Μια από τις λέξεις που έχει εισχωρήσει πλέον, με τρόπο σχεδόν παγιωτικό, στο καθημερινό μας λεξιλόγιο είναι αυτή του «Μνημονίου». Με τον όρο αυτό αποδίδουμε, συνήθως, εν συντομία, το σύνολο των τυπικών νομικών και άτυπων πράξεων που συναπαρτίζουν τον «μηχανισμό στήριξης της Ελληνικής Οικονομίας», μέρος του οποίου είναι και το Μνημόνιο stricto sensu, δηλαδή το Μνημόνιο Συνεννόησης που υπογράφηκε στις 3 Μαΐου 2010 μεταξύ της Ελληνικής Δημοκρατίας και της Ευρωπαϊκής Επιτροπής, ως εκπροσώπου των κρατών-μελών της Ε.Ε.
Rebuilding the Greek economy will require creative interaction with the underlying realities of Greek society: the family, the small business, the habits of rentocracy and of low-trust opportunism.
After the shooting of a fifteen year old by a patrolling police guard on December 6th, 2008, Greece was faced with the worst unrests and disorder in several decades. By now, most designate these events as the “December riots.” How can we make sense of them? Political riots of that scale seemed to have been eliminated from Greek politics, relegated to a less developed past of political immaturity. Could this suggest that although politically defeated and historically exhausted, these confrontational and agonistic forms of extra-institutional politics might be in the process of reappearing? Furthermore, to what grievances did the unrest speak? And how do we understand its political meaning and effects? How can we interrogate its provocations and consider its implications? Are we at the beginning of new political realignments, new forms of civic contestation and participation, new social struggles?
Constitutions do matter for privatization. While ordinary law functions mainly as an implementation means for privatization programmes, constitutional law functions mainly as their limitation. The central issue is to draw the boundaries of the realm that, according to the Constitution, has to remain public. A crucial distinction to be made here is that between the economic activity of the state and the exercise of public authority.
Hans Kelsen refused to develop a democratic theory of the basic norm. Given that he expounded a strong distinction between law and politics as two separate scientific disciplines he consistently argued against any attempt to politicize legal science and corrupt its object of cognition. As a result, there has been very little discussion of the basic norm in relation to his democratic theory. This article attempts to fill this gap by tracing the relationship between the basic norm and democracy in Kelsen’s legal and political writings. More precisely, it maps Kelsen’s seminal distinction between autonomy and heteronomy onto his reflections on constitutional making and probes the anti-democratic implications of his theory of the basic norm as they undermine the normative foundations of democratic theory. The article concludes by addressing the question of whether it is possible to articulate a theory of the democratic ground norm, of democratic foundings with a normative content, by proposing the idea of an immanent, performative basic norm as the source of validity of a democratic constitutional order.