Agrégateur de flux

Zimbabwe's president launches a new investigation into ethnic massacres of the 1980s.

« Les hommes politiques, les journalistes et les politologues parlent un langage qui n'est pas très éloigné du mien quand il ne le recouvre pas, voire le dépasse. Je me suis normalisé puisque tout le monde parle comme moi. » Jean-Marie Le Pen, France Inter, 16 avril 2002 « Loin de rompre avec l'Union (...) / Extrême droite, France, Politique - 2024/07

Der Zukunftsgipfel im September bietet ein Gelegenheitsfenster für Deutschland, eine Erweiterung der Arbeitsmethoden der Generalversammlung der Vereinten Nationen voranzutreiben.

This blog post summarises the contribution I submitted for the UACES 2024 Graduate Forum held this June in Amsterdam. I want to thank UACES for having organised and provided funds for attending this event!

 

Human rights constitute the core values of the European Union, enforceable both internally and externally. Through the Amsterdam Treaty-consolidated acquis communautaire, they have become a cornerstone of the EU law. Yet, the EU’s journey towards human rights inclusion in the treaties has been lengthy. It has been largely shaped by significant case law, notably from the German Constitutional Court, which standardized human rights based on common constitutional traditions. Equally important is the role of the European Convention and Court on Human Rights as a source for EU human rights, despite the EU Court of Justice denying the possibility of an EU membership in the convention. Finally, the third source of human rights can be found in international human rights law, especially its constituent treaties. All relevant sources were subsequently enshrined in treaty provisions, thereby enriching the construction of EU legal instruments, and ultimately fostering an EU principled approach.

Recently, this principled approach has been further concretised in EU regulatory efforts, encompassing a growing array of policies, and spanning from environmental protection to supply chains.

 

Environmental Protection and Human Rights

The EU Green Deal (EGD) has been a central policy of the 2019-2024 Commission. At its core are the commitments to achieve a carbon-neutral EU by 2050, first outlined and subsequently consolidated in the 2021 Regulation amending the broader EU climate law. While the instrument itself does not explicitly mention human rights, many associated policies include provisions that address human rights considerations. This is particularly evident in due diligence-based instruments and other regulatory frameworks such as the EU Critical Raw Materials Act (CRMA), which includes provisions addressing human rights considerations in international partnerships. Other instruments related to the EGD also include human rights provisions. The EU Battery Regulation mandates risk assessments and necessary actions linked to due diligence in cases where human rights abuses are at risk. The EU auditing regime has also been expanded to include assessments of sustainability and human rights impacts. Notably, the 2022 Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) extends human rights and sustainability requirements, previously established in non-financial reporting, to sustainability reporting, merging these concepts under a broader umbrella of sustainability.

These amendments underscore the EU’s commitment to a principled approach to human rights and its expanding influence in the business sector. Moreover, they demonstrate the inseparable nature of human rights and sustainability. Legislative developments, including recent case law from the European Court of Human Rights, support the integration of environmental rights within the realm of human rights. However, the intersection of environmental and human rights represents just one aspect of the broader EU human rights efforts. The imminent introduction of the due diligence directive presents an additional dimension to this unfolding debate.

 

Human Rights Through Supply Chains

The development of the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CS3D) was some years ago but has only recently concluded. Developing a human rights due diligence policy for supply chains was not just an independent EU initiative; it followed existing instruments in several member states. Notably, three EU member states had already developed instruments covering supply chains. The French Loi de Vigilance (Law of Vigilance – 2017) and the German LkSG (Supply Chain Act – 2021) are broad-spectrum due diligence instruments, while the Dutch Child Labour Due Diligence Law (2019) is subject-specific. The CS3D aims to complement these national actions by establishing a unified EU framework for environmental and human rights due diligence applicable to large companies. The CS3D mandates the application of EU human rights standards through due diligence within the EU. It also extends these requirements to supply chains and large companies from third countries operating within the EU internal market. It also provides mechanisms for member states to enforce penalties in cases of non-compliance. The overarching goal is to hold businesses accountable for upholding human rights, prevent gross violations within and outside of the EU borders, and establish penalty regimes for violations.

The CS3D stands out as a pivotal instrument demonstrating the EU’s principled approach, not only for its intrinsic value but also for its establishment of a unified EU-wide system to enforce human rights standards in the business sector. This framework complements existing international frameworks established by the UN, OECD, and the ILO. The CS3D represents the next phase of EU human rights policy and aligns with a global trend toward holding large corporations accountable. This aspect reinforces the EU’s role as a prominent global advocate for human rights, showcasing its commitment to external enforcement beyond traditional conditionality measures. This instrument encapsulates the evolution of the EU’s principled approach, building on past efforts and paving the way for future developments in human rights protection.

The post Advancing a Principled Approach: Human Rights and Environmental Integration in the EU Business Sector appeared first on Ideas on Europe.

Die Koordination haben Ronja Kempin und Paweł Tokarski übernommen.

The newly elected European Parliament will hold its constitutive session from 16 to 19 July in Strasbourg.

Source : © European Union, 2024 - EP

Both Equatorial Guinea and Morocco tried to persuade the Spanish-born teenage sensation to play for them.

This article is based on research presented at the UACES Graduate Forum Conference 2024 and is anticipated to be published in a journal article currently undergoing evaluation.

The 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine has reignited interest in EU enlargement, presenting new opportunities for (pre-)accession candidates. While much attention is often given to the Council and the European Commission, the European Parliament’s role is frequently overlooked. Moreover, scholars mainly focused on the Parliament (EP’s) broader role in the domain of foreign policy, specifically its tools to potentially exert influence and the extent to which it does within CFSP/CSDP. In contrast, despite its clearly distinctive position within the institutional power balance of the Union, the capabilities of Parliament when it comes to enlargement policy are yet to be appropriately addressed in the literature.

This blog post explores how the EP can leverage both formal and informal sources of power to potentially influence EU enlargement policy, thereby identifying five key tools that stand out as most prominent in the literature: agenda-setting, the consent procedure, standing parliamentary delegations, budgetary authority, and parliamentary oversight. The findings reveal a notable disparity between the European Parliament’s formal powers and informal powers, thereby confirming its ‘self-empowerment’ strategy and simultaneously underscoring the consent procedure and the budget as the most powerful tools available for the Parliament.

By combining a document analysis (Treaties, Inter-Institutional Agreements and the EP’s Rules of Procedure) and an extensive literature review (using the iterative snowballing technique), the study provides a comprehensive understanding of the EP’s capabilities to potentially influence enlargement policy.

 

Unpacking the EP’s (Hidden) Powers

The findings highlight a significant disparity between the Parliament’s formal and informal capacities regarding enlargement. While the former are often sparse in this area (except its consent and budgetary powers), the Commission and the Council anticipate the EP’s position when making choices. Besides these politics of anticipation, the Parliament empowers itself through a maximalist interpretation of the Treaties and its engagement in IIAs and its own RoP. Among the five avenues of power, the consent procedure and the power of the purse stand out as the most prominent.

 

1.  Agenda-Setting

Although the EP’s formal role in setting the EU’s enlargement agenda is limited, it can informally shape the agenda through the adoption of reports and resolutions, debates about EU enlargement and speeches by its President, thereby raising the salience of an issue and foster public and/or elite support for EU enlargement.

 

2.  The Consent Procedure

The most clearcut avenue through which the Parliament can weigh on enlargement policy is the consent procedure. Art. 49 TEU grants the EP such veto power in the case of accession through the right to accept or block any application, since Council must consult the Commission and gain EP consent before taking action. In this way Parliament “de facto decides on enlargements”. However, when it comes to enlargement the power given to the EP through the consent procedure is a blunt tool as offers no room to bargain, let alone amend the final text.

Nevertheless, the EP’s threat of veto as well as increased awareness that the views of Parliament are directly legitimized by EU citizens has allowed it to also influence the specific contents of the agreements. By adopting resolutions that set so-called ‘conditions’ for consent and (threatening to) delay the approval of Association or Accession Agreements, the EP pressures the Commission and Council to consider its positions. This has allowed the EP to push for greater attention to political issues such as democracy and human rights in the candidate countries. A unified parliament (i.e., acting with a majority among the main political groups) is, however, essential for making this avenue of power an effective one.

 

3.  Standing Parliamentary Delegations

Parliament can also weigh on enlargement policy with its nine formal standing parliamentary delegations to the (potential) EU candidate countries, through which it can partake in ‘inter- parliamentary diplomacy.’ As such, the standing delegations tend to take on two main functions. Firstly, due to its (mostly) continuous nature, they could also act as ‘preparatory agents’ that offer foundational work for the eventual decisions by the executive as they have more space to maneuver as opposed to traditional diplomacy. Secondly, delegations also allow for potentially influencing the views of parliamentarians from candidate countries as ambassadors of the EU’s constitutional values, able to emphasize matters such as human rights and democracy. However, two caveats need to be made. First, their effectiveness relies on internal coherence between committees and delegations, which often have overlapping competences. And secondly, the unregulated appointment of delegation members can lead to biased representations, potentially undermining fair debate and transforming them into dialogues among the deaf.

 

4.  Budgetary Authority

The EP’s involvement in the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) and the Annual Budget allows it to link funding to specific conditions related to enlargement. Concerning the MFF, the Treaties require

the EP to give consent by absolute majority before the Council can adopt the MFF. Additionally, sectoral regulations, which provide the basis for the funding of almost 40 EU spending programs over a seven- year period, are agreed upon under OLP, putting the EP on equal footing with the Council. This effectively makes the EP a co-legislator on the main external financing instruments regarding enlargement (i.e. IPA and NDICI) as the ceilings and overall amounts of these instruments are decided by the MFF, but not exactly how they are organized, i.e., their general and specific objectives and the size, form and rules of the funding.

Turning to the Annual Budget then, it is within the seven-year ceilings of the MFF that the Parliament’s power is most prominent, as it needs to agree with the Council following a special legislative procedure. The Annual Budget is often identified as a very important power-maximization tool that offers indirect leverage in the area of foreign policy and enlargement and allows for Parliament to steer the political direction of these policy domains. The EP often acts to defend the policies that the Council has under- funded, intervening to amend the sums that are being assigned to specific programs and projects. At the same time, shared concerns are also often promoted by acting together with the Council, as is the case with, for instance, pre-accession assistance. However, this power remains at all times constrained by the limited room for maneuver left by the MFF. Several authors therefore emphasize that one of the best strategy for the EP to still maximize its (potential for) influence, is aiming at a limited number of priorities in successive annual budgets (see f.e. 1999-2004 stabilisation programs in the Western Balkans). However, this strategy is once again dependent on internal cohesion, as conflict seems almost inevitable on a sensitive subject such as the budget, which basically covers all policy areas.

 

5.  Parliamentary Oversight

The European Parliament oversees the executive, primarily the Commission, and other EU institutions through several key functions. It consents to the appointment of the Commissioner for Enlargement, allowing it to influence portfolio allocation and even compel the withdrawal of a designated candidate. The EP also requires the Commissioner to participate in debates and respond to questions. Additionally, the EP must be fully informed at all stages of association and accession agreements, although the implementation of this requirement looks often different with the provisions unevenly implemented. Firstly, the provision of information relies on the quality of the relationship between the respective Commissioner or DG NEAR, and the AFET Committee (or its secretariat). Moreover, it seems that there exists currently no harmonized approach by the Commission’s services to provide information (concerning negotiations of international agreements) to Parliament in a coordinated manner. Finally, that the flow of information remains piecemeal and incomplete which in turn could have negative consequences for the Parliament’s consent and therefore increase the risk of tenuous relations between both institutions. Finally, apart from its role in establishing the budget, the European Parliament can also play a crucial role in assessing its implementation through the discharge procedure which is as much a power as a procedure.

 

Conclusion

The study identifies a significant disparity between the European Parliament’s formal and informal powers in the context of enlargement. While the former are often sparse in this area (except its consent and budgetary powers), the Commission and the Council anticipate the EP’s position when making choices. Besides these politics of anticipation, the Parliament empowers itself through a maximalist interpretation of the Treaties its engagement in IIAs and its own RoP. Among the five avenues of power, the consent procedure and the power of the purse stand out as the most prominent.

However, three caveats need to be made. Internal divisions and conflicting interests within the hemicycle can undermine its bargaining power, particularly during consent and budget procedures. Additionally, overlapping responsibilities among different committees and standing parliamentary delegations, along with voluntary delegation appointments, can hinder its strength. Streamlining roles and ensuring committed participation are necessary to enhance Parliament’s impact on enlargement policies. And finally, timely and complete access to information from the Commission and the Council is often challenging, hindering the EP’s ability to conduct thorough scrutiny and make informed decisions. Enhanced transparency and information-sharing are therefore vital for effective parliamentary oversight of enlargement policies.

The post The (hidden) powers of the European Parliament in EU enlargement policies appeared first on Ideas on Europe.

Le Comité international olympique a offert une invitation au nageur bosniaque Adell Šabović pour participer aux Jeux Olympiques à Paris. Sauf que la Fédération kosovare de natation refuse sa sélection, préférant celle d'un Albanais. La polémique enfle.

- Le fil de l'Info / Courrier des Balkans, Kosovo, Sports, Populations, minorités et migrations

In June, Israeli automobile company Universal Motors Israel sold its stake in Israeli cyber intelligence company Candiru to a trust.

BeamTrail, which is located on the seventh floor of Abu Dhabi's Aldar Tower, once the headquarters of the now-defunct DarkMatter,

Noting "a manifest error of assessment", the administrative court of appeal in the city of Nantes put an end to

At a time when former intelligence community officials are denouncing the lethargy of President Joe Biden's administration in the field

When senior officials in the Bahraini government handed K2 Integrity a mandate, in 2022, to root out corruption at the

A selection of the week's best photos from across the African continent.

The briefings contained in this volume provide an overview of the challenges ahead in four key areas of EU security and defence policy: defence industrial policy (‘Sovereign: A dynamic defence industrial and technological base’), EU rapid response capabilities (‘Capable: From “paper tigers” to rapid and effective presence on the ground’), technology and innovative in the area of defence (‘Innovative: Keeping the technological edge in the area of security and defence’) and the fight against certain types of hybrid warfare (‘Responsive: Hybrid warfare and the implications of the Wagner model’). Together, they provide an outlook on the major questions that will confront the European Parliament in its 10th legislative term.
Source : © European Union, 2024 - EP

- Agenda / Bosnie-Herzégovine, Région parisienne

- Agenda / Bosnie-Herzégovine, Dans les Balkans

- Agenda / Bosnie-Herzégovine, Région parisienne