The Jean Monnet chair at UCH-CEU, Susana Sanz Caballero, has coordinated the first international seminar celebrated as part of the research project on the Rule of Law crisis in Europe, which was attended by all of the researchers involved in the project: 14 experts in Human Rights and European institutions from 5 different European states.
The international seminar: “The Rule of Law crisis in the EU: Diagnosis and prognosis” took place last October 2nd at Palacio de Colomina, in València, it was coordinated by Prof. Sanz Caballero and organized by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation and the Valencian Department of Universities. Both entities finance the research project: “The Rule of Law Crisis in the EU: causes, effects, and political and legislative proposed solutions. Hungary, Poland, Estonia, Spain and Italy as case studies”, whose leading researchers are Dr. Sanz and Dr. Antonio Bar Cendón, a Jean Monnet chairholder.
The seminar provided an opportunity for the researchers, who came from 5 different European states like Italy, Croatia, Poland and Hungary, to meet and present the results from their research and give an answer to two pressing questions: How does the future of the Rule of Law in the EU look like? Is it possible to stop the democratic backsliding the EU is facing? The seminar served as an opportunity to reflect on the Rule of Law and the attacks that it is facing in each of the countries being studied by the research project.
The commencement speech at the seminar was given by Alicia López Castellano, Vice Rector of Research at UCH-CEU, in which she highlighted the need for the Rule of Law in Europe to be respected, as it constitutes the main and yet basic element of every democratic system. She reminded the importance of the principle of separation of powers in order to avoid abuse of power by the state while guaranteeing the existence of independent powers and branches of Government. This is something that has sadly come under attack in Spain as well as other European countries.
After that, Ms. López Castellano underlined the importance of having independent, strong researchers that are able to speak up in order to report systematic situations of abuse of power that are rooted a populist drift that has now caused Europe to face an unprecedented crisis that seriously questions the values of the continent.
The inaugural lecture gave way to the first round table discussion which was moderated by Prof. Susana Sanz and included the interventions of four professors who are experts on issues related to the current situation of the rule of law in the EU. By order of intervention, the panelists were: Antonio Bar, Leopoldo García, Clara Portela and Carlos González.
The first intervention was given by Antonio Bar Cendón, Professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Valencia and Jean Monnet ad personam chairholder. In his speech, Professor Bar addressed the impact of the different mechanisms for the protection of the rule of law in the EU, especially Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union. He pointed out the ineffectiveness of Article 7 as a means of defending the rule of law, since it requires unanimity of the members of the Council, which makes its activation practically impossible.
Furthermore, Dr. Bar stated that the Council’s current strategy against attacks on Rule of Law is the conditionality mechanism, which allows the withholding of EU funds to countries that engage in systematic attacks against Rule of Law, as well as the action of the EU Court of Justice. Lastly, he mentioned the agreement between Poland and Hungary to render article 7 useless, which means that indirect measures are the only ones in the realm of possibility.
Afterwards, Leopoldo García Ruiz, full professor in the department of legal sciences of UCH-CEU, took the lead to address the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in Rule of Law violations, especially pertaining to restrictions in freedom of speech regarding vaccines, government’s intervention in mass media and the temporary nature of emergency norms.
Professor García remarked that in countries like Spain, Italy or France, there was a dishonest intervention by national governments in mass news media, something that negatively impacted the scientific community’s credibility, as the governments did not have concluding evidence on the officially supported thesis. On the other hand, some countries like Hungary, took the pandemic as an opportunity to enshrine laws that allow a solid government control of freedom of expression.
Dr. Clara Portela, Political Science professor at the University of Valencia, took the third intervention to speak about EU sanctions to Rule of Law violations. In this topic, she highlighted the informal and indirect sanction mechanisms that the Council has deployed against breaching States: withholding of EU funds and the judicial response of the CJEU. In this regard, Moreover, she referred to how these informal sanctions can have a certain effectiveness in some cases, but in most cases, the effect achieved is much less than desired.
Lastly, Political Science professor Carlos González focused on the profile of the extreme right-wing deputy in the post-covid environment. He explained that after the pandemic, the profile of the extreme right-wing deputy is increasingly similar to that of the rest of the parties across the political spectrum, which exemplifies a progressive normalization of this political option in Europe.
He also pointed out that these parties, as they proliferate and become internationally associated, have access to a wider audience, thus growing in electoral strength and becoming the preferred choice of government in some countries such as Hungary (Fidesz) and Poland (PiS).
The second panel continued to dig deeper into the issue of the crisis of values in the EU, this time through the analysis of specific areas of attacks of the rule of law in Spain and Italy.
This second panel, which was moderated by Almudena Del Castillo, PhD student in Law and pre-doctoral research assistant of the project that Dr. Sanz leads, began with the intervention of Nuria Hernández García, PhD in Political Science and professor at the UCH-CEU.
During her intervention, Prof. Hernández spoke about corruption in Spain, distinguishing the pre and post pandemic environments. She explained the deep links between “corruption”, “Rule of Law”, and “democracy”, and how these concepts interact, while also mentioning the dominant perception of the Spanish public in this area, who predominantly regard their country to be much more corrupt than the EU average, and explained that the government’s efforts to establish an effective legal framework are insufficient. Furthermore, she ended her intervention underlining the need for a strong anti-corruption framework to enjoy a solid democracy, as well as the need to use more objective methods in defining and measuring corruption through more transparent processes.
Next, Marta Pérez Gabaldón, PhD in Political Science, professor and academic secretary of the Faculty of Law, Business and Political Science of the UCH-CEU, reflected on the problem related to the abuse of the figure of the Decree-Law in Spain, something that weakens the quality and transparency of the Spanish Rule of Law system, to the extent that the use of this type of regulation, only provided for specific situations of extraordinary and urgent need, implies the evasion of certain controls in the procedure for the elaboration of laws for the Government. Prof. Pérez Gabaldón also recalled the problem posed by the fact that the Spanish Constitutional Court has made the limits of this figure more flexible, admitting its use for the regulation of matters of a regulatory nature.
Valentina Colcelli, PhD in Law and researcher at the Italian National Research Council, explained the situation of the rule of law in Italy. In particular, she focused her presentation on the difficulty of creating a national authority for the protection of human rights in Italy, and how its creation is increasingly essential for the country. She recalled that, contrary to what happens in many European states, which do have such an authority, Italy has several institutions dedicated to the promotion and protection of human rights, but none of them seems to comply with the principles of independence, pluralism, effectiveness and accountability.
Finally, Roberto Cippitani outlined the problems associated with the protection of freedom of the press in Italy, using the latest report of the European Commission on the Rule of Law. He highlighted as necessary measures the need for more extensive interventions, through the reinforcement of the Italian legal framework on professional secrecy to offer more effective protection to journalists and their sources of communication; one of the major problems that exist in relation to press freedom in Italy, taking into account the continuous criminal investigations against journalists that undermine their right to use optimal and safe sources of information.
The following round table of the event featured professors Joaquín Marco, Manuel Martínez Sospedra, and Rosa García Vilardell, who addressed other attacks on the Rule of Law, such as the judicial system and freedom of education.
Joaquín Marco, Lawyer of the Corts Valencianes and professor at the UCH-CEU, spoke about the delicate situation of the justice system in Spain, especially about the major problem of the non-renewal of the General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ) and the impact it has on the functioning of the Spanish judicial and legislative system. Prof. Marco highlighted how the EU had (on many occasions) in its annual reports on the situation of the rule of law in Spain, focused attention on the fact that Spain has not made any progress in the renewal of the CGPJ nor in its election system, something that the Commission considers a priority to guarantee the independence of the judiciary.
He concluded that Spain needs to depoliticize its vision of justice, in addition to providing it with an adequate legislative framework and economic resources that can adapt it to the needs of our current model of coexistence.
Manuel Martínez Sospedra, Professor Emeritus of Constitutional Law at UCH-CEU and former senator, explained how the dangerous decline of justice in Spain increasingly resembles the Polish model. He pointed out that it had been abundantly demonstrated that the CGPJ model of 1985 had ceased to be functional, as evidenced by the ongoing blockage in its renewal.
According to Professor Martínez Sospedra, “the problem does not lie in the people but in the rules, in the wear and tear of the existing rules, and in the disagreement over their replacement.” He also added that the current CGPJ system is unsustainable and incompatible with European criteria for the Rule of Law, which could prompt the Commission to initiate a procedure to take Spain to the CJEU.
Finally, Rosa García Vilardell, Full Professor of Canonical Law and Ecclesiastical Law at UCH-CEU, discussed the growing problem of partisan ideology and symbolism in the public sphere, as well as their conflict within the Catalan educational framework, particularly in the university context.
During her presentation, Professor García Vilardell asserted that the comprehensive development of individuals and their full personality can only be achieved in a regime of public freedoms and ideological pluralism. In this context, the state plays a fundamental role and must operate with absolute neutrality to prevent any form of indoctrination. She also expressed that the ideologization within the field of education is another sign of the crisis of moral and ethical values that we have been experiencing in recent times, which weakens traditional fundamental rights and freedoms.
The international event came to a close with presentations from three academic experts from Hungary, Croatia, and Poland. The participants in the final panel discussion that concluded the seminar were Fruzsina Gárdos-Orosz, Dario Čepo, and Barbara Grabowska-Moroz.
First, Fruzsina Orosz, law professor at the ELTE Faculty of Law in Budapest, spoke about the democratic backsliding and the protection of the Rule of Law in the EU in Hungary. She discussed the entire process of democratic transition in her country, from compliance with democratic standards as a diligent EU member to the delicate situation Hungary now faces under the government of Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, a government that challenges the values upon which the EU is founded.
Specifically, she explained the excessive constitutional reforms (a total of 11 reforms have been carried out in Hungary in recent years) and how these democratic setbacks affect the judiciary, NGOs, the fight against corruption, academic freedom, and interference in legislative work.
Next, Dario Čepo, Ph.D. in Political Science and professor at the Department of Sociology at the University of Zagreb, explained judicial reform strategies in Croatia and trust in the Croatian judiciary.
He stated that although the situation of democratic decline in Croatia had not reached the critical point of Poland and Hungary, trust in institutions was decreasing due to a lack of transparency in their actions coupled with certain instances of abuse of power. He also noted that the reason attacks on the Rule of Law in Croatia had gone relatively unnoticed compared to other Eastern European countries was that Croatia did not want to draw the EU’s “spotlight.”
However, the professor expressed optimism that this situation could be reversed and even improved, something that would have to start from within the countries themselves, with the States taking responsibility for strengthening and improving their institutions. Therefore, the solution should begin “from within” and not rely solely on EU action.
Finally, Barbara Grabowska, Ph.D. in Law from the University of Warsaw and researcher at the Institute for Democracy at Central European University in Budapest, spoke about the funding of NGOs in times of declining Rule of Law in Poland and Hungary. Her presentation focused on explaining how the space for NGOs is shrinking, as they are being suffocated in both countries. By denying them funding, these NGOs eventually disappear and cease to be a “nuisance” to those in power.
She explained that in Poland and Hungary, those in power are essentially ignoring the enforcement of rules and court judgments, and this non-compliance goes unpunished. She also mentioned the well-known judgment issued by the CJEU against Hungary regarding NGOs receiving foreign funds and explained how the Hungarian government has found other ways to bypass the rule by imposing equally abusive requirements on NGOs.
To conclude, the researcher expressed pessimism about the future of the Rule of Law in the EU, declared to be unable to see clear solutions to stem this crisis of values and felt sorry that the EU has not taken more action in this regard.
