11 April 2022
How to Overcome an Anti-democratic Heritage
Chile and Turkey appear to be more similar than one would initially imagine. In both countries, neoliberal policies were implemented through constitutions made under the shadow of military dictatorships. For the last half-century, the development of democratic culture in both countries was undermined by military coups and military governments using anti-democratic methods. However, in late 2019, Chile has taken off from its old path to become a more democratic state that rests on social justice and gender equality by generating a new constitution through intense popular participation and equal political representation. Continue reading >>
0 
22 December 2021
Open Access … And Then?
In 2021, the Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht (also known as the Heidelberg Journal of International Law) was reborn. Though one of the oldest public and international law journals, its editors have taken the decision to embrace a new era and mode of publishing. The ZaöRV is now a Platinum Open-Access journal. Continue reading >>
0
01 February 2020
The Conference on the Future of Europe: an Open Letter
To the Presidents of the European Parliament, of the EU Commission and of the Council: Europe, and your new, yet already contested, political leadership can hardly afford to be associated with an initiative that might soon be perceived as top-down, unauthentic, outdated and out-of-touch with EU citizens’ daily lives. Continue reading >>
0
17 November 2016
Wahlkreisreform in UK: die Neuvermessung des Mehrheitswahlrechts
Wahlkreisreformen sind oft eine anrüchige Sache. Die Regierungsmehrheit gerät leicht in den Verdacht, sich die Wahlkreise zu ihrem eigenen Vorteil zurechtzuschneiden. Auch in Großbritannien gibt es laute Proteste der Opposition gegen die aktuellen Reformpläne der Tories. Doch wenn man genauer hinsieht, zeigt sich: die Demokratie im Vereinigten Königreich wird eher profitieren. Continue reading >>24 September 2015
Regulatory Cooperation under TTIP: Democracy on this Side of the Bridge
A week ago, the EU Commission announced that investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) will no longer be part of its proposals on TTIP. This was the Commission’s response to public contestation and fears that such a mechanism could place unjustified constraints on democratic institutions and on the capacity of states and of the EU to preserve their regulatory autonomy. The change announced by the Commission may be a step in the right direction. But there are other reasons of concern in the current Commission proposals, which have been overshadowed by the discussion on ISDS. Once the agreement is in place, how will decisions be made on the differences between EU and US regulation that could be usefully overcome? On which technical requirements are unnecessarily duplicated? On which standards should remain in place because they contend with health safety in a way that would not be compatible with EU standards? On which areas are too distinct to justify attempts at mutual recognition? Such issues will be decided, in a first instance, via regulatory cooperation between the EU and the US. Thus far there has been little debate on this chapter of TTIP. Yet, regulatory cooperation may remove decision-making further away from parliamentary oversight and impact on existing institutional balances in the EU. Continue reading >>
0