In federal states, constitutional identity is the glue that holds together the Union. On the contrary, in the European Union—not a fully-fledged federation yet—each Member state has its own constitutional identity. On the one hand, the Union may benefit from the particular knowledge, innovation, history, diversity, and culture of its individual states. On the other hand, identity-related claims may have a disintegrating effect. Constitutional diversity needs to come to terms with risks of disintegration. The Treaty on the European Union seeks a balance, providing the obligation to respect the constitutional identities of its Member states. Drawing from the European experience, this article compares judicial and nonjudicial means of accommodation of divergent constitutional values. In the category of nonjudicial means, political negotiated exemptions and opt-outs in favor of certain Member states have been considered. In the category of judicial means of accommodation, this article analyzes how the Courts approach the concept of constitutional identity. This article finds that nonjudicial means of accommodation of identity-related conflicts are a crucial complement to judicial ones and—under certain circumstances—a superior alternative.

Taking Constitutional Identities Away from the Courts

faraguna pietro
2016-01-01

Abstract

In federal states, constitutional identity is the glue that holds together the Union. On the contrary, in the European Union—not a fully-fledged federation yet—each Member state has its own constitutional identity. On the one hand, the Union may benefit from the particular knowledge, innovation, history, diversity, and culture of its individual states. On the other hand, identity-related claims may have a disintegrating effect. Constitutional diversity needs to come to terms with risks of disintegration. The Treaty on the European Union seeks a balance, providing the obligation to respect the constitutional identities of its Member states. Drawing from the European experience, this article compares judicial and nonjudicial means of accommodation of divergent constitutional values. In the category of nonjudicial means, political negotiated exemptions and opt-outs in favor of certain Member states have been considered. In the category of judicial means of accommodation, this article analyzes how the Courts approach the concept of constitutional identity. This article finds that nonjudicial means of accommodation of identity-related conflicts are a crucial complement to judicial ones and—under certain circumstances—a superior alternative.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
2016_6_BJIL_Taking Constitutional Identities Away from the Courts.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Documento in Versione Editoriale
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 693.4 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
693.4 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11368/2918210
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact