Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts

Thursday, 7 July 2016

The underdue final

Avoiding EURO 2016: A self-experiment — Day Twenty-Eight


Portugal and France will play out the final. This concludes my blogpost series on avoiding EURO 2016, three days before this finally last game, three days before expected. Which may indicate that the self-experiment has failed but at the same time actually proves its point.

The big circus will close for another couple of years. A lot of smaller ones will keep playing.

Meanwhile, enjoy the pleasures in life. Such as art, love, empathy and celery salad.

Monday, 4 July 2016

Bye Iceland — Go Wales!

Avoiding EURO 2016: A self-experiment — Day Twenty-Five


We have reached the semi-finals of EURO 2016. Six days till the final. Meaning a day or probably two of rest, maybe even three.

The story so far: Portugal plays Wales and Germany plays the host nation France in the semis. It’s a fifty-fifty thing. Germany and Wales are those I support, or rather would support if I did follow the tournament. And if it wasn’t just football, the thought of Portugal or France winning the whole thing would be hard to bear.

But it is only football. A mere sport, blown up to not only huge business but also international politics. Which is the reason Denmark did not qualify. Or rather was cheated outside the green pitch, on the green table, because of politics at the other end of Europe that has nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with Denmark as a country, and even less with Danish football.

Oh well, it is soon over. Three more matches. Only one of the surprises left. And then another month and a half of peace before the German football season finally starts.

Tuesday, 28 June 2016

The mysterious eighth team

Avoiding EURO 2016: A self-experiment — Day Nineteen


Belgium thrashed Hungary. I don’t know by how much but I saw headlines such as ‘Belgium seriously signs in for the fight for medals’ and ‘Belgium’s captain: We could have won even higher’. So I am supposing it was by more than three goals, which for some newspapers is enough to call a victory ‘thrashing’.

Anyway, I hope the won’t go all the way, that would simply be unbearable. One of the usual suspects, I can bear, even France or Italy. But not Belgium.

France won against Ireland, as I wrote about a couple of days ago. And I know the Squadra azzura is through too, as they played against another usual suspect, Spain, and I read that Spain is out.

The remaining of the four usual suspects is the only one I would support: Germany. I am pretty sure they won their eighth-final against Slovakia, as I saw photos of a celebrating Thomas Müller and Mario Gomez, the latter being one of the most overrated strikers to have worn the white jersey. But apparently he does live up to this honour now in his (for a footballer) older days. Maybe it’s just me who never got over watching him scoring a hattrick in RheinEnergieStadion back in 2009 when VfB Stuttgart was a top team and 1. FC Köln was (once again) newly promoted.

Who I’d really support though, if I was in fact following the EURO 2016, and who everyone seems to be supporting now are the volcanic wonderboys from Lavaland. Yes! Iceland were the wizards behind the second Brexit within a few days, this time just in a football tournament. I had caught a liveticker displaying that they were up 2:1 against England, and this morning I saw a text from my best friend, an Englishman, reading: ‘Yes! Iceland hand out just punishment for Thursday! Great result!’

Indeed.

A close Polish source also told me in a slightly worried tone that Poland will play Portugal in the quarter-finals. I will know the outcome of that one by the honking or the silence in my street. Although I actually do not know when the matches take place. My guess is that today is a day of rest, which then leaves exactly twelve days till the final on 10 July. That is a lot for seven more matches. Could it really be that tomorrow is a day off too, followed by only one quarter-final a day until 3 July? That would make space for a two-day break before the semi-finals on 6 and 7 July and another two days’ rest before the final.

So who is through anyway. Italy, France, Germany, Belgium, Portugal, Poland and Iceland. But who is the eighth quarter-finalist? Truth is, I honestly have no clue. Croatia? Turkey? Who am I forgetting, or rather not knowing about?

I think it proves a certain success in my self-experiment to not follow the EURO 2016: There is even one of the eight teams still in the tournament that I do not know of! Let’s celebrate that by watching the highlights of another quarter-final, not at a European but at a World Championship, and not with a good outcome but truly one of the most exciting matches ever:



Oh, wait! Maybe Wales is through?? Despite voting to leave…

Saturday, 25 June 2016

Eighth-final snippets

Avoiding EURO 2016: A self-experiment — Day Sixteen


Today was an eighth-final day, and I have no idea of the outcome. Isn’t that great?

All I know is that there is supposed to be a ‘British clash’. Perhaps England will play Wales? I don’t know.

And that Poland was leading 1:0 against Switzerland despite the Swiss making the game. So it could very well be that they won in the end.

And that Hungary seems to be through to the knock-out phase too, as I got a glimpse of a survey on a newspaper’s website where one could vote for the coolest thing at the EURO 2016 so far. One of the three possibilities was ‘Hungary’s upswing’.

Another was Iceland. I know they are through to the eighth-finals as well. What’s more, there are elections for the Planet’s oldest Parliament very soon, and a record-low turnout is expected, as a tenth of the country’s population is in France to support their team! A friend who has read my blog (glad that somebody does) texted this to me this morning.

See what football can do to people… But at least they cannot vote themselves out of the European Union.



Friday, 24 June 2016

The Union that does not want to be part of a Union

Avoiding EURO 2016: A self-experiment — Day Fifteen


Today does not call for a blogpost about football, after 51.9% of the UK voters chose to leave the European Union of peace.

So I will make it short and try to link the two. Which is easy: Now there is a real chance that, after almost a decade and a half, it will be justified for more than mere historical reasons that the UK has so many ‘national’ teams.

Because the United Kingdom will soon not be one. It is a now a far from unrealistic scenario that within a pretty near future, Scotland and perhaps even Northern Ireland will actually leave the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, just as the United Kingdom will leave the European Union. Wales, surprisingly, did vote to leave the EU …and the beautiful hilly country will probably keep its ‘national’ team.

https://www.fc-koeln.de/fileadmin/_processed_/csm_Jonas_Dusan_EM2016_1420x780_0d5f9f952d.jpg
The only thing I did pick up about the European Championship today was in my team’s newsletter where it says that our two players Jonas Hector and Dusan Svento will play against each other in the eighth-finals.

So now I know that Slovakia is through to the knock.out stage and that they will face Germany.

A duel between two countries that are both among the 28 members (soon 27, then 29 or a few more) of the European Union of peace.

Thursday, 16 June 2016

PoL-Di — and the paradox of a possible Brexit

Avoiding EURO 2016: A self-experiment — Day Seven


An English friend told me that the England’s last group match — to be played three days before the UK referendum on whether or not to be part of the European community we are building together for some sixty years now — can actually influence that group of still-doubting voters who might very well be decisive to the outcome.

Is that really what the World has come to? Is football, or rather following football, the modern-day battle between tribes?

If so, it is actually a paradox of big dimensions. If one looks to the ethnicity of players on the different teams, especially but not only the former colonial powers, the plethora of diversity is evident.

One famous example is Lukas Podolski. Born in Gliwice in Southern Poland, his family moved to a suburb of Cologne when he was very little. Already as a teenager, he became the star of my team 1. FC Köln where he remains a cult figure. In fact, the only club where Prinz Poldi has had real success is here.

Given Germany and Poland’s long intermingled history, there is even a book about Polish players who carried the black eagle rather than their own white one. Apparently, tonight the two countries play each other. Should Poldi score …although it seems unlikely he will even play; some claim he is only part of the Germany’s squad of 23 because of his persistent good mood and positive influence on his team mates… he will not celebrate, out of respect for his country of birth.

Podolski made the same gesture, of not celebrating that is, when he played for Bayern München against 1. FC Köln years ago. I was there, in the stadium. Before the match, during the warm-up, the kölsche supporters celebrated their lost star. And they celebrated his goal despite that it consolidated the 0:3 defeat against the spoiled Bavarian millionaires. As the German media reported: Das gibt’s nur in Köln!

Incidentally this happened to be the only time my Polish better half has joined me for a live football match, to see what on Earth made me spend entire Saturdays on driving a couple hundred kilometres and back to see 22 men chase some ball for 90 minutes.

Beats me.

Tuesday, 14 June 2016

Footballitical wonder(ing)s

Avoiding EURO 2016: A self-experiment — Day Five


In a meeting about a team event that I am co-organising for another department at my workplace, someone asked which match we are going to watch when the event is over. It turns out the venue has a bar with big screens, broadcasting all the EURO 2016 matches, but as the two matches on that day do not start at 9 pm, i.e. three and a half hours after the event is planned to end, the idea was off. I am sure some people will hang around anyhow.

One of the matches is Wales against Russia, and a colleague commented that there will be riots again, as there has been between English and Russian supporters already. I threw in a remark that it seems only England supporters fight and riot, not the Irish, the Welsh, or the Scottish (the latter, as far as I recall, not being present in EURO 2016 anyway).

On the verge of the Brexit referendum, this is put in an interesting light. Some predict that if the United Kingdom really does choose to leave the European Union — to which the country since its admission in 1973 has paid a lower contribution than any other member state, while getting the same full benefits apart from a few essential ones from which they decided to stay out (the social dimension, the Schengen Agreement, the common currency) — the Scotland will leave the United Kingdom, and Wales and possibly Northern Ireland will follow. So the price that the old empire will pay to leave the 21st century might very well be that the core of that empire will crumble.

Who knows, perhaps England will become the 51st U.S. state instead of Puerto Rico. And then: No more European Championships for them… On the other hand, already now, several countries outside Europe are actually UEFA members and therefore play in the EURO qualifiers.

International politics is a strange thing. Not least when it gets mixed up with sports. Which, in my naivety, I still consider just being games.

Speaking of which, my better half came home proudly saying that she, as the only one among the ex-colleagues with whom she had spent the evening out, had bet for Iceland to beat Portugal. Oddly, the party had left the bar —incidentally, the same as mentioned at the beginning of this blogpost —four minutes before the end of the match. At that time, the score was 1:1, and true, I did not hear a single honk in my street here in Little Portugal this evening.

Did the Vikings even win the match? Then they might as well take Scotland under their wings and start forming a Nordic Union.


Sunday, 12 June 2016

Switzerland has scored! But what else do I know?

Avoiding EURO 2016: A self-experiment — Day Three


In a newspaper heading somewhere, probably online, I caught that Albania’s team was reduced to ten players in yesterday’s match. Probably a red card, but that’s just an assumption.

So far, all I know for sure from EURO 2016 is that Switzerland has scored a goal against Albania. I don’t for a fact know whether the Eidgenossen scored more than this one goal, nor if they won, drew or even lost against the decimated Skënderbeu squad. This is going well! Not knowing more about the actual results of the tournament, I mean.

Oh, and one of my 400+ Facebook connections posted this neat picture. So apparently the two countries that up until the first world war (I know that according to dictionaries, this takes capital letters, but I deliberately write the names of wars in lower case) formed the main part of a European colossus-on-feet-of-clay superpower are actually in the same group. And me who had happily forgotten that they even qualified. I mean …what has Hungarian football been since Puskás, and what has Austrian football been since Krankl? I werd’ narrisch. No offense.

Then the less funny part I half picked up today. Apparently England and Russia have played as well. And their brainless hooligans have caused chaos. If I trusted that this scum could actually read, I would send them this link, hoping it could make them realise what they actually do. And what it costs society. Did you know that the Land Bremen in Germany has started invoicing their local heroes Werder Bremen for the extra costs they have in providing man-days to ensure security at regular Bundesliga matches? I think it only fair. Until someone comes up with a better idea for a simple game not to set the agenda on how one of society’s essential resources is used.

I want to end today’s blogpost on a positive note though. The so-far biggest challenge in avoiding the EURO 2016 showed up today: An invitation to watch tonight’s matches. From friends, a Belgian-Polish couple. So most likely, diable rouge is playing. Or the silver eagle. Or both. Maybe even against each other. Though I would have enjoyed the Belgian beer and a bit of the Polish wódka that would for sure have been on the small table in front of the big screen, I stayed firm.

And I hope we are still friends.

Saturday, 11 June 2016

Who played? Who won? Who cares…

Avoiding EURO 2016: A self-experiment — Day Two


I heard no honking yesterday, no cheering whatsoever. I live in a multinational city where all nationalities of the European Championships are covered, so there is usually some celebration noise after a match finishes. But there was nothing.

This did not occur to me until I saw half of a newspaper heading, which I think said that the host nation had a lot of trouble beating Romania in the opening match. As 6% of the population here where I live are French citizens, one would have thought that some celebration took place in the city after this opening victory for what are supposed to be the favourites in this tournament.

In a weak moment some days ago, when I was reminded that the tournament would start, and that the hosts would play the opening match, I considered putting perhaps 10 € on them winning the whole thing. Not that I in any way hope they will (if I did care) — but when France hosts a big tournament, they tend to win it. Except for the 1938 World Cup, which no-one remembers, and the 1960 Nations Cup, more of a forerunner to the European Championship, which was too small a tournament for one to really speak of a host nation.

But maybe les bleus did not win yesterday after all. I could have misread the newspaper heading, as I only half-read it anyway. In reality I do not know — so far, so good.

What I do know though is that Switzerland (had completely forgotten that they had qualified; I am still not used to that) was leading 1:0 against Albania. I saw that by accident as I went to the German football magazine kicker’s website to check something far more important: When the Bundesliga and the DFB-Pokal (= German Cup) will start again, so that I can maybe go watch 1. FC Köln on my way up North when I might go to Denmark for an extended weekend.

Whether the Swiss won, I do not know. I made sure not to check. Although I secretly hope they did not, as I — had I chosen to follow EURO 2016 — would support Iceland and Albania. The latter with mixed feelings… but more about that later.

Friday, 10 June 2016

From football virginity to football celibacy

Avoiding EURO 2016: A self-experiment — Day One


Today is a big day for many. They will spend a big part of the next month watching overpaid young men from 24 different countries running around on picture-perfect pitches in The Fifth Republic.

Usually I am one of these many. And I have been since 1982 when I happened to enter our living room where our only(!) television set, with eight(!!) channels, was. My older brother in front of it, watching eleven men in white shirts and black shorts lining up, at least some of them trying to remember the German national anthem.

Superimposed on this picture was a pixelated yellowish font that spelled ‘ALEMANIA’ and a list of eleven numbers between 1 and 22, each followed by last names such as ‘SCHUMACHER’, ‘FOERSTER B’ or the (then) more exotic ‘LITTBARSKI’.

The TV speaker read out all eleven names. As he came to the name next to the number ‘8’, he said ‘Klaus Fischer’, and my brother spontaneously half-shouted ‘He is good!’ Still being at an age where one’s older brother held somewhat of a model role, Klaus Fischer was my idol from that day on. And to this day, the club he happened to play for those years, 1. FC Köln (known to English-speakers as FC Cologne — I still do not understand why the ‘1st’ in the club’s name is always omitted outside the German-speaking part of the World), has remained my favourite team.


It was in my Panini sticker album that I found out where he played. In 1980, without watching a single match, I already collected the stickers for the European Championship album, which I shared with my brother. Two years later, for the 1982 World Cup in Spain, I had my own sticker album. And I started watching some of the matches.

I continued to do so. Every other summer was a highlight, alternating between World Cups and European Championships. Even in the nineties and the beginning of the new millennium when I did not really follow club football that closely, I would still follow these big tournaments in even years.

Until now, 34 years after España 1982 and Klaus Fischer’s equalising bicycle kick in the extra time of a semifinal that to this day remains one of the most dramatic football matches ever. 17 big tournaments for national teams later — seventeen! — I have decided to conduct a self-experiment: To not follow this year’s alleged football feast. Instead I will publish a blogpost every day.

The reasons are manifold. We will get back to them over the course of the next 31 days.

Monday, 19 May 2014

Nature, Our Mother

‘[N]ature is motherly, and [there is] no reason to improve or educate it, as it voluntarily gives everything [you] need.’
Carsten Jensen

Monday, 20 January 2014

Onsdag, den 20. januar 2099

I dag ville min oldefar, Christian, være blevet 226 år. Hvis han levede endnu, ville han hedder “Krajsjan”. Så sent som i 1998, for hundrede år siden, hed jeg Bjørn, nu hedder jeg “Pjen”.

Der var fest blandt de 120-140-årige i eftermiddags. Det er nemlig præcis 75 år siden (2014), at skolerne blev udført. Jajah, nu er der kun 19 dage tilbage til min 126-års fødselsdag. Hvis jeg bliver ved med at få hjernen udskiftet hvert 15. år, undgår jeg at blive senil. Jeg skal have den skiftet ud den 7. marts af professor Stylts robot, XXXMTV66.

De fleste af de 21.697.889.608 mennesker, som lever på jorden nu, regner med at få et evigt liv, da der kun er én ting, som man kan dø af, nemlig sygdommen antikata (man er gået væk fra de latinske betegnelser, og alle taler ét og samme sprog).

De sagde i dag i telebølgeavisen, at man havde vedtaget at droppe grænserne i hele verden. De sagde også, at man skulle tilat oprette et ferieparadis på ydre planet nr. 12 i solsystem 6, galakse 9.

(fra “Bjørns Samlede Værker, Bind V af Bjørn Clasen — © 1984-85 Bjørneforlaget)

Friday, 15 February 2013

Kritzelart

Mein Beitrag zur „Kritzelei der Woche“ in Die Zeit


Entstanden ist diese Kritzelei bei einem internationalen Workshop in Berlin zum Thema EU-Recht, -Wirtschaft und -Politikwissenschaften. Nicht dass ich mich langweilte, aber diese Themen sind so gradlinig, dass ich Angst hatte, meine Gehirnzellen würden sich in parallelen Reihen ordnen, und um dies zu vermeiden, habe ich dann kreuz und quer gekritzelt, allerlei kleine Bildchen und Symbole, die mir eingefallen sind. Während einer Pause hat eine Mitstudentin aus Kosovo — ich selbst bin ein luxemburgischer Däne, was man sicher auch aus meinen grammatischen Fehler sehen kann — das Blatt geklaut und einige ihrer eigenen Kritzeleien zugefügt. Deshalb sind einige Details am Rande des Werks viel künstlerischer als der Rest.

 ©2013

Thursday, 31 January 2013

Dystopia on the big screen — How man closes his own circle


So… I have signed up for this online course at the University of Edinburgh, on eLearning and digital cultures. It is the second Internet-based academic course I am attending, although this one at Edinburgh is rather different from the first one, a master degree in European Union studies, which is more like a classic academic course, just using the Internet as the main communication means.

Already after reading the course description and all the ‘how to’ stuff, checking a few of the fora, and watching the first of four videos that constitute the core of the first course week, I see chaos installing itself. Students who are lost in the microcosmic cyberspace of the course website and all the subsites and websites it refers to.

What strikes me as well is that whereas the language used by the course managers (I am not allowed to quote from it, so I won’t) is very abstract and what I call ‘unnecessarily over-academised’, the instructions are pretty straight-foward, perhaps even too simplified to be comprehensible. Er, I mean understandable.

The clear question we, the (six-digit number of) students have been asked in the first week, is to think of an example of utopian and dystopian stories about technology told in popular films, and describe or share it, for example on one’s blog. Well, I have thought. And now I will share. And describe. A little.

In fact, two of my favourite films come to mind, and they both tell rather dystopian stories.

Pink Floyd The Wall has sequences of how mankind is becoming so inhuman that everything we love about being human is destroyed. Any artistic creativity, any feeling is not only taboo but also forbidden. A quote from one of the final scenes (and thus songs, as Pink Floyd The Wall is in a way one long music video) is:
The prisoner who now stands before you
Was caught red-handed showing feelings
Showing feelings of an almost human nature
This will not do!
Alien — The 8th Passenger needs little further presentation. It is a little more ambiguous than Pink Floyd The Wall in its dystopian message, but one thing that I would like to point out is how The Company — which in this first part of what is by now a pentalogy, if one counts the recently released prequel Prometheus in, is not known by any other name than simply The Company — has powers that seem to reach beyond that of a nation state as we know it today. As The Company wants to capture the alien lifeform in order to use and possibly develop it for its weapons division, a creature of nature actually becomes, or is intended to become, technology.

Last but not least, a recommendation for those who like to watch something alternative: Try to get hold of the Belgian film Thomas Est Amoureux. The whole film is seen through the eyes of a man who lives his life through his computer screen. In other words, we only see the screen. While this may sound unbearably boring, the film is actually a fantastic attempt to show how human can become a slave of its own creation: the machine. Watch it! (pun intended)

Oh, I almost forgot: Of the four videos that we students are supposed to watch this first week, I rather liked this one. Watch it too…



#edcmooc

Tuesday, 22 January 2013

Stop smoking in Luxembourg bars

Actually, it should not be necessary to still discuss this in 2013 in a Western European Country. But apparently it is: The issue of smoking, and of passive smoking. The Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has yet to manage to pass legislation in order to protect its tax payers and visitors from the effects of passive smoking.

A pregnant friend of mine has finally had it. (We used to work together, me being in charge of ideas and she of the action…) She has taken the initiative of launching a petition to finally get rid of tobacco smoke in bars. And it looks promising, as her initiative immediately made it to national news! When I signed yesterday evening, I was number 10 or 11, and now the petition has over a 1000 supporters!

Monday, 17 December 2012

The Erasmus Experience — 25 portraits from 25 years of success

This autumn, I was commissioned by the association ANEFORE, via Luxembourg’s coolest publishing house Maison Moderne, to interview 25 former Erasmus students (well, including a current one and a professor) and write up a short portrait of each of them telling tales of their individual experiences.

Here is the resultdownloadable, free of charge! I hope you will enjoy it …and do contact me if you have writing or editing tasks for me!

Wednesday, 11 July 2012

Looking for, er, people

This classified-ad page is from 1968 and was published in the Observer and Gazette.

Notice how distinctly employers advertised for women or men, depending on the nature of the position to be filled. Today this would not only be unthinkable but also illegal. The Kodak advert even clearly lists which vacancies are for women, and which ones are for men.

(Click on the picture to see it in a larger and more readable version.)


Wednesday, 1 February 2012

Why is the protection of fundamental rights needed in the EU
and how has the initial problem been resolved (until now)?

1. Introduction: Why are fundamental rights needed
If members of a society do not have rights, there is no or only a weak base for making rules for that society. Rights reflect values, and it is upon values — intended to prop up the common good — that a society is built. Rules cannot exist without rights, as they are based upon them, rather than vice versa: It would not make sense for a society to construct rules and then base the rights on them afterwards.

Nevertheless, this is more or less what happened during the first half century of the European Communities’, and later the European Union’s, existence. In the beginning, the formalised cooperation between six independent countries was mainly a political project calling for a common approach within a few rather specific areas. With time, this cooperation grew larger in terms of participating countries, wider in terms of policy areas falling under its wings, and deeper in terms of involving not just the upper spheres of political decision-makers but also going further and further down into people’s lives.

This is where a common approach to the basic aspect of rights starts to become a necessity. Each society, each member state of the European Union is built on rights for its citizens or inhabitants — be it explicitly, formally or informally. These rights may differ from country to country, and in an ever more tightly-knit community between nations, agreeing on a set of common rights for each and every of its meanwhile half a billion inhabitants would seem to be essential in order to continue the progression towards common goals that serve the European Union as a whole, and each person as an individual.

2. The past
Certain specific rights were laid down already in earlier treaties, such as equality between the sexes in 1957 by means of Article 119 of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community 1 (now Article 157 in the Lisbon Treaty), and consumer protection in 1992 by means of Article 129a of the Treaty on European Union 2 (now Article 12 in the Lisbon Treaty).

Perhaps more importantly, the Treaty on European Union also established that:
‘The Union shall respect fundamental rights, as guaranteed by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms signed in Rome on 4 November 1950 and as they result from the constitutional traditions common to the Member States, as general principles of Community law.’ 3
This was the first time that a European Community or Union treaty directly mentioned fundamental rights. However, without establishing its own definitions of the rights, it instead referred to those set out by the Council of Europe 42 years before. As every member state of the European Union was already a member of the Council of Europe at its time of accession 4, it was nothing new to commit to this Convention. What was new was that the European Union as such committed to them, formally.

Until then, the protection of fundamental rights had been taken care of not through treaties but through case law. During the years, the European Court of Justice has ruled in a number of interesting cases involving questions of fundamental rights. One such case was the Schmidberger case, in which the Court of Justice ended up ruling that freedom of speech prevails over the free movement of goods principle. 5 Other examples include the Nold case, emphasising that the European Communities’ citizens are protected by international and national human rights principles, 6 and the Stauder case, which can be considered an early example of protection of personal data. 7

3. The present
Since late 2000, the fundamental rights of the citizens of and inhabitants in any European Union member state are protected by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. 8 That is the theory. For, proclaimed by the three legislative institutions of the European — the Council, the Parliament and the Commission — there were doubts whether the charter was actually legally binding. Moreover, the United Kingdom had reserves about the Charter, as had both the meanwhile new member states Czech Republic and Poland when the Charter was referred to directly in the Lisbon Treaty, 9 amending the Treaty on European Union, and thus making it legally binding from 1 December 2009 when the Lisbon Treaty entered into force. All of these three member states were granted an opt-out in a Protocol to the Treaty.

The Lisbon Treaty also includes a Protocol to the Treaty on European Union, opening up for the possibility of applying for accession to the European Court of Human Rights 10 — again, as an entity, as the ‘European Union’ in itself, in addition to its member states already being members of the Court.

Meanwhile, in 2007, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights was established. 11 This advisory body was set up to observe and verify whether the people of European Union have the rights granted to them by the agreed charters.

4. The future
In a time where the European Union, the entire European continent, and the World as a whole seems to be in a phase of transition, discussions on fundamental rights mushroom perhaps more than ever. Ever more apocalyptic predictions on our Planet’s ecological balance together with a financial end economical crisis raise questions on how our current way of life can, could, should or even must be reshaped into a future society based on sustainability.

This is why fundamental rights in a not very distant future might have a less individualistic focus, along the line of the ideas of Jeremy Rifkin, adviser to the European Union and to heads of state around the World:
‘We are so used to thinking of property as the right to exclude others from the use or benefit of something that we’ve lost sight of the fact that in previous times property was also defined as the right not to be excluded from the use or enjoyment of something. […] In a collaborative economy, the right of inclusion becomes more important in establishing economic and social relationships than the right of exclusion.’ 12

by Bjørn Clasen

Sources
1 European Economic Community: Title III — Social Policy, Chapter 1 — Social Provisions, Article 119 of Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (Publishing Services of the European Communities, Luxembourg 1957). Quoted here from Centre Virtuel de la Connaissance sur l’Europe (http://tiny.cc/rometreaty)
1 European Communities: Title XI — Consumer Protection, Article 129a of Treaty on European Union, signed at Maastricht on 7 February 1992. Official Journal of the European Communities C 191 of 29 July 1992 (Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg 1992), p 25
3 Ibidem, Title I — Common Provisions, Article F(2). p 5
4 Member states of the Council of Europe, 2011, Wikipedia 11 December 2011 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Member_states_of_the_Council_of_Europe)
5 Court of Justice of the European Union: Judgment of the Court of 12 June 2003, Case C-112/00 — Eugen Schmidberger, Internationale Transporte und Planzüge v Republik Österreich. European Court reports 2003 (Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg 2003), pp I-5694 – I-5725
6 European Court of Justice: Judgment of the Court of 14 May 1974, Case 4-73 — J. Nold, Kohlen- und Baustoffgroßhandlung v Commission of the European Communities. European Court reports 1974 (Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg 1974), p 491
7 European Court of Justice: Judgment of the Court of 12 November 1969, Case 29-69 — Erich Stauder v City of Ulm - Sozialamt. European Court reports 1969 (Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg 1969), p 419
8 European Parliament, Council, Commission: Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Official Journal of the European Union C 303 of 14 December 2007 (Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg 2007), pp 1-35
9 European Union: Title I — Common Provisions, Article 6 of Consolidated version of the Treaty on European Union (Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg 2010), p 19
10 European Union: Protocol relating to Article 6(2) of the Treaty on European Union on the accession of the Union to the European Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, to the Treaty of Lisbon amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community, signed at Lisbon, 13 December 2007. Official Journal of the European Union C 306 of 17 December 2007 (Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg 2007), p 155
11 Council of the European Union: Council Regulation (EC) No 168/2007 of 15 February 2007 establishing a European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. Official Journal of the European Union L 53 of 22 February 2007 (Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg 2007), pp 1-14
12 Jeremy Rifkin: From Belongings To Belonging, in The Empathic Civilization — The Race To Global Consciousness In A World In Crisis (Jeremy P. Tarcher/Penguin, New York 2009), pp 541-542

Tuesday, 31 January 2012

Institutional Architecture of the European Union IV:
High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy

Introduced by the Amsterdam Treaty (1999), the High Representative was in charge for the Common Foreign and Security Policy. With the Treaty of Lisbon (2009), the post also took over the responsibilities hitherto covered by the External Relations Commissioner, and at the same time changing to the current name.

Until the entry into force of the amendments laid out in the Lisbon Treaty, the Secretary General of the Council of the European Union held the High Representative post. With Lisbon, the post became a separate one, and British Commissioner Catherine Ashton became the first one to take office.

Remaining Commissioner for External Relations and Vice-President of the Commission, the High Representative is in charge of external affairs, which is why s/he is often considered the equivalent of a country’s Foreign Minister. The High Representative holds a number of other offices, such as President of the Foreign Affairs Council (i.e. the Council of the European Union consisting of each member state’s Ministers for Foreign Affairs) and President of the European Defence Agency, established in 2004. Interestingly, de facto the High Representative can probably not be of Danish nationality, as Denmark has opted out of this Agency. However, there is nothing in the Treaties (de jure) preventing a Dane from taking this office.

Moreover, the High Representative was Secretary General of the now defunct Western European Union. Importantly, s/he also takes part in European Council meetings but cannot vote as s/he is not an actual member of the European Council.

by Bjørn Clasen

Some reference sources
Catherine Ashton’s page on the official European Union website and Glossary
Unofficial website of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy
European Defence Agency’s offical website

Monday, 30 January 2012

Institutional Architecture of the European Union III:
The terms supranational and intergovernmental

When we talk about ‘supranational’, we talk about a body that rules ‘over’ (=supra) the national governments. This means that the countries who by convention, for example a treaty, are under supranational authority, must follow decisions taken by that authority.

‘Intergovernmental’, on the other hand, means ‘between governments’. In other words, governments of at least two countries make decisions between them, and other countries’ governments can choose not to fall under that decision.

The difference is thus that if a group of independent nations are members of a supranational community, it is the community that takes certain decisions, according to the rules laid out between the nations in question to form this community, and each nation falls under these decisions — whereas in an intergovernmental community, each member can opt in or opt out on a single-case basis, each thus keeping their full independence.

by Bjørn Clasen