Abstract
AbstractThis chapter deals with shortcomings of the EU policies vis-à-vis Hungary and partially also Poland. Firstly, it depicts the argument that the EU’s diagnosis of illiberal backsliding is too narrow. When assessing the quality of democracy in Hungary and Poland, the Commission and the European Parliament almost exclusively focus on recent constitutional changes, and thereby overlook many other deficits which lead to a distorted picture. Secondly, there is a legitimate debate on the meaning of the basic values of the EU. Article 2 TEU contains many open-textured expressions, which might be understood differently. Thirdly, due to the incomplete diagnosis, the instruments currently being used to combat backsliding tendencies seem ill-suited on the one hand, and, on the other, the EU surprisingly does not seem to make best use of currently available tools. The chapter concludes by highlighting and discussing possible improvements of EU strategies towards backsliding states.
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Reference91 articles.
1. Adamski, Dariusz. 2019. The Social Contract of Democratic Backsliding in the “New EU” Countries. Common Market Law Review 56: 623–666.
2. Amtenbrink, F., and J. de Haan. 2006. Reforming the Stability and Growth Pact. European Law Review 31: 402–413.
3. Avbelj, Matej. 2015. Pluralism and Systemic Defiance in the European Union. In The Enforcement of EU Law and Values: Ensuring Member States’ Compliance, ed. A. Jakab and D. Kochenov, 44–64. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
4. Bachmann, Theresa. 2019. Der Nachbarschaftsraum nach Artikel 8 EUV. Baden-Baden: Nomos.
5. Badó, Attila. 2014. ‘Fair’ Selection of Judges in a Modern Democracy. In Fair Trial and Judicial Independence, ed. Attila Badó, 27–58. Heidelberg: Springer.