Evaluation of Member State Provisions Addressing Land Policy and Restitution by the European Commission

Ágoston Korom
{"title":"Evaluation of Member State Provisions Addressing Land Policy and Restitution by the European Commission","authors":"Ágoston Korom","doi":"10.47078/2021.2.101-125","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The scope of action of EU Member States’ land policies lies at the intersection of positive and negative integration. Therefore, if a Member State restricts the ownership and use of agricultural land, it implies both the legitimate restriction of fundamental freedoms and that it achieves the targets listed under the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) on improving the quality of living for farmers in keeping with the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). Despite this, it is worrisome that the EU’s control over negative integration does not allow Member States to create sustainable regulations. In contrast, the EU law leaves it entirely to the Member States to introduce restitution measures vis-à-vis the properties that were confiscated before their accession. The EU’s control prohibits direct discrimination against the citizens of other Member States. Under certain circumstances, according to the European Commission, the general principles of EU law and the provisions of the Charter can help individuals enforce restitution provisions. Bearing this in mind, we analysed the practice of the European Commission, its statements, and procedures against Member States, given that these are based on professional and/or political considerations. We examine the practice of the Commission and the CJEU vis-à-vis a Hungarian legislation on the so-called ‘zsebszerződések’. We also propose recommendations.","PeriodicalId":325719,"journal":{"name":"Central European Journal of Comparative Law","volume":"62 3","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Central European Journal of Comparative Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47078/2021.2.101-125","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The scope of action of EU Member States’ land policies lies at the intersection of positive and negative integration. Therefore, if a Member State restricts the ownership and use of agricultural land, it implies both the legitimate restriction of fundamental freedoms and that it achieves the targets listed under the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) on improving the quality of living for farmers in keeping with the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). Despite this, it is worrisome that the EU’s control over negative integration does not allow Member States to create sustainable regulations. In contrast, the EU law leaves it entirely to the Member States to introduce restitution measures vis-à-vis the properties that were confiscated before their accession. The EU’s control prohibits direct discrimination against the citizens of other Member States. Under certain circumstances, according to the European Commission, the general principles of EU law and the provisions of the Charter can help individuals enforce restitution provisions. Bearing this in mind, we analysed the practice of the European Commission, its statements, and procedures against Member States, given that these are based on professional and/or political considerations. We examine the practice of the Commission and the CJEU vis-à-vis a Hungarian legislation on the so-called ‘zsebszerződések’. We also propose recommendations.
欧盟委员会对成员国关于土地政策和归还的规定的评价
欧盟成员国土地政策的行动范围处于积极和消极一体化的交叉点。因此,如果一个成员国限制农业用地的所有权和使用,这既意味着对基本自由的合法限制,也意味着它实现了共同农业政策(CAP)所列的目标,即根据欧洲联盟法院(CJEU)的判例法提高农民的生活质量。尽管如此,令人担忧的是,欧盟对负一体化的控制不允许成员国制定可持续的法规。相比之下,欧盟法律完全由成员国对-à-vis在加入欧盟之前被没收的财产采取恢复措施。欧盟的管制禁止对其他成员国公民的直接歧视。根据欧盟委员会的说法,在某些情况下,欧盟法律的一般原则和《宪章》的规定可以帮助个人执行赔偿规定。考虑到这一点,我们分析了欧洲委员会针对成员国的做法、声明和程序,因为这些都是基于专业和/或政治考虑。我们审查委员会和欧洲法院对-à-vis匈牙利关于所谓“zsebszerződések”的立法的做法。我们也会提出建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信