英国脱欧时期的欧洲公民倡议

Natassa Athanasiadou
{"title":"英国脱欧时期的欧洲公民倡议","authors":"Natassa Athanasiadou","doi":"10.15166/2499-8249/275","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the era of Brexit negotiations, which will determine the future of citizens’ rights in terms of the bilateral relations between the UK and the EU, EU citizens from different Member States have used the instrument of the European citizens’ initiative in order to bring forward their claim for retaining the same rights also in the post-Brexit era. The present Article analyses the current legal framework for European citizens’ initiatives against the benchmark of general principles of EU law, in particular the principles of good administration, legal certainty and legitimate expectations. On the basis of this analysis, the Brexit-related citizens’ initiatives are used as a case study marking a change in the Commission’s administrative practice, towards more openness and cooperative spirit in the phase of the admissibility check. However, this new approach bears the risk of creating false expectations to organisers and signatories as to the real prospect of an initiative. The Article concludes that, in order to enable the full potential of citizens’ initiatives, the Commission should strengthen the cooperation mechanisms when registering initiatives in line with the principle of good administration.","PeriodicalId":354310,"journal":{"name":"European Citizenship under Stress","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The European Citizens’ Initiative in Times of Brexit\",\"authors\":\"Natassa Athanasiadou\",\"doi\":\"10.15166/2499-8249/275\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In the era of Brexit negotiations, which will determine the future of citizens’ rights in terms of the bilateral relations between the UK and the EU, EU citizens from different Member States have used the instrument of the European citizens’ initiative in order to bring forward their claim for retaining the same rights also in the post-Brexit era. The present Article analyses the current legal framework for European citizens’ initiatives against the benchmark of general principles of EU law, in particular the principles of good administration, legal certainty and legitimate expectations. On the basis of this analysis, the Brexit-related citizens’ initiatives are used as a case study marking a change in the Commission’s administrative practice, towards more openness and cooperative spirit in the phase of the admissibility check. However, this new approach bears the risk of creating false expectations to organisers and signatories as to the real prospect of an initiative. The Article concludes that, in order to enable the full potential of citizens’ initiatives, the Commission should strengthen the cooperation mechanisms when registering initiatives in line with the principle of good administration.\",\"PeriodicalId\":354310,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Citizenship under Stress\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-08-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Citizenship under Stress\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15166/2499-8249/275\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Citizenship under Stress","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15166/2499-8249/275","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在英国脱欧谈判时代,这将决定英国与欧盟双边关系中公民权利的未来,来自不同成员国的欧盟公民利用欧洲公民倡议这一工具,提出他们在后英国脱欧时代保留同样权利的要求。本文以欧盟法律的一般原则为基准,分析了欧洲公民主动性的现行法律框架,特别是良好管理原则、法律确定性原则和合法期望原则。在此分析的基础上,将脱欧相关的公民倡议作为案例研究,标志着欧盟委员会行政实践的变化,在可受理性审查阶段走向更加开放和合作的精神。然而,这种新方法有可能让组织者和签署人对倡议的真实前景产生错误的期望。文章的结论是,为了充分发挥公民倡议的潜力,委员会应根据善治原则加强倡议登记时的合作机制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The European Citizens’ Initiative in Times of Brexit
In the era of Brexit negotiations, which will determine the future of citizens’ rights in terms of the bilateral relations between the UK and the EU, EU citizens from different Member States have used the instrument of the European citizens’ initiative in order to bring forward their claim for retaining the same rights also in the post-Brexit era. The present Article analyses the current legal framework for European citizens’ initiatives against the benchmark of general principles of EU law, in particular the principles of good administration, legal certainty and legitimate expectations. On the basis of this analysis, the Brexit-related citizens’ initiatives are used as a case study marking a change in the Commission’s administrative practice, towards more openness and cooperative spirit in the phase of the admissibility check. However, this new approach bears the risk of creating false expectations to organisers and signatories as to the real prospect of an initiative. The Article concludes that, in order to enable the full potential of citizens’ initiatives, the Commission should strengthen the cooperation mechanisms when registering initiatives in line with the principle of good administration.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信