{"title":"定义和操作欧盟的挑衅不合规:法治案例","authors":"Carlos Closa, Gisela Hernández","doi":"10.1111/jcms.13676","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Existing literature often attributes non-compliance to either a lack of resources or implementation costs. However, the rule of law crises in Hungary and Poland present a different picture: a deliberate strategy aimed at not complying with EU enforcement actions. This article differentiates this model from previous ones and terms it ‘defiant non-compliance’, which is characterised by four types of domestic actions (ignoring the Commission's recommendations and warnings; not complying with Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) rulings; questioning the role of the CJEU as the sole final interpreter of EU law; and impeding national courts' right to raise preliminary questions). A defiant rhetoric questioning the authority and legitimacy of the enforcing authorities accompanies these actions. The article distils defiant non-compliance by systematising empirical evidence on these governments' reactions to EU enforcement. This model of non-compliance severely threatens the foundations of the EU, as it erodes the notion of a community of law-abiding member states' governments.</p>","PeriodicalId":51369,"journal":{"name":"Jcms-Journal of Common Market Studies","volume":"63 3","pages":"964-986"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jcms.13676","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Defining and Operationalising Defiant Non-Compliance in the EU: The Rule of Law Case\",\"authors\":\"Carlos Closa, Gisela Hernández\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jcms.13676\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Existing literature often attributes non-compliance to either a lack of resources or implementation costs. However, the rule of law crises in Hungary and Poland present a different picture: a deliberate strategy aimed at not complying with EU enforcement actions. This article differentiates this model from previous ones and terms it ‘defiant non-compliance’, which is characterised by four types of domestic actions (ignoring the Commission's recommendations and warnings; not complying with Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) rulings; questioning the role of the CJEU as the sole final interpreter of EU law; and impeding national courts' right to raise preliminary questions). A defiant rhetoric questioning the authority and legitimacy of the enforcing authorities accompanies these actions. The article distils defiant non-compliance by systematising empirical evidence on these governments' reactions to EU enforcement. This model of non-compliance severely threatens the foundations of the EU, as it erodes the notion of a community of law-abiding member states' governments.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51369,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Jcms-Journal of Common Market Studies\",\"volume\":\"63 3\",\"pages\":\"964-986\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jcms.13676\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Jcms-Journal of Common Market Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcms.13676\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jcms-Journal of Common Market Studies","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcms.13676","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Defining and Operationalising Defiant Non-Compliance in the EU: The Rule of Law Case
Existing literature often attributes non-compliance to either a lack of resources or implementation costs. However, the rule of law crises in Hungary and Poland present a different picture: a deliberate strategy aimed at not complying with EU enforcement actions. This article differentiates this model from previous ones and terms it ‘defiant non-compliance’, which is characterised by four types of domestic actions (ignoring the Commission's recommendations and warnings; not complying with Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) rulings; questioning the role of the CJEU as the sole final interpreter of EU law; and impeding national courts' right to raise preliminary questions). A defiant rhetoric questioning the authority and legitimacy of the enforcing authorities accompanies these actions. The article distils defiant non-compliance by systematising empirical evidence on these governments' reactions to EU enforcement. This model of non-compliance severely threatens the foundations of the EU, as it erodes the notion of a community of law-abiding member states' governments.