Georgia Today’s Post

The European Parliament adopted a critical resolution today, strongly condemning Georgia's re-initiation of the "Foreign Influence Transparency" bill. The resolution asserts that this bill contradicts EU values, undermines Georgia's aspirations for EU membership, damages its reputation, and jeopardizes its integration into Euro-Atlantic institutions. The resolution specifies that accession negotiations will not proceed until this law is repealed. The supported amendments in this resolution once again emphasize the significant role played by Bidzina Ivanishvili, Georgia's sole oligarch, in the ongoing political crisis. They highlight his repeated efforts to shift the country's orientation away from the West towards Russia. The resolution reiterates its call for the Council and the EU's democratic partners to consider imposing personal sanctions on Ivanishvili due to his involvement in exacerbating the political situation in Georgia and working against the interests of its people. It is crucial to emphasize that the concerns about Ivanishvili's influence, having captured state institutions in Georgia, as repeatedly highlighted by Georgian civil society, are now recognized within EU institutions.

“Thorough, detailed and all encompassing, … the ruling gathered together multiple strands of international law from the Geneva conventions to the Hague convention to make a case that has been obvious to Palestinians and to critics of Israeli policy in the international community for years.” The ICJ has just issued its Advisory Opinion on the 2 questions posed by the UN General Assembly as follows: (a) What are the legal consequences arising from the ongoing violation by Israel of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, from its prolonged occupation, settlement and annexation of the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including measures aimed at altering the demographic composition, character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem, and from its adoption of related discriminatory legislation and measures? (b) How do the policies and practices of Israel referred to . . . above affect the legal status of the occupation, and what are the legal consequences that arise for all States and the United Nations from this status? In its Advisory Opinion, the Court responds to the questions posed by the General Assembly by concluding that: (1) the State of Israel’s continued presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory is unlawful; (2) the State of Israel is under an obligation to bring to an end its unlawful presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory as rapidly as possible; (3) the State of Israel is under an obligation to cease immediately all new settlement activities, and to evacuate all settlers from the Occupied Palestinian Territory; (4) the State of Israel has the obligation to make reparation for the damage caused to all the natural or legal persons concerned in the Occupied Palestinian Territory; legal persons concerned in the Occupied Palestinian Territory; (5) all States are under an obligation not to recognize as legal the situation arising from the unlawful presence of the State of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by the continued presence of the State of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory; (6) international organizations, including the United Nations, are under an obligation not to recognize as legal the situation arising from the unlawful presence of the State of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory; and (7) the United Nations, and especially the General Assembly, which requested the opinion, and the Security Council, should consider the precise modalities and further action required to bring to an end as rapidly as possible the unlawful presence of the State of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

I've had the immense pleasure of contributing an op-ed on the effect of the 2004+ EU enlargement on the rule of law in EU for EU Law Live, looking at the evolution of mechanisms and tools used to enforce respect for the rule of law, and how the crisis of values might have been the most visible in Hungary and Poland, but is present to a degree in many other Member States. https://lnkd.in/d24Gfwz2

In his Op-Ed titled "20 Years after the 2004 Enlargement: The EU, Old and New, and Its Fortified Judicial Order," Marek Safjan reflects on the significant impacts and ongoing dynamics since the European Union's 2004 enlargement, when ten new Member States joined the Union. This expansion was the largest in the EU's history and brought substantial political, economic, and social changes. Read more at EU Law Live.  

🔹 The process of approximation of Ukrainian legislation to EU law goes far beyond the purely technical adaptation of legislation. 🗣️ That was stated by Oksana Tsymbrivska, Team Leader of EU Project Pravo-Justice, at the conference “Legal Collisions in the Application of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms”. The event was organised by the Supreme Court with the support of EU Project Pravo-Justice and the OSCE. 💬 “This is a deep transformation that includes not only legislative amendments, but also a change in thinking, values, and behavioural patterns of every citizen. It involves the implementation of European values in all spheres of social life,” said Oksana Tsymbrivska. 🔸 She expressed the opinion that the judges’ ability to navigate through the complexities of national, international, and EU law will be a critically important factor in the success of Ukraine’s European integration process. 💬 “The process of harmonisation of Ukrainian legislation with EU law requires judges to have a deep understanding and to be able to correctly apply the norms of various legal systems. It is judges who play a decisive role in ensuring that legal collisions are resolved in favour of the rights and freedoms of citizens, as well as in the context of European values and standards “, she said. ☝️ According to the Team Leader of EU Project Pravo-Justice, the process of European integration may take between several years up to several decades. The length of this path for Ukraine depends on everyone’s efforts, in particular on the judges. They ingare the ones play a decisive role in ensuring justice and implementing these values in life. #pravojustice #judge #justice #values

The Op-Ed by Bruno de Witte explores the impact of the "large-scale" EU enlargement of 2004 on EU institutions, focusing on the need to adapt the institutional framework to accommodate the increased membership. The text discusses the debates and Treaty revision processes preceding the enlargement, emphasizing the importance of adapting EU institutions to maintain decision-making capacity amidst expansion. Read more at EU Law Live.

Greenland as the 51st State? Legal Perspectives and Political Realities A view by Flieger Law Office Recent discussions about Greenland potentially becoming a U.S. state have sparked global attention, yet much of the debate—particularly in Europe—has been marred by superficial rhetoric and a lack of understanding of international law. The dismissive, reactionary commentary by some European politicians highlights their unqualified grasp of the legal and geopolitical complexities involved, doing little to advance informed debate. Under international law, Greenland’s future is governed by the principle of self-determination enshrined in the UN Charter and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The Greenlandic people would need to freely express their will through a legitimate referendum. As a self-governing territory within the Kingdom of Denmark, any transfer of sovereignty to the U.S. would also require Danish approval, likely through constitutional amendment or treaty negotiations. These processes are far from simple, requiring compliance with international norms on territorial integrity, which strictly forbid coercion or undue influence. The Arctic’s strategic importance, coupled with U.S. interest in Greenland, demands a nuanced approach rooted in legal and diplomatic expertise. However, much of the European political response has been reduced to alarmist rhetoric about “protecting Greenland from America,” with little acknowledgment of the Greenlandic people’s agency. This reflects a troubling pattern of European politicians treating international issues as platforms for populist soundbites rather than opportunities for meaningful engagement. What’s missing is leadership that respects the Greenlandic people’s rights while adhering to international legal frameworks. Simplistic commentary from unqualified European politicians not only undermines the debate but also risks alienating Greenland’s population, who are entitled to decide their own future. Greenland’s geopolitical significance requires informed, critical leadership. Its future belongs to its people—not to superficial narratives spun by European politicians unprepared to deal with the legal realities. Europe must do better. Without respect for self-determination and the rule of law, this debate risks descending into political posturing, devoid of substance or credibility.

Summer reading for EU/comparative lawyers! I'm excited to share my latest article, just published in the Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law. It explores how the incorporation of a central bill of rights affects the federal equilibrium in a composite system, comparing the experiences of the US and the EU. Drawing on historical records, I show that in the US, the incorporation of the Bill of Rights served as a tool of nation-building, particularly under the Warren Court. In contrast, the federalizing potential of the EU's Charter of Fundamental Rights was initially constrained by the Conventions of 1999 and 2002, through a strict application of the principle of conferral. Nevertheless, the most profound constitutional challenge in the EU’s history to date, namely the rule of law crisis, has caused the emergence of unconventional tools to circumvent this rigid backstop, namely the Portuguese judges case law and various mechanisms of rights-related funding conditionality. While still different, these dynamics confirm the federalizing force of constitutional bills of rights, which in time tend to make integrative federations more homogeneous. Comments and questions are most welcome. Have a nice summer! https://lnkd.in/dCC3-p52

CPLR expert’s article “Why the EU benchmarking on the rule of law needs to be revised» was published by Euractiv Media recently.  Viktoriia Melnyk answers the following essential questions:  📍 What problems arise with current EU guidelines for rule of law and judicial reform in candidate countries?  📍 What is the new approach proposed by Ukrainian and European experts for judicial reform in Ukraine?  📍 How can a clear set of benchmarks help restore confidence in EU enlargement and its transformational power? Read more:https: http://surl.li/uevfp

"We cannot know for certain why the Georgian Dream (GD) chose to reintroduce the draft law, but it is apparent that, in addition to the obvious problems with the law, reintroducing it was a politically stupid and baffling decision." I was asked by the Georgia Institute of Politics to comment on why I thought the GD reintroduced the foreign agent law. My full comment can be read here. https://lnkd.in/ef33D_FK