The concept of constitutional pluralism as the fundamental basis for the development of the European Union legal order

• Vitalii Gutnyk Ivan Franko National University of Lviv
• Ivan Bratsuk Ivan Franko National University of Lviv https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0164-7407
• Stepan Burak Ivan Franko National University of Lviv https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5184-0451
• Antonina Zubareva Ivan Franko National University of Lviv https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3994-2698

DOI: https://doi.org/10.46925//rdluz.34.21

Keywords: European Union, law, pluralism, doctrines, courts

Abstract

The objective of this article is to analyze the concept of constitutional pluralism as a methodological basis for the construction of the legal system of the European Union. In particular, attention is paid to investigating the particularities of the interaction and operation of the different constitutional legal systems within the legal sphere of the European Union, studying the constitutional collisions derived from the interaction of European Union law and the law national of the Member States. Dialectical, comparative legal, historical, systemic-structural and formal dogmatic methods were used in the research. The article concluded that the national constitutional courts of the Member States of the European Union can give priority to their constitutional rules only if those rules are clear and reflect substantial constitutional obligations. However, in any case, in order to maintain the coherence of the legislation of the European Union and the national legislation of the Member States, it is necessary to amend the national Constitutions of the Member States of the European Union.

References

Avbelj, M. (2016). Pluralism and Systemic Defiance in the EU. In: A. Jakab and D. Kochenov (eds). The Enforcement of EU Law and Values. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198746560.003.0004

Avbelj, M. & Komarek, J. (2008). Four Visions of Constitutional Pluralism. Symposium Transcript. European Journal of Legal Studies, 2 (1), 325–370.

Avbelj, M. (2008). Questioning EU Constitutionalisms. German Law Journal, 9 (1), 1-26. Retrieved from: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1113498

BVerfG decision: Bananenmarktordnung. (2000). Retrieved from: https://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/SharedDocs/Entscheidungen/EN/2000/06/ls20000607_2bvl000197en.html

BVerfG decision: Bundesverfassungsgericht. (2009). Retrieved from: https://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/SharedDocs/Entscheidungen/EN/2009/06/es20090630_2bve000208en.html

BVerfG decision: Internationale Handelsgesellschaft v. Einfuhr und Vorratsstelle für Getreide und Futtermittel. (1974). Retrieved from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/DE/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:61970CJ0011&from=EN

BVerfG decision: In Re Maastricht Treaty (1993). Retrieved from: https://iow.eui.eu/wp-content/uploads/sites/18/2013/04/06-Von-Bogdandy-German-Federal-Constitutional-Court.pdf

BVerfG decision: Solange II (1986). Retrieved from: https://law.utexas.edu/transnational/foreign-law-translations/german/case.php?id=572

Claes, M. & Eijsbouts, W.T. (2008). The Difference. European Constitutional Law Review, 4 (1), 1-19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1574019608000011

Cruz, B.J. (2008). The Legacy of the Maastricht-Urteil and the Pluralist Movement. European Law Journal, 14 (4), 389–422. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0386.2008.00419.x

Dieter H. S. (1998). Deutsches Verfassungsrecht und Europäische Integration, 157–207. In: P-C. Muller-Graff und E. Riedel (Hg.), Gemeinsames Verfassungsrecht in der Europäischen Union. Baden-Baden.

Gogin, A. A., Fedorova, A. N., Vagapov, R. F., & Sergeev, A. V. (2021). Austrian and Russian constitutionalism: comprehensive analysis. Amazonia Investiga, 10(41), 121-130. https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2021.41.05.12

Horn H.-D. (1995). Grundrechtsschutz in Deutschland – Die Hoheitsgewalt der Europäischen Gemeinschaften und die Grundrechte des Grundgesetzes nach dem Maastricht-Urteil des Bundesverfassungsgerichts. Deutsches Verwaltungsblatt DVBL, 89–96.

Lawrence, J.C. (2019). Constitutional Pluralism’s Unspoken Normative Core. Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies, 21, 24–40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/cel.2019.12

Kellenberger J. (2003). Federalism in Foreign Relations, 189-194. In: R. Blindenbacher and A. Koller (eds.). Federalism in a Changing World: Learning from each other. McGill-Queen's University Press.

Krisch, N. (2013). Constitutionalism and pluralism: A reply to Alec Stone Sweet. International Journal of Constitutional Law, ·11 (2), 501–505. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/mot010

Kumm, M. (2005). The Jurisprudence of Constitutional Conflict: Constitutional Supremacy in Europe before and after the Constitutional Treaty. European Law Journal. 11(3), 291-292. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0386.2005.00260.x

Kumm, M. (1999). Who is the Final Arbiter of Constitutionality in Europe?: Three Conceptions of the Relationship between the German Federal Constitutional Court and the European Court of Justice. Common Market Law Review, 36, 351–386. Retrieved from: https://kluwerlawonline.com/journalarticle/Common+Market+Law+Review/36.2/202713

Kwiecien, R. (2005). The Primacy of European Union Law Over National Law Under the Constitutional Treaty. German Law Journal, 6 (11). 1479-1495. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-37721-4_5

MacCormick, N. (1999). Questioning Sovereignty: Law, State, and Nation in the European Commonwealth. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198268765.001.0001

Maduro, M.P. (2007). Interpreting European Law: Judicial Adjudication in a Context of Constitutional Pluralism. European Journal of Legal Studies, 1 (2), 1-21.

Maduro, M.P. (2003) Contrapunctual Law: Europe’s Constitutional Pluralism in Action’, 526-528. In: N. Walker (ed), Sovereignty in Transition. Oxford: Hart Publishing.

Jansen, N. (2012). Legal Pluralism in Europe - National Laws, European Legislation, and Non-Legislative Codifications. Legal Pluralism. Retrieved from: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1840356

Pollicino, O. (2010). The New Relationship between National and the European Courts after the Enlargement of Europe: Towards a Unitary Theory of Jurisprudential Supranational Law? Yearbook of European Law, 29 (1), 65–111. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/yel/29.1.65

Shaffer, G. (2012). A Transnational Take on Krisch’s Pluralist Postnational Law. European Journal of International Law, 23 (2), 565–582, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chs029

Steinbach, A. (2010). The Lisbon Judgment of the German Federal Constitutional Court – New Guidance on the Limits of European Integration? German Law Journal, 11(4), 367-390. DOI:10.1017/S2071832200018587

Walker, N. (2002). The Idea of Constitutional Pluralism. The Modern Law Review, 65, 317-359. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.00383

Weiler, J. (2001). Federalism Without Constitutionalism: Europe's Sonderweg: 54–72. In: T. Kalypso Nicolaidis and Robert Howse. The Federal Vision: Legitimacy and Levels of Governance in the United Statse and the Europian Union, Oxford Universety Press.

Weiler, J. H. (1996). European neo-constitutionalism: in search of foundations for the European constitutional order. Political Studies, 44, 517–533. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.1996.tb00598.x

Wilkinson, M. (2019). Beyond the Post-Sovereign State?: The Past, Present, and Future of Constitutional Pluralism. Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies, 21, 6 – 23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/cel.2019.9

Winkelmann I. (1994). Das Maastricht-Urteil des Bundesverfassungsgerichts. Vom 12. Oktober 1993. In: Winkelmann, Ingo (Hrsg.). Dokumentation der Verfahrens mit Einführung. Tübinger Schriften zum Staats- und Verwaltungsrecht Band 25. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.

Ziegler, K. (2013). International and EU law: between asymmetrical constitytionalization and fragmentation. Legal Journal “Law of Ukraine”, 3, 5 -12