The Importance of the Concept of Citizenship in the Development of EC Law After Maastricht

The legitimacy of the ECJ to uphold EU legislation is a necessary component of effective human rights policy. The history of its increase in power is worth noting. Throughout the 1960s and 1970s, the ECJ’s location in Luxembourg, far from the political fray in Brussels and Strasburg, prevented it from becoming a strong body of the EU. Yet, throughout that time the court methodically built case-law that would lead to its surge in influence in the 1980s. The two most significant developments of the court during this time period were direct effect and supremacy. These twin pillars clarified the relationship between the national and EU legal orders.

For that reason, Dalton (2009) believes that the changing norms of citizenship are the most relevant answer to this debating issue. Therefore, the theory on duty-based citizenship and engaged citizenship will be the center framework to examine the following three levels of political

The democratic principles, Consent of Governed, The rule of law, Responsibilities of citizenship and Citizens rights all help the American Democracy vote and get involved in the government. Consent of the Governed helps Americans actually vote. The rule of law can get the president impeached. The responsibilities of citizenship can be dating public issues. Citizens rights is being able to express their own opinion. These principles give all American citizens an opportunity to vote.

Furthermore these democratic foundations were further “reinforced” with the conditionality’s of membership adopted at the Copenhagen Summit in June 1993, whereby democratic governance and human rights were included in its criteria for membership. Furthermore, the Maastricht Treaty in 1993 formally established a Common Foreign and Security Policy which included objectives of which included the development and consolidation of democracy. The EU as Lucarelli argues hence became a strong instrument for the promotion and development of democracy in Europe and but especially in post-communist ones. This Furthermore, the Amsterdam Treaty in 1997 reaffirmed its strong democratic position through Article 6:

The concept of the Union Citizenship introduced at Maastricht for the first time in 1992 and a number of rights were specified in the treaty which can be enjoyed by the citizens.

In general, the realisation of the main principles and dimensions of citizenship, especiallyconcerning people’s rights, entitlements, and obligations, is chiefly determined by the nature ofthe state, which varies depending on its socio-historical context. Recent decades have seen manydeveloping countries emerge as neoliberal polities. Naturally, this shift has tremendousimplications for citizenship. This essay will use T.H. Marshall's classic theories of citizenshiprights — civic, political, and social rights (economic and cultural rights being subsets of socialrights). Neoliberalism denotes the rebirth of Adam Smith's laissez-faire economics, actualized byunfettered markets, free trade, privatisation, and fiscal austerity. Through analysis

As one of the founding member of the European Council, formed in 1953, United Kingdom was entitled to incorporate the European Conventions on Human Rights into the state’s domestic law. Undoubtedly, the European Convention on Human Rights (hereafter ECHR) is one of the foremost achievements in European legal history and the topmost achievement of the Council of Europe. The emergence of the authority of the European Court of Human Rights has been defined as one of the most notable occurrences in the history of international law. Its predominance in the area of human rights standards is also

(i) The actions that might be brought by Rochelle and Neil in the national courts

The European Court of Justice (ECJ), first created by the European Coal and Steel Community in 1951 is situated in Luxembourg. The court’s main objectives were the interpretation and the consistent and uniform application of the treaty across all Member States. With the exception of the Maastricht Treaty (1992) the ECJ has gained influence through the different treaties over time. The ECJ unlike any other international justice system is able to cooperate directly with its citizens who are able to directly invoke a European provision before a European Court through ‘direct effect’. Further EU law has supremacy over the national laws in individual Member

Further, there cannot be found any indication or acknowledgement, in relation to this, of levels of government apart from than those of the State Member or the Community ? nor the levels above the EC or EU and not also the below the Member State. The paragraph set up or exemplified three guidelines that are to be evaluated and checked for the determination of whether steps should be taken by the Community in the field of so-called mutual capabilities and expertise: primarily whether an issue has transnational aspects that cannot be sustainably regulated by Member State action; then, whether the lack of community action or the Member State action would contradict with the Treaty needs and then thirdly whether action at Community level would result in apt benefits of scale or effect[footnoteRef:4]. However, these guidelines though tend to offer bit more than the terms of Article 5 (3b) of the EC Treaty[footnoteRef:5].it evolves into probable when they are evaluated or scrutinized that they to a great extent redefine or reestablish the greater political questions in open-ended terms, and do not contribute to or equip in the strong legal criteria to answer them. The first of the three is a probability of the most established guideline, in the relevance of that the presence of

The application of the real seat theory has become a widely discussed topic, progressively changing with the judgements of cases by the ECJ concerning freedom of establishment in Europe. It has been accepted that the courts objective of extending the freedom of establishment leads to the support of the incorporation theory, while conflicting with principles of the real seat theory. However, this alone does not imply that the real seat theory is "dead." The development of the application of the real seat theory can foremost be presented by comparing the ECJ 's judgements in moving-in and moving-out scenarios, case-by-case, in the scope of application of articles 49, 541 TFEU2.

In every form of government system we have two sides of the same equation, (people and power). The kind or form of the democracy depends how these two sides are balanced. The more democratic a democracy becomes the more and the better the two sides of equation will be balanced which means people which is the source of power in a democracy will have less propensity of their rights to be violated. There are two main concepts which are very important in a democracy and especially in a liberal form of democracy; the first is membership of the political community and second is the concept of citizenship which arises in relation to the membership of political community. This paper attempts to examine this relationship and argues that; first, citizenship

Citizenship and residency here in the U.S. comes with many rights, but these rights come hand-in-hand with many responsibilities as well. The things that we as Americans have the privilege of being able to do come at the cost of having these responsibilities and as citizens, and even residents, we must do our part to be able to continue to have these rights. As citizens of this country we share many rights that people in other countries may not necessarily have the right to do. The greatest rights we citizens share are the rights to chose how we live our lives, to speak our minds and hold our own opinions, the right to practice our own religion without fear of persecution, the right to be proven innocent or guilty of a crime we have been accused of committing in front of an unbiased panel of fellow citizens, and most importantly we have the right to vote for public officials and run for these offices ourselves. These rights we share as citizens set this country above many others as there are numerous countries around the world that do not give their citizens the rights that we have here. However, with the long list of rights we share in this country comes a list of responsibilities as members of this nation just as long. Everything comes at a price and things can be taken away just as easily as they were given. The rights we as U.S. citizens share are no different. As citizens here in this country, it is our responsibility to uphold this country’s ideals such as the belief

It is important to set the European Union Charter of Fundamental Rights in context by examining the development of rights within the European Union. The embryo organisation that commenced the EU (The Coal and Steel Community 1951) was introduced in the wake of World War II to rebuild Europe by economically tying previously warring nations together. The consensus amongst the "heavy weights" of the EU was, if member states were economically invested in each other to ensure financial stability within their own state, future conflicts would be avoided. The EU had taken the role of a purely economic organisation which explains why it was not focused on social issues such as human rights, leaving such matters to individual member states to determine. Then came the political advancement of the 1990s, as evidenced by Weiler; ‘[The Maastricht Treaty] appropriates the deepest symbols of statehood: European citizenship, defence and foreign policy’. Naturally, the issue of human rights became prominent within the EU, and after much debate and a Convention the Charter was passed and given legally binding status under the Lisbon Treaty of 2009. The Charter has proved to be a controversial issue within European politics, with doubts being voiced about the functionality of the European Union’s own “Bill of Rights”. To effectively assess the question at hand, this essay will evaluate the extent to which the Charter is a necessary and desirable development, before reaching an overall

With regard to the concepts of citizenship, there have been a significant variety of understandings. Specifically, in Marshall’s perspective (1950, p30), citizenship consists of civil, political, and social citizenship. In addition, Marshall argues that the development of civil citizenship expanded, involving political citizenship and social citizenship. Based on the three-dimension model of citizenship, Marshall, in