Suchergebnisse

This paper has two objectives. First, by mapping investment-based the legal provisions that may result in the direct acquisition of citizenship or residence rights through a pecuniary contribution in all the 28 European Union (EU) Member States, it clears the grounds for further normative inquiries in this issue. Second, it discusses the iterative relationship between European Union (EU) citizenship and investment-based citizenship programmes, taking into account the intuitive conflict between the values inherent in EU citizenship and the opportunity structures that it creates for countries to commodify their membership by exchanging it for investment. The paper starts by a theoretical examination of membership in national and supranational polities in order to discern the links between national and EU citizenship. This is followed by an empirical classification of the different investor and residence programmes in the 28 Member States of the EU, aimed at comparing how different countries regulate access to membership on grounds of wealth. The conclusion to the paper discusses of the effects of investor citizenship and golden residence programmes in the broader EU context, taking into account the unique characteristics of European citizenship.

AbstractImmigrant investor programmes (IIPs) – aimed at attracting investment in return for residency or citizenship for wealthy foreigners – have proliferated in EU Member States in recent years. Such schemes constitute part of a much broader commercialization of citizenship, which has intensified during the crisis. They have been particularly controversial in the EU because they rely for their attractiveness in part on the reality of EU citizenship and the rights of mobility and residence that it entails. The European Commission, among others, has presented them as threat to national citizenship and yet the EU at once champions a 'post‐national' citizenship and is arguably culpable in the very commercialization of citizenship of which investor schemes are a stark manifestation. This paper unpacks the tensions in the theory and politics of investor migration in the recent EU context, arguing that they reveal what is termed a 'quadrilemma' at the heart of a multi‐level citizenship.

Cover -- EU CITIZENSHIP -- Copyright -- Table of Contents -- Introduction -- 1 Concepts of citizenship and identity: National vs. postnational paradigms -- Introduction -- Ethnicity, nationality and citizenship -- Universalist conception of citizenship -- Identity politics -- The emergence of European subjectivity -- Citizenship as discursive practice: The postmodern concept of citizenship -- Globalization and postnational model of citizenship -- 2 The European Union as a postnational political community -- Introduction -- Different paradigms of Europe and European citizenship -- The European Union: Towards the postmodern political community -- The spiritual and cultural dimension of Europe -- The idea of a European identity -- The question of European identity in the light of Brexit and migration crisis -- 3 The Postmodern Europe: Democracy to come -- Introduction -- The postmodern conception of law -- The postmodern Europe: Problems and perspectives -- Europe's migration crisis: A challenge to democracy -- Conclusion -- Bibliography -- Name Index -- Subject Index.

This special issue of Perspectives on Federalism offers a multidisciplinary collection of pieces dealing with some (selected) issues in the field of citizenship studies. In order to investigate how citizenship has been reconceived over the years, we decided to propose a multidisciplinary itinerary where scholars interested in political and legal theory, EU, international and constitutional law produced a contribution to defining the new boundaries of this concept.

European citizenship offers great potential for the protection of fundamental rights. Due to the relation between EU citizenship and EU fundamental rights, the Court's seeming willingness in Ruiz Zambrano to protect the substance of EU citizenship rights could potentially have an immense impact on the EU fundamental rights architecture. However, considering the Dereçi case, it is questionable if the Court takes EU citizenship rights seriously. Instead of contributing to the safeguarding of fundamental rights, the Dereçi approach will have worrisome effects for the protection of fundamental rights in the EU. This article examines the relation between EU citizenship and EU fundamental rights and argues that if the Court is truly willing to protect the substance of EU citizenship rights, it has to overturn its decision in Dereçi and to include fundamental rights in the doctrine established by Ruiz Zambrano. After it has been outlined why such an approach would, in contrast to the Court's argument in Dereçi, be completely in line with Ruiz Zambrano, the potential effects of such an approach will be presented.

'EU Citizenship Law' analyses the legal framework and legal development of EU Citizenship and its relationship to other rights protected by EU law. By examining the complex legal status of Union citizenship, this book reflects on the wider economic, political, social, and emotional contexts that both complicate and inform EU membership.

UK nationals will lose their EU citizenship status as a result of the Brexit referendum. To prevent this, several commentators, including the European Parliament Brexit negotiator Guy Verhofstadt, proposed to grant associate EU citizenship to UK nationals to safeguard their rights as EU citizens after Brexit. We make the case against associate EU citizenship, dismissing it on three grounds. First, it violates the letter and the spirit of EU law. Second, it violates core EU values, including the EU's promise to respect the constitutional traditions of member states and the values of democracy and the rule of law. Third, it is against EU's interests, as associate EU citizenship fails to respect reciprocity in EU relations with third countries and undermines the coherence of the edifice of EU constitutionalism.

Die EU-Exkursion in Kooperation mit dem Europa Zentrum Baden-Württemberg trägt den Titel "Die Europäische Union – aktuelle Herausforderungen". Es handelt sich um eine Studienfahrt über Luxemburg nach Brüssel im Zeitraum 21.-24. Mai 2024. Das Programm sieht folgendermaßen aus:Dienstag, 21. Mai 202408.00 Abfahrt am Parkplatz der PH Ludwigsburg12.00 Schengen, LuxemburgWeiterfahrt nach Luxemburg Stadt Mittagspause am Place d'Armes, Luxemburg 14.30 Europapolitische Stadtführung in Luxemburg mit Europaviertel: "Die Auswirkungen der EU auf Luxemburg"19.45 Ankunft Brüssel20.30 Gemeinsames Abendessen im Grand CaféMittwoch, 22. Mai 2024 08.15 Spaziergang zur EU-Kommission ab Herberge Informationsbesuch in der EU-Kommission mit zwei Themen: "Die Rolle der Europäischen Kommission in der EU" und "Die EU ihren Bürgerinnen vermitteln" 12.15-13.30 Mittagspause am Place Jourdan Informationsbesuch im Rat der Europäischen Union: "Die Rollen des Rates der Europäischen Union und des Europäischen Rates" Informationsbesuch in der Ständigen Vertretung der Bundesrepublik Deutschland: "Wie nehmen die Mitgliedstaaten in Brüssel Einfluss?"Donnerstag, 23. Mai 2024 09.00 "Migratorische und soziologische Wirkungen der EU auf die Stadt Brüssel" - Geführte Stadtbegehung 12.00-13.00 Mittagsimbiss à la belge am Place de Luxembourg 13.30 Informationsbesuch im Europäischen Parlament: "Der Zustand der EU und ihre politische Zukunft" - Gespräch mit einem Mitarbeiter/einer Mitarbeiterin des Abgeordnetenbüros des Vizepräsidenten des Europäischen Parlaments, Rainer Wieland, mit Besuch des Plenarsaales 16.15 Informationsbesuch im Haus der Europäischen Geschichte: "Neue Wege zu Europa – das Haus der Europäischen Geschichte"Freitag, 24. Mai 2024 09.00 Informationsbesuch in der Vertretung des Landes Baden-Württemberg – The Länd: "Die Rolle der Landesvertretung in Brüssel" 10.45 Informationsbesuch im Parlamentarium: "Europa entdecken über das Parlamentarium" 12.30 Rückfahrt ca. 20.30 Ankunft am Parkplatz der PH Ludwigsburg

The formulation of Union citizenship has concentrated on rights since the 1970s. In the Maastricht and subsequent EU treaties, Union citizenship is defined through rights. Against this background, discussion on rights in the EU documents on citizenship analysed in this article is surprisingly scarce. The research material consists of 15 documents produced by EU institutions in 2003–2007 as part of three programmes on citizenship. In the documents, the discussion on rights focuses on mobility instead of other aspects of rights. Electoral rights and fundamental rights are discussed a little, but in general, the minuscule discussion on rights is dominated by discussions on freedom of mobility, which appears to be the most important right of the Union citizen. Union citizenship is understood above all as citizenship of a mobile person and as a status guaranteeing freedom of movement. Conception of free movement as the core of citizens' rights keep up the citizenship discussions in the history of integration. Freedom for mobility lies also in the core of the area of freedom, security and justice – an area construct discussed in the documents. Both Union citizenship and the area of freedom, security and justice are innovations, through which EU can use power in the nation states' traditional fields of action: border control and citizenship. The central position given to the freedom of mobility and its connection with the economy as well as understanding citizenship rather as a status than practice link the Union citizenship formulated in the rights discussions to the liberalist tradition. Discussions on freedom of mobility imply both promoting and regulating mobility as well as crossing and drawing borders. In this kind of discussions on rights, Union citizenship appears as a category with which people and mobility as well as the entire integration can be governed. These discussions do not promote citizenship as political agency. ; peerReviewed

The EU still has a democratic deficit and its legitimacy is strongly questioned. This reveals the importance of citizenship and participation in the context of the challenges the EU faces today. The article contributes to the current discussions on the shifting frameworks of participation and citizenship through empirical research into the EU's participatory governance. It asks how participation is framed in terms of scale and how these scalar framings are used to formulate citizenship in selected projects funded by the EU programmes on citizenship and culture. This microlevel analysis yields new insights into the politics of scale in the EU's multilevel participatory governance. Frame analysis of the texts produced in these EU projects indicates how the combination of European and local scales is articulated to shape and regulate participation, citizenship and the EU as a community. The article therefore introduces a new concept, Euro-local scale, to make sense of this rehierarchisation of scales in the EU's participatory governance. ; peerReviewed

The EU still has a democratic deficit and its legitimacy is strongly questioned. This reveals the importance of citizenship and participation in the context of the challenges the EU faces today. The article contributes to the current discussions on the shifting frameworks of participation and citizenship through empirical research into the EU's participatory governance. It asks how participation is framed in terms of scale and how these scalar framings are used to formulate citizenship in selected projects funded by the EU programmes on citizenship and culture. This microlevel analysis yields new insights into the politics of scale in the EU's multilevel participatory governance. Frame analysis of the texts produced in these EU projects indicates how the combination of European and local scales is articulated to shape and regulate participation, citizenship and the EU as a community. The article therefore introduces a new concept, Euro-local scale, to make sense of this rehierarchisation of scales in the EU's participatory governance.

The Court has continued with its expansive interpretation of the Citizenship provisions in Article 18 EC which it had previously acknowledged as being a fundamental right granted to all EU citizens by the Treaty.1 The case-law of the Court has, in particular, stressed the relationship between the free movement rights under Article 18 EC and preventing discrimination against EU nationals on grounds of nationality and without which the Citizenship provisions would lack force. Two recent judgments of Bidar2 and Ioannidis3 demonstrate the extent to which the Court will prevent covert discrimination on grounds of nationality. In a third judgment, that of Schempp,4 the Court, seemingly sensitive to criticism of interfering in domestic tax policy, adopts a more measured interpretation of discrimination when considering whether the rights granted under Article 18 EC are interfered with.