Its Sources, Limits and Identity
Edited By Roman Hauser, Marek Zirk-Sadowski and Bartosz Wojciechowski
The fundamental postulate from Lisbon Treaty 2007 and other basic EU’s acts is to make “an ever closer Union among the peoples of Europe” (Art 1) and empower its citizens to participate in processes of will-formation because the rule of law and the principle of democracy have the same source of their legitimacy, notably, public spheres. Thus unleashing normative premises of institutionalization of discourse occurs Janus-faced as it runs towards the human rights interpretation and recognition, that means, it results in the interplay between universalizable normative claims and their interpretation coloured with the ethical fibre – be it national, ethnic or cultural.
Nevertheless, processes of Europeanization have been proceeding on the legal level basically, wherein the prominent role was casted by the CJEU, and also on the level of intergovernmental decision-making. In the aftermath of such a proceeding the EU may be comprehended in terms of the rights-based union and problem-solving entity though the emergence of the values-based community has been stymied and the transnational public spheres are rather thin. In other words, the ethical fibre became crumpled up or at least huddled for the effective governance performance what caused a democratic deficit and gave rise to debates on the EU as a post-democratic polity. There are disputes whether this oddity of the EU indicates its nobility or perversion, but the fact remains, that the Eurocitizens, in their post-sovereign states, became lost in the Hegelian extreme terms of the universal-formal rights (including the ECJ rulings in the...
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.
Do you have any questions? Contact us.Or login to access all content.