|
Europe's Futures Colloquium
|
|
Seminars and Colloquia
|
Amanda CoakleyZoran Nechev
|
Register Here
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
|
Judges Under Pressure
|
|
Seminars and Colloquia
|
Ivan VejvodaJudy Dempsey
|
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
Two members of the European Union. Two members of NATO. They couldn't be more different.
Poland and Romania are undergoing transformations that could have a profound effect on the rule of law, particularly on the role of independent judges.
Romania has been consistently criticized by reformers, by human rights activists and by organizations trying to combat the rampant corruption for the weak rule of law and for the constant interference by the political elites in the judiciary.
Since 1989, the country's transformation has been long, complicated and delayed by vested interests and indeed the old guard. Its history and culture do play a role in delaying the transformation. But the past cannot be used as an excuse to postpone a long overdue institutionalization of the rule of law and make the judiciary genuinely independent.
As for Poland, it was supposed to be a kind of model for other countries making the transformation from communism to democracy. But since 2005, a year after Poland joined the European Union, Law and Justice, a nationalist, conservative party, has been doing everything possible to overturn the gains of the post-1989 period.
Its first stint in power was too short-lived for the party to achieve its goal: adapting the law to implement its agenda. But since 2015, it has chiseled away at the fundamental aspects of the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary.
There are a lot of "whys" with regard to what is happening in Poland and Romania. This will be the topic of my presentation on 4 November.
Read more
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
Two members of the European Union. Two members of NATO. They couldn't be more different.
Poland and Romania are undergoing transformations that could have a profound effect on the rule of law, particularly on the role of independent judges.
Romania has been consistently criticized by reformers, by human rights activists and by organizations trying to combat the rampant corruption for the weak rule of law and for the constant interference by the political elites in the judiciary.
Since 1989, the country's transformation has been long, complicated and delayed by vested interests and indeed the old guard. Its history and culture do play a role in delaying the transformation. But the past cannot be used as an excuse to postpone a long overdue institutionalization of the rule of law and make the judiciary genuinely independent.
As for Poland, it was supposed to be a kind of model for other countries making the transformation from communism to democracy. But since 2005, a year after Poland joined the European Union, Law and Justice, a nationalist, conservative party, has been doing everything possible to overturn the gains of the post-1989 period.
Its first stint in power was too short-lived for the party to achieve its goal: adapting the law to implement its agenda. But since 2015, it has chiseled away at the fundamental aspects of the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary.
There are a lot of "whys" with regard to what is happening in Poland and Romania. This will be the topic of my presentation on 4 November.
Read more
|
|
Europe’s Futures Colloquium with Katy Hayward and Ieva Česnulaitytė
|
|
Seminars and Colloquia
|
Ivan VejvodaKaty HaywardIeva Česnulaitytė
|
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
|
Europe’s Futures Colloquium II
|
|
Seminars and Colloquia
|
Alida VracicPéter Krekó
|
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
|
The EU Periphery and Revisionist Powers
|
|
Seminars and Colloquia
|
Dimitar BechevIvan Vejvoda
|
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
Starting with the annexation of Crimea in the spring of 2014, scholars and analysts have been debating the standoff between the West and competitors such as Russia, Erdogan’s Turkey, and lately China on Europe’s periphery. “The return of geopolitics” has become a standard phrase to describe the new moment in the international politics of Eastern and Southeast Europe. A contrast is drawn with the 2000s, the highmark of the European Union’s “transformative power” and NATO’s eastward expansion. But the top-down view highlighting the preferences and actions of big players, including core EU member states like Germany and France, Russia, Turkey etc. overlooks the critical role played by peripheral countries and their elites. Rather than being the object of great powers’ decisions, they manipulate rivalries in pursuit of political advantage. Though the domestic arena provides entry points for external actors’ influence it also empowers incumbent elites in the target countries. The talk drew on examples from Southeast Europe (the Western Balkans, Bulgaria, Romania, Greece) but drew parallels to the post-Soviet space.
Read more
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
Starting with the annexation of Crimea in the spring of 2014, scholars and analysts have been debating the standoff between the West and competitors such as Russia, Erdogan’s Turkey, and lately China on Europe’s periphery. “The return of geopolitics” has become a standard phrase to describe the new moment in the international politics of Eastern and Southeast Europe. A contrast is drawn with the 2000s, the highmark of the European Union’s “transformative power” and NATO’s eastward expansion. But the top-down view highlighting the preferences and actions of big players, including core EU member states like Germany and France, Russia, Turkey etc. overlooks the critical role played by peripheral countries and their elites. Rather than being the object of great powers’ decisions, they manipulate rivalries in pursuit of political advantage. Though the domestic arena provides entry points for external actors’ influence it also empowers incumbent elites in the target countries. The talk drew on examples from Southeast Europe (the Western Balkans, Bulgaria, Romania, Greece) but drew parallels to the post-Soviet space.
Read more
|
|
Learning From the Prespa Agreement
|
|
Seminars and Colloquia
|
Ioannis ArmakolasIvan Vejvoda
|
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
|
Europe’s Futures Colloquium with Hanna Shelest
|
|
Seminars and Colloquia
|
Hanna ShelestIvan Vejvoda
|
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
|
Europe’s Futures Colloquium I
|
|
Seminars and Colloquia
|
Grigorij MesežnikovNiccolo Milanese
|
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
The working hypothesis of the project is a consideration that no less important factor of the growth of right-wing radicalism in Slovakia is – besides ethno-politics and social deprivation – a illiberal regression in the execution of power by mainstream political forces: tyranny of the majority, efforts to limit the fair electoral competition, marginalization of the opposition (especially of liberal-democratic orientation), selective justice, attacks on independent media and civil society, state capture, nourishing the illiberal public discourse on democracy, freedom, human rights, universal values, migration, the future of the EU, etc.
Read more
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
The working hypothesis of the project is a consideration that no less important factor of the growth of right-wing radicalism in Slovakia is – besides ethno-politics and social deprivation – a illiberal regression in the execution of power by mainstream political forces: tyranny of the majority, efforts to limit the fair electoral competition, marginalization of the opposition (especially of liberal-democratic orientation), selective justice, attacks on independent media and civil society, state capture, nourishing the illiberal public discourse on democracy, freedom, human rights, universal values, migration, the future of the EU, etc.
Read more
|
|
Europe’s Futures Symposium 2020
|
|
Seminars and Colloquia
|
Alida VracicBernd MarinGrigorij MesežnikovIsabelle IoannidesIvan VejvodaLeszek JazdzewskiNiccolo MilaneseNicole KoenigPéter Krekó
|
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
|
Elections in Finland: Between Happiness and the Russo-Ukrainian War
|
|
Seminars and Colloquia
|
Ivan VejvodaVeera Luoma-aho, Iro Särkkä, Mirjana Tomic
|
|
Speakers: Ivan VejvodaVeera Luoma-aho, Iro Särkkä, Mirjana Tomic
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
Speakers: Ivan VejvodaVeera Luoma-aho, Iro Särkkä, Mirjana Tomic
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|