Labour markets are undergoing digital transformations with significant impacts on their structures, institutions, actors, and the power relations sustaining them. The legal and regulatory implications of these transformations are in urgent need of clarification, if the new world of work affected by digitalization and automation is to meet rule of law standards – legality; legal certainty; prohibition of the arbitrary exercise of executive power; effective judicial protection; separation of powers; and equality before the law. The digital transformation affecting European labor markets is intertwined with human mobility. Changes in the organisation of work and what will count as work in the future has important rule of law and democracy implications in terms of who is making those decisions, who is affected and how democratic those consequences are. This session starts with preliminary impulse presentations, followed by small group breakouts and ends with a group discussion of findings from each breakout.

With:

Colleen Boland | Post-Doc Researcher, Centre for Migration Law, Radboud University, re:constitution Alumna

Sandra Mantu | Assistant Professor of Migration Law, Radboud University

Karol Muszyński | Assistant Professor in Labour and Economic Sociology, University of Warsaw

“Legislative backsliding” can be understood as the regressive deterioration of legislative quality and democratic norms. In light of Article 2 of the conditionality regulation No. 2090/2020 defining rule of law and lawmaking processes, this concept could become increasingly relevant in European governance. The panel seeks to develop a normative discourse around legislative backsliding in connection with the rule of law definition, common constitutional traditions of Member States, as well as the opinions of the Venice Commission. Key questions include how to define legislative backsliding, its impact on the rule of law, and the role of constitutional courts in addressing it while respecting the separation of powers. Particular attention will be given to legislative backsliding in criminal justice and budgetary law, as well as the rise of programmatic and identitarian legislation as a distinct manifestation of this phenomenon. A case study-driven approach (focused on Italy, France and Germany) will be used to substantiate claims. Panel format includes short case study presentations and a roundtable discussion with interactive Q&A session.

With:

Giovanni Boggero | Assistant Professor of Constitutional Law, University of Turin

Ylenia Maria Citino | Post-Doc Research Fellow in Public Law, Sant’Anna School of Advanced Studies, re:constitution Alumna

Giacomo Delledonne | Associate Professor of Constitutional Law and Public Law, Sant’Anna School of Advanced Studies

This session invites an open discussion on the role and responsibility of scholarship in times of rising authoritarian threats. It explores how scholarship, shaped by political and social contexts, as well as by institutional obligations, can generate ideas that defend constitutional values beyond academic debates. The session encourages an honest exchange among diverse stakeholders about the stakes of scholactivism: the potential risks of political and public engagement, the motivations of scholar-activists, and the institutional conditions that facilitate (or hinder) this phenomenon. Featuring senior speakers and re:constitution alumni from academia and beyond, the session will invite the audience to actively participate in the discussion and help to frame questions and guidelines to help scholars reflect on their own choices regarding societal and political engagement.

With:

Olga Ceran | Post-Doc Researcher in Law and Philosophy, Europa Institute, Leiden University, re:constitution Alumna 

Jan Komárek | Donatio Universitatis Carolinae Chair, Faculty of Law, Charles University in Prague 

Maciej Krogel | Lecturer in European Law, Department of European Studies, University of Amsterdam, re:constitution Alumnus 

Katarzyna Krzyżanowska | PhD Candidate, European University Institute, re:constitution Alumna 

Noémi Fanni Molnár | Lawyer and PhD Candidate, ELTE Center for Theory of Law, re:constitution Alumna

Aarti Narsee | Senior Policy and Advocacy Officer, European Civic Forum 

András Sajó | Professor Emeritus at Central European University (remotely) 

Alexander Somek | Professor of Legal Philosophy, Faculty of Law, University of Vienna 

Max Steuer | Schumann Fellow, Faculty of Law, University of Münster, re:constitution Alumnus

This session proposes an interactive conversation among international scholars and an interdisciplinary artist working on forests, from the Brazilian Amazon to Indonesia to the Congo Basin. Our dialogue will explore, on the one hand, the commodity supply chains that threaten these vital ecosystems, and on the other hand, existing and potential legal frameworks to protect primary forests across the world. The “rule of law” will be explicitly connected to climate and biodiversity imperatives, and to objectives of human and planetary health. The session aims to inform the audience and facilitate a deeper understanding of these issues, as well as of the crucial role of EU institutions and decision-making processes in their respect. 

The format will include short, interactive presentations, an open discussion, and exercises in visualisation facilitated by artist Elia Nurvista.

With:

Gildelen Aty-Biyo | PhD Candidate, European University Institute

Pierre-Louis Choquet | Fellow, French Research Institute for Sustainable Development

Claire Debucquois | Max Weber Fellow, European University Institute, re:constitution Alumna

Elia Nurvista | Indonesian interdisciplinary artist

Maria Cecilia Oliveira | Research Group Leader, Ecopolitics and Just Transformations, Research Institute for Sustainability Potsdam

This interactive session will focus on upskilling participants with the tools they need to effectively advocate for change related to the protection of EU values. Various measures exist to facilitate such change that remain underused by civil society, including academics. While various advocacy avenues exist across a spectrum of direct and indirect tactics, this discussion will highlight means of democratic participation that can be used to influence the EU institutions and hold them accountable, in particular through access to documents requests, filing complaints with the European Ombudsperson or parliamentary petitions, and bringing actions for annulment or failure to act. After introducing these tools, a problem situation will be introduced that will then be followed by breakout case clinics and a plenary discussion.

With:

Neil Campbell | Senior Advisor, The Good Lobby

Jacquelyn Veraldi | Scholar, The Good Lobby, re:constitution Fellow

This workshop invites participants to interrogate the assumptions behind the idea of ‘restoration’ and ‘repair' of the rule of law. Should the rule of law be framed solely as a legal issue, or can, and should, it also be translated into a compelling political narrative to counter illiberal or autocratic tendencies? If one Member State successfully restores or strengthens the rule of law, could that create a positive spillover effect across the EU? How can we ensure that rule of law restoration, once achieved, is sustainable and resilient in the long term? At what point can we say the rule of law has been restored, and who gets to decide that? Participants will be divided into three thematic groups, each focusing on a different dimension of the restoration debate. The group’s finding will be commented on by invited scholars.

With:

László Detre | Salaried Attorney, Karsai Dániel Law Office, Junior Research Fellow, ELTE CSS - Institute for Legal Studies, re:constitution Alumnus

John Morijn | Chair in Law and Politics in International Relations and Assistant Professor of European Human Rights Law, University of Groningen

Angelika Nußberger | Director, Academy for European Human Rights Protection, University of Cologne, Member of the Venice Commission, Chair re:constitution Advisory Board

Maria Skóra | Consultant and Advisor on European Politics, re:constitution Alumna

Anna Wójcik | Principal Investigator, Constitutional Law Division, Koźmiński University Warsaw, re:constitution Alumna

Over the past decade, a substantial body of scholarship has examined how democratically elected incumbents subvert democratic institutions and the rule of law. While ample discussion has been devoted to the legal and political tactics of autocratic leaders, the role of their economic policies in that process received much less attention. 

This interactive session enriches debates on democracy and the rule of law by adding a perspective of comparative political economy. It investigates the role of economic policy and state-business relations in autocratization processes, and the EU’s legal and political means to tackle these challenges. It will feature inputs by experts in competition law and political economy, followed by an open discussion with the audience. By doing so, the session provides a platform for advancing interdisciplinary academic debate about protecting the rule of law in the EU. 

With:

York Albrecht | Research Associate, Institut für Europäische Politik, re:constitution Fellow

Dorothee Bohle | Professor of Comparative Politics, University of Vienna

Kati Cseres | Associate Professor of Law, University of Amsterdam

József Péter Martin | Executive Director, Transparency International Hungary, and Senior Lecturer, Corvinus University of Budapest 

Through polls and interactive word clouds generated by participants, the panel explores complementary mechanisms to enforce State cooperation with the ICC. Over twenty years after its creation, States that once championed the fight against impunity increasingly resist the Court’s authority. From selective compliance to outright defiance, these divergent approaches reveal a deeper fragmentation of the international legal order and call into question the enforceability of obligations to cooperate with the ICC. As the ICC faces mounting pressure and offers limited remedies for violations, the need for alternative enforcement tools becomes pressing. The presentation examines Italy’s refusal to surrender Libyan suspect Elmasry as a case study of regressive State practice and non-cooperation by an ICC State Party, and of possible remedies thereto.

With:

Maria Crippa | Post-Doc Researcher, University of Milan, re:constitution Alumna

Danya Chaikel | Representative to the International Criminal Court, International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)

Lavinia Parsi | PhD candidate in International Criminal Law, Università degli Studi di Milano and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin

This session will employ an innovative and engaging format in the form of a moot court. A moot court is a simulated court session for which teams prepare and present their arguments in oral proceedings before a bench of mock judges. The participants will be divided into three groups (applicants, respondents, and judges), each filling the shoes of their designated actor. The moot court problem (approximately 500 words, max one page, on a topic concerning the ban of a populist candidate from national elections) will be made available to all participants in hard copy format who will then have time to brainstorm arguments (for the applicant and respondent groups) and questions (for the judges group) on how to resolve the mooting dispute. Each of the groups will then ‘role play’ their role in the moot court hearing, leaving some time for an open discussion at the end of the session.

With:

Joseph Finnerty | Post-Doc Researcher, Academy for European Human Rights Protection, University of Cologne

Franziska Michel | PhD Candidate, Academy for European Human Rights Protection, University of Cologne

Veronika Stockinger | PhD Candidate, Academy for European Human Rights Protection, University of Cologne

As the EU prepares its post-2027 budget (MFF), new forms of conditionality may reshape rule of law enforcement. This session explores whether evolving MFF provisions could make the current Conditionality Regulation redundant or whether both can coexist. It will also assess if a new mechanism could address the challenge of holding net contributing countries accountable. Will Member States agree to stricter conditionality? Is the new push for value compliance compatible with the EU’s economic reality? Finally, will the EU add another paper tiger to its toolbox—or create an effective instrument to prevent rule of law backsliding?

With:

Nick Aiossa | Director of Transparency International EU

Krzysztof Izdebski | Board Member and Director for Advocacy, Stefan Batory Foundation

Jakub Jaraczewski | Research Coordinator Rule of Law, Democracy Reporting International

Thu Nguyen | Deputy Director, Jacques Delors Centre, re:constitution Alumna