re:constitution
2019/ 2020

Stoyan Panov

Mobility Phase: Center for the Study of Democracy, Sofia

»Two is not enough, three is too many?«: An Analysis of EU’s Multi-layered Response to the Backsliding of Democracy and the Rule of Law in Central and Eastern Europe

Photo: Joanna Scheffel

Dr. Stoyan Panov is a Lecturer in International Law and Jurisprudence at University College Freiburg, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg. He received his PhD (Law) at University of Birmingham (the UK), his LL.M. in Leiden University and studied at Georgetown University, and DePauw University. His PhD dissertation was on the topic of the principle ‘extradite-or-prosecute’ for international crimes in international law. His research interests cover the areas of EU law, human rights law, international criminal law, international law, the rule of law, anti-corruption mechanisms, and international security. He has published on topics such as liability for international crimes, applicability of the EAW and the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, populism and the rule of law, human rights protections in preventive seizure and confiscation of assets and property, among other topics.

“Two Is Not Enough, Three is Too Many?”: An Analysis of EU’s Multi-layered Response to the Backsliding of Democracy and the Rule of Law in Central and Eastern Europe

EU member states have been experiencing threats to the democratic structures, fundamental values and the rule of law. The backsliding undermines the Rule of Law through the Rule of the Super-majority to the Rule of the Corrupted. The EU plans various supranational mechanisms to respond to such multidimensional threats. This project looks at the envisaged framework of the triangulation of mechanisms currently planned on EU level as regards the backsliding of the rule of law in Central and Eastern Europe with a particular focus on Bulgaria: the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO), the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism applicable in Bulgaria since 2007, and the envisaged mechanism to protect EU’s budget in deficiencies as regards the rule of law in Member States. The added value is in the analysis of the envisaged multi-partite EU framework and the interplay between populism and its effect on the principle of the rule of law with a focus on the functioning of non-majoritarian institutions as the judiciary. Has Bulgaria under the CVM been more receptive towards recommendations and practices coming from Brussels as regards the rule of law or independence of the judiciary? Bulgaria also participates in the EPPO’s framework, while Poland and Hungary may be used in the comparative analytical exercise as they have opted out of the EPPO structure but are subject to Article 7 TEU proceedings.