Constitutional referrals by ordinary courts – Judicial dialogue between constitutional courts and ordinary courts – Toolkit for judicial resistance – Novel taxonomy of features and functions of constitutional referrals – Separation of powers approach – Democratic decay – Self-defence mechanism – Mix of methodological approaches – Case study on Czechia

References to the European Convention on Human Rights by Israeli courts – the European Convention on Human Rights and the European Court of Human Rights as sources of comparative law – comparative law as technique of legitimation – content analysis of use by domestic courts of European Court of Human Rights jurisprudence – European Court of Human Rights jurisprudence and deference to state

German Federal Constitutional Court’s review of memory laws – Poland’s Constitutional Tribunal review of memory laws – politicisation of the judicial review of memory laws – gouvernement des juges – abusive judicial review

Introduction of the institutional framework of constitutional democracy and transitional justice in Hungary – Liberal constitutionalism as a victim of the authoritarian efforts of Viktor Orbán’s Fidesz party after the 2010 parliamentary elections – The legal governance of history contributing to the backsliding of democracy and the rule of law – Use of memory politics for the newly established authoritarian regime’s own political purposes – Transitional justice measures to help reconcile society and consolidate democracy – The current Hungarian government’s attitude towards public discussion of history

Strategic Lawsuits against Public Participation (SLAPPs) – the rule of law backsliding – governance of historical memory – academic freedom – EU Draft Directive on protecting persons who engage in public participation from manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings

Introduction to the Special Section – relationship between memory laws and the rule of law – exploiting law in the service of historical policy and undermining democracy – rule of law backsliding – democratic backsliding – risk of abuse of memory laws

Memory laws – Protecting the good name of the nation – de facto memory laws – Prohibiting statements about the past – Article 301 of the Turkish Criminal Code – Protecting the good name of Poland and the Polish nation – Protecting the good name of the nation as de facto memory laws – Role of organisations in implementing the laws – Rule of law – Independence of the judiciary – European Court of Human Rights – Chilling effect – European memory politics

Judicial councils – separation of powers – fourth-branch institutions – judicial independence – four ideal types of judicial councils – a judge-controlled, politician-controlled, inter-branch and fourth-branch judicial council – danger of politicisation and corporativism of the judiciary

The need for a standard of review even during times of crisis – proportionality analysis as the ideal and universally applicable standard of review – the problem of excessive stringency of proportionality analysis during an emergency – the principle of in dubio pro libertate as the cause of the problem – adjusting each component of proportionality analysis to the precautionary principle as the solution – the precautionary application of proportionality analysis strikes a more appropriate balance between excessive stringency and insufficient protection of fundamental rights

From ‘strategic autonomy’ to ‘open strategic autonomy’ in the 2021 EU Trade Policy Review – questioning the added value of the qualifier ‘open’ – legal exploration of ‘openness’ in EU external trade – identification of constitutional norms of ‘openness’ in the Treaties – strong constitutional preference for openness – discretion for trade liberalisation and multilateralism and international cooperation but strict obligation for compliance with international law – reviewing recent EU trade instruments in light of these norms – rise in unilateral trade policy instruments adopted since 2021 in pursuit of open strategic autonomy – instruments seeking to restore reciprocity in international trade relations – instruments using access to the internal market as a lever for achieving global sustainability goals – instruments preserving EU security through trade – problematic tensions with international law – very limited ‘openness’ in ‘open strategic autonomy’.

Constitutionalising private law – Horizontal effect of fundamental rights –New legislative techniques in the EU in platform governance – References to the Charter of Fundamental Rights in secondary union law – Article 14(4) of the Digital Services Act – Article 5(1) subparagraph 2 of the Terrorist Content Online Regulation – Compatibility of secondary union law references to the Charter with primary union law – Interpretative methodology of secondary union law references

Protection of personal data as a fundamental right – GDPR’s enforcement dilemma in cross-border cases – “One-stop-shop” model’s inadequacies highlighted – Distinction: regular cross-border enforcement versus cases of common European concern – Proposal: centralised enforcement mechanism for cases of common European concern – Union supervisory authority as a solution – Insufficiencies of the harmonisation proposal of the European Commission – Centralisation’s advantages: uniform enforcement, better coordination, and curbing forum shopping – Implications: fundamental rights protection and EU’s constitutional obligations – Constructive critique of the one-stop-shop model, not a dismissal – European constitutional law mandates effective data protection enforcement.

Citizenship deprivation on security grounds – Difference in state practices – Underlying citizenship regimes and states’ constitutional structures – Constitutional roles attributed to the citizen – Judicial decisions on citizenship deprivation – Comparison with a focus on France and the United Kingdom

The European Court of Human Rights holds that the Bosphorus presumption of equivalent protection cannot apply to the European Economic Area (EEA) Agreement – Its reasons focus on EEA Agreement’s lack of primacy, direct effect and adequate enforcement mechanisms – Not applying Bosphorus presumption to EEA Agreement results in the indirect review of EU law by the Strasbourg Court, given that EEA and EU law are substantially identical – Court’s arguments are open to strong criticism – However, its conclusions are correct – They are substantiated by two considerations, which were overlooked by the Court – First, EEA law is to be considered ‘freely entered into’ international law under the Matthews case law – Second, the EFTA Court lacks the power to strike down EEA law breaching upon fundamental rights – Both these consideration are the corollary of the fundamental premises of the EEA Agreement: the retention by EFTA states of sovereign decision-making powers – Refusal to apply Bosphorus presumption to EEA Agreement will likely determine a growing inconsistency between the Convention, EU and EEA law – This entails serious systemic problems