Advertisement

Solidarity as a Legal Concept

Chapter

Abstract

The chapter of Markus Kotzur examines solidarity as a legal concept. Whereas the Treaty of Lisbon contains manifold references to the notion of solidarity, Kotzur argues that a precise meaning of or conceptual framework for this notion is anything but clear. The question of which overall expectations, moral obligations, political assumptions and normative forces can be attributed to “solidarity” needs, therefore, to be addressed. Against this backdrop, the chapter aims, firstly, to introduce conceptual approaches to solidarity on the national, regional and international planes; secondly, to identify text-based legal substantiations of solidarity within the EU and beyond; and, finally, to frame solidarity as a constitutional paradigm. In doing so, the paper follows a leitmotif once expressed by Jacques Delors in the saying “solidarity mechanisms are not based on pure generosity, but on enlightened self-interest”.

References

  1. Biscop, S. (2005). The European security strategy: A global agenda for positive power (p. 124). Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  2. Christopoulos, D., & Souvlis, G. (2016). Europe’s solidarity crisis: A perspective from Greece. Last visit January 19, 2017, from https://roarmag.org/essays/europe-refugee-solidarity-crisis-greece/
  3. Delors, J. (2012). In S. Fernandes & E. Rubio (Eds.), Solidarity within the Eurozone: How much, what for, for how long? Report by Notre Europe. Retrieved May 16, 2012, from http://www.notre-europe.eu/uploads/tx_publication/SolidarityEMU_S.Fernandes-E.Rubio_NE_Feb2012.pdf
  4. Giddens, A. (2007). Europe in the global age (p. 112). Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  5. Giegerich, T., Gstrein, O. J., & Zeitman, S. (Eds.). (2014). The EU between “an ever closer union” and inalienable policy domains of member states. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  6. Häberle, P. (1990). 1789 als Teil der Geschichte, Gegenwart und Zukunft des Verfassungsstaates. JöR, 37, 35.Google Scholar
  7. Häberle, P., & Kotzur, M. (2016). Europäische Verfassungslehre (8th ed., pp. 939). Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  8. Hatje, A. (2001). Loyalität als Rechtsprinzip der EU (pp. 16).Google Scholar
  9. Konstantinides, Th. (2011). Civil protection in Europe and the Lisbon “solidarity clause”. A genuine legal concept or a paper exercise (Uppsala Faculty of Law Working Paper no. 3, p. 7).Google Scholar
  10. Kotzur, M. (2015). In R. Geiger, D.-E. Khan, & M. Kotzur (Eds.), European Union treaties. A commentary (Art. 80 TFEU para 1).Google Scholar
  11. Kotzur, M., & Schmalenbach, K. (2014). Solidarity among Nations. Archiv des Völkerrechts, 52(2014), 68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Krüger, H. (1971). Brüderlichkeit—das dritte, fast vergessene Ideal der Demokratie. In Festschrift Maunz (pp. 249).Google Scholar
  13. Lais, M. (2007). Das Solidaritätsprinzip im europäischen Verfassungsverbund. Baden-Baden: Nomos.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lüder, S. R. (2009). Katastrophenschutz in der Europäischen Union und seine Auswirkungen auf das nordrhein-westfälische Recht. In NWVBl (pp. 251).Google Scholar
  15. Maduro, M. (2001). Contrapunctual Law: Europe’s constitutional pluralism in action. In N. Walker (Ed.), Sovereignty in transition (p. 21). Portland: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  16. Mavelli, L., & Wilson, E. (Eds.). (2016). The refugee crisis and religion. Secularism, security, and hospitality in question. London: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  17. Myrdal, S., & Rhinard, M. (2010). The European Union’s solidarity clause: Empty letter or effective tool? (UI Occasional Papers no. 2, p. 6).Google Scholar
  18. Pernice, I. (1999). Multilevel constitutionalism and the treaty of Amsterdam: European constitution-making revisited. Common Market Law Review, 36, 703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Pernice, I. (2009). The treaty of Lisbon: Multilevel constitutionalism in action, Columbia. Journal of European Law, 15, 349.Google Scholar
  20. Peters, A. (2006). Compensatory constitutionalism: The function and potential of fundamental international norms and structures. Leiden Journal of International Law, 19, 579 at 601.Google Scholar
  21. Regelsberger, E., & Kugelmann, D. (2012). In R. Streinz (Ed.), EUV/AEUV (2nd ed. Art. 31 TEU para 6).Google Scholar
  22. Report of the International Law Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS) (2001) The Responsibility to Protect. Google Scholar
  23. Ross, M. (2010). Solidarity—A new constitutional paradigm for the EU. In M. Ross & Y. Borgmann-Prebil (Eds.), Promoting solidarity in the European Union (pp. 23). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Schmalenbach, K., Puntscher Riekmann, S., & Wydra, D. Last visit May 15, 2016., from http://www.uni-salzburg.at/portal/page?_pageid=465,1835853&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL
  25. Slaughter, A.-M. (2005). Security, solidarity and sovereignty: The grand themes of UN reform. The American Journal of International Law, 99, 619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Smith, K. (2008). European Union foreign policy in a changing world (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  27. Stahn, C. (2007). Responsibility to Protect. Political Rhetoric or Emerging Legal Norm. The American Journal of International Law, 101, 99.Google Scholar
  28. UN Doc. GA/Res. 60/1 (2005 world Summit and Outcome)Google Scholar
  29. Volkmann, U. (1998). Solidarität—Programm und Prinzip der Verfassung. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.Google Scholar
  30. von Arnauld, A. (2009). Souveränität und die responsibility to protect. Die Friedenswarte, 84, 11.Google Scholar
  31. von Bogdandy, A. (2009). Grundprinzipien. In: A. von Bogdandy & J. Bast (Eds.), Europäisches Verfassungsrecht (2nd ed., pp. 13 at 69–71). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  32. Walker, N. (2002). The idea of constitutional pluralism. Modern Law Review, 65, 317.Google Scholar
  33. Weiler, J. H. H. (1991). The transformation of Europe. Yale Law Journal, 100, S. 2403 ff., at 2471.Google Scholar
  34. Weiler, J. (2000). Federalism and constitutionalism: Europe’s Sonderweg (Jean Monnet Working Paper 10/00, p. 14).Google Scholar
  35. Wellens, K. (2010). Revisiting solidarity as a (re-)emerging constitutional principle: Some further reflections. In R. Wolfrum & C. Kojima (Eds.), Solidarity: A structural principle of international law (pp. 3 at 4). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  36. Wellens, K. (2005). Solidarity as a Constitutional Principle: Its Expanding Role and Inherent Limitations. In Ronald St. J. Macdonald & D. M. Johnston (Eds.), Towards world constitutionalism: Issues in the Legal Ordering of the World Community (p. 775). Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.Google Scholar
  37. Wiener, A. (2014). A theory of contestation. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wolfrum, R. (2006). Solidarity amongst states: An emerging structural principle of public international law. In P.-M. Dupuy (Ed.), Völkerrecht als Weltordnung. Festschrift für Christian Tomuschat (pp. 1087).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of HamburgHamburgGermany
  2. 2.Europa-Kolleg HamburgHamburgGermany

Personalised recommendations