Freedom of movement of persons - the building block of European growth. CHALLENGE EUROPE Issue 22 - Challenges and new beginnings: Priorities for the EU's new leadership, September 2014.

The European integration project is founded on values and principles which are simple, equal, and advantageous for all. Freedom of movement of persons is one of the main cornerstones of EU success. It is a fundamental, cherished right of EU citizens. Thanks to this liberty, European citizenship is real, concrete and attractive. Moreover, it spurs economic growth and technological development. But because freedom of movement has become an obvious feature of our day-to-day lives, some of us tend to underestimate its consequences. Important recent developments mean that we must renew our commitment to defend this building-block of a Europe whole and free.

Citizenship Deprivation: A Normative Analysis. Liberty and Security in Europe No. 82, 19 March 2015

Most critical analyses assess citizenship-deprivation policies against international human rights and domestic rule of law standards, such as prevention of statelessness, non-arbitrariness with regard to justifications and judicial remedies, or non-discrimination between different categories of citizens. This report considers instead from a political theory perspective how deprivation policies reflect specific conceptions of political community. We distinguish four normative conceptions of the grounds of membership in a political community that apply to decisions on acquisition and loss of citizenship status: i) a ‘State discretion’ view, according to which governments should be as free as possible in pursuing State interests when determining citizenship status; ii) an ‘individual choice’ view, according to which individuals should be as free as possible in choosing their citizenship status; iii) an ‘ascriptive community’ view, according to which both State and individual choices should be minimised through automatic determination of membership based on objective criteria such as the circumstances of birth; and iv) a ‘genuine link’ view, according to which the ties of individuals to particular States determine their claims to inclusion and against deprivation while providing at the same time objections against including individuals without genuine links. We argue that most citizenship laws combine these four normative views in different ways, but that from a democratic perspective the ‘genuine link’ view is normatively preferable to the others. The report subsequently examines five general grounds for citizenship withdrawal – threats to public security, non-compliance with citizenship duties, flawed acquisition, derivative loss and loss of genuine links – and considers how the four normative views apply to withdrawal provision motivated by these concerns. The final section of the report examines whether EU citizenship provides additional reasons for protection against Member States’ powers of citizenship deprivation. We suggest that, in addition to fundamental rights protection through EU law and protection of free movement rights, three further arguments could be invoked: toleration of dual citizenship in a political union, prevention of unequal conditions for loss among EU citizens, and the salience of genuine links to the EU itself rather than merely to one of its Member States.

EU citizenship, Citizenship and identity beyond national borders. EU Centre Singapore Background Brief No. 10, October 2013

The 1992 Maastricht Treaty introduced the concept of European Union citizenship. All citizens of the 28 EU member states are also EU citizens through the very fact that their countries are members of the EU. Acquired EU citizenship gives them the right to free movement, settlement and employment across the EU, the right to vote in European elections, and also on paper the right to consular protection from other EU states' embassies when abroad. The concept of citizenship in Europe – and indeed anywhere in the world – has been evolving over the years, and continues to evolve. Against this time scale, the concept of modern citizenship as attached to the nation-state would seem ephemeral. The idea of EU citizenship therefore does not need to be regarded as a revolutionary phenomenon that is bound to mitigate against the natural inclination of European citizens towards national identities, especially in times of economic and financial crises. In fact, the idea of EU citizenship has even been criticised by some scholars as being of little substantive value in addition to whatever rights and freedoms European citizens already have. Nonetheless the ‘constitutional moment’ that the Maastricht Treaty achieved for the idea of EU citizenship has served more than just symbolic value – the EU’s Charter of Fundamental Rights is now legally binding, for instance. The idea of EU citizenship also put pressure on the Union and its leaders to address the perceived democratic deficit that the EU is often accused of. In attempts to cement the political rights of EU citizens, the citizens’ initiative was included in Lisbon Treaty allowing citizens to directly lobby the European Commission for new policy initiatives or changes.

The European Union’s Democratic Deficit and Options for EU Democracy in the 21st Century. EU Centre Singapore Working Paper No. 22, August 2014

The European Union (EU) is widely acknowledged as a successful example of economic and political integration of nation states today – a slate of democratic institutions such as the European Parliament have also been developed and European citizens now possess extensive political and civil rights by virtue of the introduction of European citizenship. Nevertheless, the EU is said to suffer from a so called “democratic deficit” even as it seeks deeper and closer integration. Decades of institutional design and elite closed-door decisions has taken its toll on the inclusion and integration of European citizens in social and political life, with widening socio-economic inequalities and the resurgence of extreme-right parties during in the wake of the debt crisis in the Eurozone. This paper attempts to evaluate the democratic development of the EU through the use of a process-oriented approach, and concludes at the end with discussions on the various options that the EU and its citizens can take to reform democratic processes and institutions in Europe.

Post-national citizenship without post-national identity? A case study of UK immigration policy and intra-EU migration

A key dividing line in the literature on post-national citizenship concerns the role of collective identity. While some hold that a post-national form of identity is desirable in developing citizenship in contexts such as the European Union (EU), others question the defensibility of a collective identity at this supra-national level. The aim of this article is to intervene in this debate, drawing on qualitative research to consider the extent to which post-national citizenship should be accompanied by a form of post-national identity. The article takes the UK as a case study, and explores tensions between the immigration policies and rhetoric of the Coalition Government since 2010 and the post-national citizenship rights of EU citizens migrating into British local communities. It draws on independently collected qualitative data from the county of Herefordshire, UK, to argue that the persistent reinforcement of national identity reproduces national lines of difference which further problematise the full realisation of European citizenship. At a theoretical level, this highlights the need for the development of post-national citizenship rights to be accompanied by a paradigmatic shift in the way that collective identity is constituted in post-national contexts.

Notable reacción europea ante otro intento laicista : El crucifijo en las escuelas italianas y la Corte de Estrasburgo (a propósito de la sentencia “Lautsi c. Italy”)

Resumen: Del mismo modo como hace no muchos años la ciudadanía europea se conmovió frente al planteo sobre las raíces cristianas en el momento de redactar la Constitución de la Unión Europea, dando lugar a numerosos discursos sobre la necesidad de no olvidar la verdadera cultura y enseñanza que había ennoblecido al Viejo Mundo, hace casi un año una sentencia proveniente de la Corte de Estrasburgo aplicable al Estado italiano, el caso “Lautsi c. Italy”, ha generado numerosas reacciones en diferentes sectores intelectuales permitiendo el desarrollo de notables argumentos que han intentado desenmascarar los verdaderos rostros que se encontraban velados detrás de los lugares comunes de la argumentación jurídico-política de los últimos dos siglos, especialmente los de laicidad, neutralidad, igualdad y libertad. De este modo la radicalización y desarrollo llevado al extremo de las premisas de la Ilustración ha mostrado su real fisonomía y consecuencia. Para tal propósito el análisis se concentra en la apelación a la Grande Chambre presentada por el Estado italiano y los sucesivos aportes provenientes de la doctrina europea, especialmente a través de valiosos Congresos y Jornadas dedicados a la problemática.

Sustainable Technoscientific Development and the Innovator Citizen

Sustainable development could provide a critical foil for individual
and especially collective reflection on the normative
direction, ends and means employed by societies, particularly
around the economy, its technology and resource-intensive
orientation and configuration with ecosystems. However,
although sustainable development is a constitutional objective
of the EU, its implementation in strategies and policies reveals
a much narrower meaning. By framing sustainable development
as ecological modernisation on the basis of technoscientific
innovation, and by imagining citizens as entrepreneurs in a
knowledge-based European economy, openings for democratic
experimentation and social innovation are limited and even
forestalled. In addition, the disruptive and transformational
potential of citizenship is stymied. Still, sustainable development
has resonance within citizenship and human rights
discourses that provide important resources for the fashioning
of common understanding. These are valuable supplements to
the repertoire of European citizenship that could help to embed
sustainable development in the social fabric and generate
alternative imaginaries and futures of a sustainable Europe.

Érase una vez: integração de um projeto Comenius na prática letiva

O presente relatório de estágio centra-se nas possibilidades de integração de um projeto Comenius na prática letiva. Na primeira parte, de carácter essencialmente teórico, dá-se visibilidade à vertente sociocultural, numa escola que se entende inclusiva, plurilingue e intercultural. A fim de contextualizar a temática do projeto - os contos populares – tecem-se breves considerações sobre as possibilidades de utilização do conto nas aulas de Espanhol e de língua materna, refletindo-se também sobre as modalidades de avaliação que se podem adequar ao tipo de tarefas previstas. Na segunda parte, caracteriza-se o espaço e o público-alvo, traçando-se ainda as linhas gerais do projeto Comenius Érase una vez, il était une fois, que servirá de base à terceira parte deste relatório, em que se descreve a operacionalização do projeto, interligando programas, manual e atividades. Tendo em conta a planificação desta simbiose, descrevem-se as atividades levadas a cabo para integrar e avaliar este projeto internacional nas disciplinas de Português e de Espanhol. Para terminar, reflete-se sobre o percurso realizado e os resultados alcançados.

Cidadania pós-nacional

In the midst of changes of the world political order fostered mainly by the very debated phenomenon of globalization, the nation-state is confronted with new paradigms regarding their identification with society. Citizenship, as was defined up to the latter decades of the last century, rooted in nationalist ideals that tend to condition it full exercise on exclusionary policies oriented criteria, is not consistent with the human needs of present days. One can observe, mainly in Europe with the establishment of European citizenship, certain propensity towards a relative detachment between nationality and citizenship. It is expected with the present research to expose some of the arguments invoked by those who defend the possibility of a post-national conception of citizenship, i.e., decoupled from the concept of nationality and national boundaries, in order to develop a grounding for a necessary re-articulation of this institute. This assumption is based mainly on the movement of universal human rights and the revaluation of human dignity, especially through participatory policies on citizenship and respect for ethnic and cultural diversity.

« Citoyennisation » et consolidation d’entités supranationales : les cas de l’Union européenne et de l’Organisation des Nations Unies

Le contexte contemporain est marqué dans la sphère politique par la multiplication des paliers de régulation. Une nouvelle structure de gestion des affaires publiques a émergé, caractérisée par la superposition, ou plutôt l’enchevêtrement, des institutions nationales, des entités infra-étatiques et des organisations supranationales (à caractère régional et international). L’État, tout en conservant un rôle privilégié, ne détient plus le monopole de la production de politiques ; la sphère nationale n’est plus le seul locus de la vie politique. De telles dynamiques de changement n’ont pas laissé inchangés les contours de la citoyenneté, élément central de la régulation du politique. Les années 90 ont ainsi vu émerger une prolifération d’analyses concernant la dimension de plus en plus post/trans/supra-nationale, voire globale, de la citoyenneté ; selon ces travaux, le locus de la citoyenneté est de moins en moins national et de plus en plus supranational. La thèse cherche à dépasser cette problématique du locus à partir d’une conception multiple et dynamique de la citoyenneté ; celle-ci est considérée comme une construction dont les contours mouvants évoluent dans le temps et l’espace. Les individus ne sont pas citoyens « par nature » ; ils le deviennent à travers un processus de « citoyennisation », au fur et à mesure que des entités politiques se constituent et se consolident. Les structures institutionnelles et les politiques publiques progressivement mises en place au sein des entités politiques supranationales créent des liens de citoyenneté avec les individus, et la nature de ces liens se transforme au fur et à mesure que les structures institutionnelles et politiques changent. C’est une analyse contextualisée de ces processus de « citoyennisation » en cours au niveau supranational que propose la thèse. Dans cette perspective, elle s’interroge sur la signification des développements récents qui ont marqué l’Union européenne et l’Organisation des Nations Unies pour la construction d’une citoyenneté supranationale. Piliers importants de la structure de régulation multi-niveaux caractérisant la sphère politique contemporaine, ces deux entités se sont ces dernières années engagées dans un processus de réformes institutionnelles profondes. En s’appuyant notamment sur les concepts de « régime de citoyenneté » et de « gouvernance » et un cadre théorique institutionnaliste, la thèse propose une analyse de l’impact des changements institutionnels en cours au sein des Nations Unies et de l’Union européenne en termes de citoyennisation.

L'identité européenne : un développement progressif par la citoyenneté et la Charte des droits fondamentaux de l'Union européenne

Thèse de doctorat effectuée en cotutelle avec la Faculté de droit de l'Université Jean Moulin Lyon III

Perspectivas del debate en torno al concepto de europeidad al interior de la Unión Europea a la luz de los criterios de adhesión de Copenhague

Cuando se habla de los límites y fronteras de Europa, actualmente no están definidos en su totalidad, resultando problemático en la subregión del este, donde se encuentran Estados como Ucrania, Bielorrusia, Turquía y otros más. La delgada línea que divide a Europa de Asia aún es confusa, por lo cual delimitar el concepto de europeidad implica contemplar más variables que lo geográfico y cultural. De esta manera, la incertidumbre que existe está relacionada con los atributos que tiene la europeidad, y como los ciudadanos se identifican con ella. La europeidad antes que un conjunto de valores atribuible a los ciudadanos o una herencia cultural común, es un concepto difuso, efímero y esquivo para algunos autores. La trascendencia de este concepto se hace manifiesta en el artículo 49 del Tratado de la Unión Europea donde se estipulan las condiciones para ser miembro de la Unión Europea (UE). Aunque ser miembro de la UE no es lo mismo que ser europeo hasta este momento es la forma más aceptable para denominar a un Estado como europeo.

El aprendizaje de la ciudadan??a europea

Los autores forman parte del grupo de investigaci??n GIOES. Departamento de Did??ctica e investigaci??n Educativa. Facultad de Educaci??n de la Universidad de La Laguna (Santa Cruz de Tenerife).

EU immigration trends and policies: Spain and France as case studies. Jean Monnet/Robert Schuman Paper Series Vol. 13 No. 10, August 2013

From the Introduction. The Treaty on European Union, also known as the Treaty of Maastricht or the Maastricht Treaty, created the European Union (EU) from the existing European Economic Community (EEC.) It was signed by the member states on February 7, 1992, and entered into force on November 1, 1993.1 Among its many innovations was the creation of European citizenship, which would be granted to any person who was a citizen of an EU member state. Citizenship, however, is intertwined with immigration, which the Treaty also attempted to address. Policy on visas, immigration and asylum was originally placed under Pillar 3 of the EU, which dealt with Justice and Home Affairs. In 1997, however, the Amsterdam Treaty moved these policies from Pillar 3 to Pillar 1, signaling “a shift toward more supranational decision-making in this area,” as opposed to the intergovernmental method of Pillars 2 and 3.2

Best Practices in Involuntary Loss of Nationality in the EU. CEPS Liberty and Security in Europe No. 73/November 2014

This paper was prepared as a ILEC Policy Brief for discussion at the final conference of the project on Involuntary Loss of European Citizenship: Exchanging Knowledge and Identifying Guidelines for Europe, 11-12 December 2014. Co-funded by the European Commission’s DG for Justice, Citizenship and Fundamental Rights, the ILEC project has aimed to establish a framework for debate on international norms on involuntary loss of nationality. For more information visit: www.ilecproject.eu.