University:
University College London
Course:
LAWS0014 | European Union Law
Academic year:

2024
Views:

51

Pages:

2
Author:

Nam B.

Name : Date : 1. How does the CJEU use purposivist and consequentialist reasoning in assessing Romanian rule of law issues? Answer: The CJEU evaluates not just literal legal texts but also their purpose and potential consequences, especially concerning judiciary independence. This allows for dynamic interpretations aligned with EU values, but it raises concerns about subjectivity and judicial overreach. 2. What is the CVM, and why is it central to Romania’s rule of law assessment? Answer: The Cooperation and Verification Mechanism (CVM) is a transitional measure assessing Romania’s compliance with EU justice standards. It sets benchmarks on judiciary transparency and anti-corruption, thus making rule of law a precondition for full EU integration. 3. Why did the Romanian Constitutional Court argue that CVM reports lack constitutional relevance? Answer: It claimed that CVM reports do not create binding norms under Romanian constitutional law. However, the CJEU rejected this, asserting their binding nature as part of broader EU legal obligations—exposing a clash of legal philosophies. 4. How do Articles 2 and 19 TEU reinforce EU judicial oversight? Answer: These articles impose obligations for effective legal protection and judicial independence. They justify EU intervention where national laws risk undermining these protections, especially when political influence over judges is suspected. 5. What precedent did the CJEU establish in the Lin case regarding statutes of limitations? Answer: The Court clarified that interruption rules must not be exploited to create systemic impunity. This reflects the EU’s insistence on uniform, non-manipulable criminal accountability frameworks—especially for corruption.