You are looking at 1 - 10 of 11 items

  • Author or Editor: Mariolina Eliantonio x
Clear All Modify Search
You do not have access to this content

Mariolina Eliantonio

The volume of EU environmental legislation and the serious consequences for humans and nature alike in case of non-compliance has made the issue of the enforcement of EU environmental law a top priority for the EU. The EU commitment to better and more effective enforcement of environmental legislation is all the more urgent because the EU is obliged by virtue of international law under the Aarhus Convention to ensure that the public has effective means to enforce EU environmental law through ensuring ‘wide access to justice’. This chapter will first identify the shortcomings of the system of centralized enforcement of environmental law. It will then analyse the gaps to effective decentralized enforcement before the national courts. The chapter will then consider some ‘new’ modes of governance in the enforcement of environmental law, namely the use of ‘soft law’ and networks, and evaluate their role towards creating a more effective enforcement regime for EU environmental law. This chapter will show that networks and guidance documents represent a promising addition to the more traditional instruments. However, further academic attention should be devoted to explore their actual effectiveness (and the conditions for their effectiveness) to promote a higher level of compliance with EU environmental law.

You do not have access to this content

Federica Cacciatore and Mariolina Eliantonio

The management of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) has been one of the earliest concerns of the EU. While establishing a decentralised system with most responsibilities falling within the competence of Member States’ authorities, the EU also felt the need to create a dedicated agency, the European Fisheries Control Agency (EFCA), endowed with mostly coordinating and some enforcement powers. This chapter seeks to examine the shared enforcement mechanisms between EFCA and the NCAs in the CFP and assess whether they are supported by adequate accountability mechanisms. In order to do so, we examine the relationship between EFCA and two selected MS, Italy and the UK. The chapter shows that there exist two shared enforcement mechanisms, one concerning the formulation and development of the general inspection policies, another referring to the cooperation between EFCA, which has the power to carry out inspections on EU vessels in international waters, and the NCAs, which are in charge of the sanctioning phase. Such mechanisms show some gaps of judicial accountability, which however could be considered as compensated for through a complete system of political accountability.

You do not have access to this content

Federica Cacciatore and Mariolina Eliantonio

The European Fisheries Control Agency (EFCA) was established in 2005 to promote the highest common standards for control, inspection and surveillance under the Common Fisheries Policy. To this aim, EFCA carries out, among other things, various inspection-related tasks involving different actors both at EU and national level. These tasks range from coordination of and assistance in national inspections, to training of inspectors, to direct inspections and inspection operations involving third countries. This chapter focuses on EFCA’s inspection-related tasks in order to assess the systems of controls therein. Through the analysis of personal, institutional, financial, judicial and public accountability it is shown that, while financial accountability is a crucial means for the EU’s oversight activity on EFCA, judicial control is almost entirely lacking, except, in part, for direct inspections. On this basis, it is concluded that specifically the participation of EFCA staff members in joint inspection teams should be the subject matter of further research.

This content is available to you

Mariolina Eliantonio and Caroline Cauffman

Standardisation has long been neglected by lawyers, but an increasing amount of work is now being dedicated to studying its various aspects. This book aims to contribute to the literature on standardisation by examining a topical yet still open question surrounding its use: the legitimacy of standardisation as a regulatory technique in the European Union. Standards enter the EU legal systems in a variety of ways: this book aims to present various sectorial perspectives on standardisation in order to show the varied nature of the phenomenon at EU level and its enormous relevance for policy fields as diverse as pharmaceutical authorisation, telecommunications and food safety, but also raise legitimacy-related questions. The overarching research question of this book is, therefore, whether the process of standardisation, with its economic and trade advantages, provides sufficient legitimacy guarantees. We conclude that a number of legitimacy concerns can be highlighted with regard to the standardisation process, and we identify a number of possible avenues for further research on this topic.

You do not have access to this content

Annalisa Volpato and Mariolina Eliantonio

Standards enter the European legal order in a variety of ways which affect their judicial review. Notably, international standards are sometimes incorporated by reproduction in binding or nonbinding EU measures, or they penetrate the European legal order through the technique of referral, whereby the text of the standards is referred to in EU secondary law. The aim of this contribution is to examine the different techniques through which standards enter the European legal order and evaluate the way in which the Court of Justice of the European Union may judicially review the standards. The chapter will show that the Court of Justice currently has a ‘love-hate relationship’ with standards. While it accepts jurisdiction on harmonised European standards which are (at least formally) not binding, it refuses to accept jurisdiction on international standards which are incorporated into EU secondary law, thereby undermining the legitimacy of standardisation as a regulatory technique for the EU legal system.

You do not have access to this content

The Legitimacy of Standardisation as a Regulatory Technique

A Cross-disciplinary and Multi-level Analysis

Edited by Mariolina Eliantonio and Caroline Cauffman

This timely book examines the field of European and global standardisation, showing how standards give rise to a multitude of different legal questions. It explores diverse topics in regulation such as food safety, accounting, telecommunications and medical devices. Each chapter offers in-depth analysis of a number of key policy areas. These multi-disciplinary contributions go beyond the field of law, and provide cross-disciplinary comparisons.
This content is available to you

Edited by Marjan Peeters and Mariolina Eliantonio

You do not have access to this content

Matthijs van Wolferen and Mariolina Eliantonio

There is not only a long and commonly held (academic) opinion, but also an international obligation that requires the European Union to have easy access to justice for environmental non-governmental organisations (ENGOs). However, even under heavy international pressure, the standing requirements that limit the access to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) for these applicants remain in place. This chapter aims to introduce the general system of access to justice under Article 263 and Article 267 TFEU. It will be explained how the Court has a particular view on how judicial review should function. It is however likely that this system has a number of deficiencies. These deficiencies are clearly brought to light in the complaint that was raised before the Aarhus Convention’s compliance mechanism. An analysis of this procedure and its problematic outcome will be used to discuss the future for these public interest litigants.

This content is available to you

Marjan Peeters and Mariolina Eliantonio

This concluding chapter captures the findings of the previous 29 chapters by discussing three main issues, namely: (1) the use of competences for EU environmental law-making; (2) the ways to address the serious compliance deficit and the role of civil society in this regard; and (3) the role of the CJEU in furthering environmental protection in the EU. The EU environmental acquis and the case law of the CJEU are of a patchwork nature, the regulatory approaches are often very complex, and the Court has regularly stepped in to clarify legislative provisions. While the EU has succeeded in adopting an impressive package of diverse regulatory approaches to protect the environment, the compliance deficit is a very serious issue. The establishment of inspection powers at EU level – next to on the ground examinations regarding the implementation of EU environmental law in Member States – are needed to improve the effectiveness of the EU environmental acquis. At the same time, the power of civil society, using its procedural rights, is an important means to help reach the ultimate aim: a high level of environmental protection in the EU.