AUTONOMY OF HIGHER EDUCATION IN THE EUROPEAN UNION

Case C-66/18 European Commission v. Hungary

  • Radmila Dragišić Pravni fakultet Univerziteta u Banjoj Luci
Keywords: University education, EU, jurisprudence of the EU Court of Justice, WTO, autonomy

Abstract


Aware of the fact that autonomy is an important prerequisite for educational institutions to be able to perform their tasks, in this paper we explore and analyze one of the most interesting cases from the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union in this area. Namely, the European Commission initiated proceedings against the Republic of Hungary for violating the rights of the European Union. The focus is on the Law on Higher Education of that member state, which has caused sharp controversies within the academic community in the countries of the European Economic Area, but also in third countries. Although the work is mostly dedicated to the free movement of services in the field of higher education, we inevitably explore the relationship between European Union law and legal instruments of the World Trade Organization (WTO), as well as the views of the Court of Justice regarding their interpretation. The case we are discussing is also important for the status of countries aspiring to become members of the European organization, since the European Parliament adopted a recommendation to include in the Copenhagen criteria for accession the defense and protection of academic freedom and institutional autonomy in order to prevent their endangerment in member states.

References

Ball, S & Youdell, D. (2008). Hidden Privatisation in Public Education. Education International 5th World Congress, July. Posjećeno 16.02.2021. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228394301_Hidden_privatisation_in_public_education.

Biondi A. (2020). Module Convenor for EU Law, A discussion on Case C-66/18 Commissin v Hungary of the 6th of October 2020: Looks like an exam model answer!, November 18, 2020. Posjećeno 17.02.2021.
https://lawsblog.london.ac.uk/2020/11/18/a-discussion-on-case-c-66-18-commission-v-hungary-of-the-6th-of-oct-2020-looks-like-an-exam-model-answer/

Chaisse, J. (2015). Deconstructing the WTO Conformity Obligation: A Theory of Compliance as a Process. Fordham International Law Journal, 38(1): 62. Posjećeno 07.02.2021. URL: http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ilj

CJEU: C-181/73 R. & V. Haegeman v Belgian State, para. 5. i 6, ECLI:EU:C:1974:41

CJEU: C-61/94 Commission of the European Communities v Federal Republic of Germany, ECLI:EU:C:1996:313

CJEU: C-377/02 Léon Van Parys NV v Belgisch Interventie-enRestitutiebureau, ECLI:EU:C:2005:121

CJEU: C-120/06P i C-121/06P Fabbrica italiana accumulatori motocarri Montecchio SpA (FIAMM) and Fabbrica italiana accumulatori motocarri Montecchio Technologies LLC, Giorgio Fedon & Figli SpA and Fedon America, Inc. v Council of the European Union and Commission of the European Communities, ECLI:EU:C:2008: 476

CJEU: C-366/10 Air Transport Association of America and Others v Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, para 73, ECLI:EU:C:2011: 864

CJEU: C-266/16 Western Sahara Campaign UK v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs and Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, ECLI:EU:C:2018:118

CJEU: C-620/16 European Commission v Federal Republic of Germany, ECLI:EU:C:2019: 256

CJEU: C-66/18 European Commission v Hungary, ECLI:EU:C:2020:792

CJEU: C-549/18 European Commission v Romania

CJEU: ECLI:EU:C:2020:563 Opinion of the Court (Full Court) of 30 April 2019. Accord ECG UE-Canada.- EU:C:2019: 341

Council of Europe - Parliamentary Assembly, Recommendation 1762 (2006), Academic freedom and university autonomy. Posjećeno 17.02.2021.
https://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/Xref-XML2HTML-en.asp?fileid=17469&lang=en

Council of EU - 94/800/EC: Council Decision (of 22 December 1994) concerning the conclusion on behalf of the European Community, as regards matters within its competence, of the agreements reached in the Uruguay Round multilateral negotiations (1986-1994), OJ L 336, 23. 12. 1994.

Directive 2006/123/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on services in the internal market, OJ L 376, 27. 12. 2006.

Fanou, M. (2020). The CETA ICS and the Autonomy of the EU Legal Order in Opinion 1/17 – A Compass for the Future. Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies, 22: 106–132.

Hauser, H. & Zimmermann, T. (2003), The Challenge of Reforming the WTO Dispute Settlement Understanding. INTERECONOMICS – Review of European Economic Policy, 38(5): 241−245. Posjećeno 15. 02. 2021. SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=666983

Lamy, P. (2007). The Place of the WTO and its Law in the International Legal Order, The European Journal of International Law, 5(17): 969−984. Posjećeno 07. 02. 2021. URL: https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chl035

Morijn, J. (2006). Economic Liberalisation of Education Provision Within the EC & WTO: A Human Rights Perspective, Croatian Yearbook of European Law & Policy, 2(1): 99−136.

Nagy, I. (2021). Does WTO Law Protect Academic Freedom? It Depends on How You Use It, Insights – American Society of International Law, Volume: 25 (1). Posjećeno 19. 02. 2021.
https://www.asil.org/insights/volume/25/issue/1/does-wto-law-protect-academic-freedom-it-depends-how-you-use-it

Nanopoulos, E. (2013). Judicial Review of Measures Implementing Security Council Resolutions: The Relevance of the EU Principle of Loyal Cooperation. Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies, 15: 669−697.

Paliwal, S. (2012). Strengthening the Link in Linkage: Defining ‘Development Needs’ in WTO Law. American University International Law Review, 27(1): 37−90, 2012. Posjećeno 11. 02. 2021. URL: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1566249

Palmeter, D. & Mavroidis, P. (2004). Dispute settlement in the World Trade Organization: practice and procedure, Cambridge University Press, 2nd ed: 1−330.

Popović, V. i Vukadinović, R. (2007). Međunarodno poslovno pravo, Opšti deo. Kragujevac: Univerzitet za poslovne studije/Centar za pravo Evropske unije, (2): 111.

Scheppele, K. (2016). Enforcing the Basic Principles of EU Law through Systemic Infringement Actions. In C. Closa & D. Kochenov (Eds.), Reinforcing Rule of Lav Oversight in the European Union. Cambridge University Press. 105−132.

Staničić, F. i Britvić Vetma, B. (2020). Primjena Direktive o uslugama u sistemu visokog obrazovanja. Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta u Splitu, (1): 157−177. Posjećeno 15. 02. 2021. https://doi.org/10.31141/zrpfs.2020.57.135.157 Posjećeno: 15. 02. 2021.

The Guardian (International edition), Article: EU court rules against Hungary over law that targeted Soros-affiliated university, Associated Press Tue 6 Oct 2020 19.50 BST. Posjećeno 19.02.2021.
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2020/oct/06/top-eu-court-rules-against-hungary-on-soros-university

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), Recommendation concerning the Status of Higher-Education Teaching Personnel, 11 November 1997. Posjećeno 20. 02. 2021.
http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=13144&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html

Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations (1986−1994) − Agreement establishing the World Trade Organization (WTO), OJ L 336, 23.12.1994.

Verger, A. (2010). WTO/GATS and the Global Politics of Higher Education (1st ed.): 1−248. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203866672

Published
2021/12/27
Section
Review Paper