Andorra: eine Einherrschaft? Monarch: ein Einzelorgan? Der Verfall des Begriffsmerkmals „monos“ in Europas sogenannten „Monarchien“

in Bussjäger, Peter; Gamper, Anna (Eds.) 100 Jahre Liechtensteinische Verfassung (2022)

Er ist Prinz. – Mehr noch: Er ist Mensch! Er ist Stimmbürger. Stimmrecht des Monarchen als Dispersionsprisma einer rechtswissenschaftlichen Monarchieanalyse

in Zeitschrift für Offentliches Recht (2021, December), 76(4), 1241-1289

In the literature on comparative constitutional law and constitutional theory, monarchies are, if they attract any attention at all, most frequently analyzed from the perspective of the monarch’s ... [more ▼]

In the literature on comparative constitutional law and constitutional theory, monarchies are, if they attract any attention at all, most frequently analyzed from the perspective of the monarch’s political power, after its more or less extensive “neutralization” in the name of the constitutional ideals of Enlightenment. Yet this classic approach, whose focus lies on the State organ’s competencies and the discretion of its royal incumbent, is incomplete as it ignores a second, increasingly important facet of the modernization process of monarchies: To what extent do Royals, including the monarch, have fundamental rights as individuals, as “human beings”? This paper considers in particular the even-more-overlooked issue of their political rights (right to vote, right to stand for election, and the right to use the instruments of direct democracy). The issue, which is a very old one, having being addressed first by Sieyès in his famous 1789 speech on royal veto and by the French Constitution of 1791, is far from being odd or futile. In some jurisdictions, like in Japan (1945), Luxembourg (2004-5), Liechtenstein (2002-3) or in Thailand (2019), it was at the core of quite controversial public debates which, eventually, lead to totally divergent outcomes. Beyond its (relative) importance in practice, it is a key parameter for theoretical purposes: combined with the criteria of the dualistic state organization, it provides a deeper insight into the complex structure of those regimes mixing, in various ways, both monarchical and democratic elements. This article sheds light on this new research field, starting with a broad historical and comparative survey, before presenting a typology in order to tackle the startling diversity of legal solutions. [less ▲]

‘État de droit’ : The Gallicization of the Rechtsstaat

in Meierhenrich, Jens; Loughlin, Martin (Eds.) The Cambridge Companion to the Rule of Law (2021)

Since the Enlightenment, the innumerous debates in Europe on nomocracy have been led under various flagship terms, whose diversity can be boiled down to four types of key terms: 1. “State”; 2. “Republic” ... [more ▼]

Since the Enlightenment, the innumerous debates in Europe on nomocracy have been led under various flagship terms, whose diversity can be boiled down to four types of key terms: 1. “State”; 2. “Republic”; 3. expressions suggesting that it is “law” that “rules”, “reigns”; 4. linguistic constructs connecting both words “law” and “State”. The German term Rechtsstaat, which is the most famous but not unique example of the fourth category, has gained progressively a worldwide resonance. By literally translating it, granting it a paramount position in their Constitution, and abandoning their traditional key word(s), many countries have germanized their legal language. Have they also germanized their legal mindset, their law? If so, to what extent, and how, and for what reason? Goes the current Germanization of our language hand in hand with a fundamental move towards a new understanding of the Constitution (i.e. judicialization of politics)? Or is the transnational (“global”) buzz about Rechtsstaat just a fashion, jurists importing the trendy German term but not its content? Or do they mix, and partially innovate, when operating this “transfer/translation”? These fundamental issues will be analyzed in the case of France, which is particularly interesting as, since 1789, France perceived itself as a universal model (of its own understanding of nomocracy), and not as an importer, especially not of German legal terms, theories and solutions. [less ▲]

Luxembourg: Grand-Duke Henri’s refusal, in 2008, to sign the bill legalizing euthanasia

in Hazell, Robert; Morris, Bob (Eds.) The Role of Monarchy in Modern Democracy. European Monarchies Compared (2020)

Pourquoi la Cour constitutionnelle devrait s’intéresser à l’histoire ou : audaces apparentes et réelles de l’arrêt n°146 (2019) relatif à "l’État de droit"

in Journal des Tribunaux Luxembourg (2019)

Une cour constitutionnelle différente des autres. Etendue, raisons & avenir de l'originalité de la Cour constitutionnelle luxembourgeoise

in Gerkrath, Jörg (Ed.) Les 20 ans de la Cour Constitutionnelle: trop jeune pour mourir? (2018)

Compte rendu de Ph. Poirier (dir.), Les pouvoirs d’un parlement. La Chambre des députés du Luxembourg, Promoculture-Larcier, Windhof, 2014

in Hemecht : Zeitschrift für Luxemburger Geschichte = Revue d'Histoire Luxembourgeoise (2018), 70(4), 101-104

La désignation des Gouvernants au Grand-Duché du Luxembourg

in Derosier, Jean-Philippe (Ed.) La désignation des gouvernants (2017)

Il inclut la désignation des Chefs d'État, de façon élective ou non, la désignation des Chefs de Gouvernement et celle des membres de ce dernier, l'élection des assemblées qui ont un impact sur la ... [more ▼]

Il inclut la désignation des Chefs d'État, de façon élective ou non, la désignation des Chefs de Gouvernement et celle des membres de ce dernier, l'élection des assemblées qui ont un impact sur la composition des Gouvernements. Les démocraties modernes sont régulièrement confrontés à un renouvellement de leurs gouvernants. Le débat récurrent sur les primaires, qu'elles concernent les prochaines élections présidentielles ou les élections locales, le déroulement passé ou proche d'élections dans de nombreux pays (États-Unis, France, Allemagne, peut-être Italie, Royaume-Uni, Turquie, etc.) marquent toute l'actualité de ce sujet. Une confrontation des règles et de leurs applications dans divers pays commande de s'arrêter sur trois de ses aspects : la présélection, soit la désignation de candidats ; le choix, soit la désignation proprement dite ; le contrôle, soit la garantie d'une désignation réelle et non faussée. [less ▲]

Compte rendu de M. Feyereisen, B.L. Pochon, L'Etat du Grand-Duché de Luxembourg, Promoculture/Larcier, 2015.

in Hemecht : Zeitschrift für Luxemburger Geschichte = Revue d'Histoire Luxembourgeoise (2017), 69(3-4), 467-469

Rapport sur la transnationalisation de l'enseignement du droit. L'exemple du Bachelor en droit de l'Université du Luxembourg

Report (2017)