The constitutional identity of the Member States is a topic of increasing importance in understanding the interaction between the EU and its Member States. This is because the EU is enjoined to respect the constitutional identities of its Member States in accordance with Article 4(2) TEU. There is also a trend among Member States to articulate their constitutional identities, in particular in relation to European integration. In this regard, this volume fills a need in scholarship by presenting critical analyses of the constitutional identities of selected Member States. Leading and well-placed experts contribute country studies on a range of states, which are compared using a framework that can be applied to other Member States as well. The analyses and comparison of Member States' constitutional identities take place in the context of the EU's multilevel architecture.

The European Yearbook of Constitutional Law (EYCL) is an annual publication initiated by the Department of Public Law and Governance at Tilburg University and devoted to the study of constitutional law. It aims to provide a forum for in-depth analysis and discussion of new developments in the field, both in Europe and beyond. This inaugurate volume examines the safeguards and limits of judicial power in a variety of constitutional systems, both at the national and supranational level. The book approaches the judiciary as part of the constitutional system operating within a legal order that connects the citizens and institutions of the state to each other. Looking at the judiciary from this broader perspective, the traditional doctrine of the separation of powers would appear no longer to adequately represent the diversity and complexity of constitutional systems and their democratic legitimacy. Judicial independence does not mean isolation, but should better be understood as institutionalizing relationships that legitimize the power of the courts. The notions of 'safeguards' and 'limits' indicate the reciprocally enabling and protecting nature of these relationships. In recognition of this, the contributions to this volume analyse these safeguards and limits as relations existing within a complex constitutional architecture. State institutions, today, are involved in a fundamental transformation of their selfunderstanding as a result of changes in political culture. Several contributions to this volume provide examples of political criticism and pressure on the judiciary, against which the usual guarantees are unable to provide adequate protection. A convincing and effective response to threats to the judiciary's independence requires a detailed and precise analysis of the judiciary's constitutional safeguards and limits. This book offers a step in that direction.

Constitutionalism is the permanent quest to control state power, of which the judicial review of legislation is a prime example. Although the judicial review of legislation is increasingly common in modern societies, it is not a finished project. This device still raises questions as to whether judicial review is justified, and how it may be structured. Yet, judicial review's justification and its scope are seldom addressed in the same study, thereby making for an inconvenient divorce of these two related avenues of study. To narrow the divide, the object of this work is quite straightforward. Namely, is the idea of judicial review defensible, and what influences its design and scope? This book addresses these matters by comparing the judicial review of legislation in the United Kingdom (the Human Rights Act of 1998), the Netherlands (the Halsema Proposal of 2002) and the Constitution of South Africa of 1996. These systems present valuable material to study the issues raised by judicial review. The Netherlands is of particular interest as its Constitution still prohibits the constitutional review of acts of parliament, while allowing treaty review of such acts. The Halsema Proposal wants to even out this difference by allowing the courts also to apply constitutional norms to legislation and not only to international norms. The Human Rights Act and the South African Constitution also present interesting questions that will make their study worthwhile. One can think of the issue of dialogue between the legislature and the judiciary. This topic enjoys increased attention in the United Kingdom but is somewhat underexplored in South African thought on judicial review. These and similar issues are studied in each of the three systems, to not only gain a better understanding of the systems as such, but also of judicial review in general.

Constitutionalism is the permanent quest to control state power, of which the judicial review of legislation is a prime example. Although the judicial review of legislation is increasingly common in modern societies, it is not a finished project. This device still raises questions as to whether judicial review is justified, and how it may be structured. Yet, judicial review's justification and its scope are seldom addressed in the same study, thereby making for an inconvenient divorce of these two related avenues of study. To narrow the divide, the object of this work is quite straightforward. Namely, is the idea of judicial review defensible, and what influences its design and scope? This book addresses these matters by comparing the judicial review of legislation in the United Kingdom (the Human Rights Act of 1998), the Netherlands (the Halsema Proposal of 2002) and the Constitution of South Africa of 1996. These systems present valuable material to study the issues raised by judicial review. The Netherlands is of particular interest as its Constitution still prohibits the constitutional review of acts of parliament, while allowing treaty review of such acts. The Halsema Proposal wants to even out this difference by allowing the courts also to apply constitutional norms to legislation and not only to international norms. The Human Rights Act and the South African Constitution also present interesting questions that will make their study worthwhile. One can think of the issue of dialogue between the legislature and the judiciary. This topic enjoys increased attention in the United Kingdom but is somewhat underexplored in South African thought on judicial review. These and similar issues are studied in each of the three systems, to not only gain a better understanding of the systems as such, but also of judicial review in general.

The European Yearbook of Constitutional Law (EYCL) is an annual publication devoted to the study of constitutional law. It aims to provide a forum for in-depth analysis and discussion of new developments in the field, both in Europe and beyond. This fourth volume of the EYCL addresses the underexplored and contentious topic of whether the EU possesses a constitutional identity of its own. To date, the main focus of scholarship and case law concerns the constitutional identities of the Member States of the EU. This is because the EU has to respect such identities according to article 4(2) TEU. The attention for Member States’ constitutional identities stands in stark contrast to the notion of an EU constitutional identity. Such an identity features very little in the literature and debate on constitutional identity and the legal architecture of the EU. Consequently, this edition of the European Yearbook of Constitutional Law addresses the gap in legal research by studying constitutional identity with a focus on the EU itself. The book explores various views on whether the EU possesses such an identity and what any possible identity might entail. In this way, a fuller and more inclusive picture can be formed of constitutional identity as it relates to the multilevel constitutional order inhabited by the EU and its Member States. This volume will be of special interest to constitutional and legal scholars who are interested in EU and national constitutional law, as well as to political scientists. In addition, the book is relevant for judges, government officials, judges and policy-makers who work with EU (constitutional) law and its relationship with national (constitutional) law. Jurgen de Poorter is State Councillor at the Dutch Council of State and professor at Tilburg Law School, Department of Public Law and Governance. Gerhard van der Schyff is associate professor at Tilburg Law School, Department of Public Law and Governance. Maarten Stremler is assistant professor at Maastricht University, Faculty of Law, Department of Public Law. Maartje De Visser is associate professor at SMU School of Law, Singapore. Ingrid Leijten is professor at Tilburg Law School, Department of Public Law and Governance. Charlotte van Oirsouw is PhD researcher at Utrecht University, Department of Constitutional and Administrative Law.

The European Yearbook of Constitutional Law (EYCL) is an annual publication devoted to the study of constitutional law. It aims to provide a forum for in-depth analysis and discussion of new developments in the field, both in Europe and beyond.  This third volume of the EYCL focuses on constitutional advice, an underexplored topic of legal scholarship today, and addresses this situation by looking beyond constitutional law’s familiar focus on the classic separation of powers and the main legislative, executive and judicial bodies implied by this construct. The attention is shifted to mapping and analysing the advisory bodies and functions grouped around and in support of the legislators, administrators and judges at the frontline of the constitutional edifice, which is accomplished through national, comparative and transnational perspectives on constitutional advice from Europe and beyond. Addressing the topic of constitutional advice is necessary to broaden and deepen not only our understanding of advice as a field in its own right, but also as a way of rendering a fuller account of contemporary constitutionalism. Also, the increasing political polarisation across many societies today underscores the need to study constitutional advice on topics of significance in an attempt to bridge divides and end gridlock. This book will be of special interest to constitutional scholars and legal scholars more generally, as well as to political scientists. In addition, government officials, judges and policy-makers wishing to better understand the legal mechanisms and avenues when it comes to rendering or receiving advice in the contemporary constitutional context will find much of relevance.   Jurgen de Poorter is professor at Tilburg Law School, Department of Public Law and Governance. Gerhard van der Schyff is associate professor at Tilburg Law School, Department of Public Law and Governance. Maarten Stremler is assistant professor at Maastricht University, Faculty of Law, Department of Public Law. Maartje De Visser is associate professor at Yong Pung How School of Law, Singapore Management University, Singapore.

The European Yearbook of Constitutional Law (EYCL) is an annual publication devoted to the study of constitutional law. It aims to provide a forum for in-depth analysis and discussion of new developments in the field, both in Europe and beyond. This third volume of the EYCL focuses on constitutional advice, an underexplored topic of legal scholarship today, and addresses this situation by looking beyond constitutional law's familiar focus on the classic separation of powers and the main legislative, executive and judicial bodies implied by this construct. The attention is shifted to mapping and analysing the advisory bodies and functions grouped around and in support of the legislators, administrators and judges at the frontline of the constitutional edifice, which is accomplished through national, comparative and transnational perspectives on constitutional advice from Europe and beyond. Addressing the topic of constitutional advice is necessary to broaden and deepen not only our understanding of advice as a field in its own right, but also as a way of rendering a fuller account of contemporary constitutionalism. Also, the increasing political polarisation across many societies today underscores the need to study constitutional advice on topics of significance in an attempt to bridge divides and end gridlock. This book will be of special interest to constitutional scholars and legal scholars more generally, as well as to political scientists. In addition, government officials, judges and policy-makers wishing to better understand the legal mechanisms and avenues when it comes to rendering or receiving advice in the contemporary constitutional context will find much of relevance. Jurgen de Poorter is professor at Tilburg Law School, Department of Public Law and Governance. Gerhard van der Schyff is associate professor at Tilburg Law School, Department of Public Law and Governance. Maarten Stremler is assistant professor at Maastricht University, Faculty of Law, Department of Public Law. Maartje De Visser is associate professor at Yong Pung How School of Law, Singapore Management University, Singapore.

The European Yearbook of Constitutional Law (EYCL) is an annual publication devoted to the study of constitutional law. It aims to provide a forum for in-depth analysis and discussion of new developments in the field, both in Europe and beyond. This second volume examines the constitutional positioning of cities across space and time. Unrelenting urbanisation means that most people are, or soon will be, living in cities and that city administrations become, in many respects, their quintessential governing units. Cities are places where State power is operationalised and concretised; where laws and government policies transform from parchment objectives to practical realities. In a similar vein, cities are also places for the realisation of the constitutional rights and liberties enjoyed by individuals. The book is organised around three sets of relations that await further unpacking in theory as well as practice: that between cities and other institutions in the national constitutional architecture; that between cities and their inhabitants; and that between cities and international organisations. The contributions to this book show the marked diversity in the role and powers available to cities in Europe and beyond, and identify principles and approaches to help stipulate new ways of thinking about the legal role and relevance of cities going forward. Ernst Hirsch Ballin is distinguished university professor at Tilburg University and vice-dean for research of Tilburg Law School. Gerhard van der Schyff is associate professor at Tilburg Law School, Department of Public Law and Governance. Maarten Stremler is lecturer at Maastricht University, Faculty of Law, Department of Public Law. Maartje De Visser is associate professor at SMU School of Law, Singapore.

The constitutional identity of the Member States is a topic of increasing importance in understanding the interaction between the EU and its Member States. This is because the EU is enjoined to respect the constitutional identities of its Member States in accordance with Article 4(2) TEU. There is also a trend among Member States to articulate their constitutional identities, in particular in relation to European integration. In this regard, this volume fills a need in scholarship by presenting critical analyses of the constitutional identities of selected Member States. Leading and well-placed experts contribute country studies on a range of states, which are compared using a framework that can be applied to other Member States as well. The analyses and comparison of Member States' constitutional identities take place in the context of the EU's multilevel architecture.

The European Yearbook of Constitutional Law (EYCL) is an annual publication initiated by the Department of Public Law and Governance at Tilburg University and devoted to the study of constitutional law. It aims to provide a forum for in-depth analysis and discussion of new developments in the field, both in Europe and beyond. This inaugurate volume examines the safeguards and limits of judicial power in a variety of constitutional systems, both at the national and supranational level. The book approaches the judiciary as part of the constitutional system operating within a legal order that connects the citizens and institutions of the state to each other. Looking at the judiciary from this broader perspective, the traditional doctrine of the separation of powers would appear no longer to adequately represent the diversity and complexity of constitutional systems and their democratic legitimacy. Judicial independence does not mean isolation, but should better be understood as institutionalizing relationships that legitimize the power of the courts. The notions of 'safeguards' and 'limits' indicate the reciprocally enabling and protecting nature of these relationships. In recognition of this, the contributions to this volume analyse these safeguards and limits as relations existing within a complex constitutional architecture. State institutions, today, are involved in a fundamental transformation of their selfunderstanding as a result of changes in political culture. Several contributions to this volume provide examples of political criticism and pressure on the judiciary, against which the usual guarantees are unable to provide adequate protection. A convincing and effective response to threats to the judiciary's independence requires a detailed and precise analysis of the judiciary's constitutional safeguards and limits. This book offers a step in that direction.

The European Yearbook of Constitutional Law (EYCL) is an annual publication devoted to the study of constitutional law. It aims to provide a forum for in-depth analysis and discussion of new developments in the field, both in Europe and beyond. This second volume examines the constitutional positioning of cities across space and time. Unrelenting urbanisation means that most people are, or soon will be, living in cities and that city administrations become, in many respects, their quintessential governing units. Cities are places where State power is operationalised and concretised; where laws and government policies transform from parchment objectives to practical realities. In a similar vein, cities are also places for the realisation of the constitutional rights and liberties enjoyed by individuals. The book is organised around three sets of relations that await further unpacking in theory as well as practice: that between cities and other institutions in the national constitutional architecture; that between cities and their inhabitants; and that between cities and international organisations. The contributions to this book show the marked diversity in the role and powers available to cities in Europe and beyond, and identify principles and approaches to help stipulate new ways of thinking about the legal role and relevance of cities going forward. Ernst Hirsch Ballin is distinguished university professor at Tilburg University and vice-dean for research of Tilburg Law School. Gerhard van der Schyff is associate professor at Tilburg Law School, Department of Public Law and Governance. Maarten Stremler is lecturer at Maastricht University, Faculty of Law, Department of Public Law. Maartje De Visser is associate professor at SMU School of Law, Singapore.