Reform of Epidemic Surveillance Exposing “Standardising” Decisions and Their Replacements by Regulations

Investor logo

Warning

This publication doesn't include Faculty of Economics and Administration. It includes Faculty of Law. Official publication website can be found on muni.cz.
Authors

KŘEPELKA Filip

Year of publication 2023
Type Article in Periodical
Magazine / Source European Papers - A Journal on Law and Integration
MU Faculty or unit

Faculty of Law

Citation
Web Open access článku
Doi http://dx.doi.org/10.15166/2499-8249/732
Keywords European Union; Secondary Law; Decision; Regulation; Law-making; official languages
Attached files
Description The reform of epidemic surveillance in the European Union as a reaction to the Covid-19 pandemic attracts attention to one sporadically discussed phenomenon. Following the usual mean-ing of this term in legal settings, many decisions address individual cases. Nevertheless, a new category of decisions establishing rules has emerged in the past decades, i.e. “standardising” (“normative”, “norm-setting”, or “general”) decisions. These decisions have addressed the cooperation be-tween the EU and national authorities, funding programmes and assistance to foreign countries. The European Parliament and the Council approved them. Theoretical reflections on these decisions are rare, but their pitfalls are identifiable. Namely, their possible effects on individuals are limited. The definition of unaddressed decisions provided by the Lisbon Treaty did not clarify the situation. Therefore, the recent tendency to replace these decisions with regulations deserves attention.
Related projects:

You are running an old browser version. We recommend updating your browser to its latest version.