Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T16:33:34.094Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Origins, Evolution, and Political Objectives of EU Citizenship

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2019

Willem Maas

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Within this collection flowing from the “European Citizenship: Twenty Years On” conference, this article has three functions: first, explain the political origins of a common supranational citizenship in Europe; second, summarize the evolution of EU citizenship by illustrating the debates about the proper relationship between human rights (for everyone) and citizenship rights (for EU citizens only) and about the relationship between national and EU citizenship (or national and EU law), debates occurring within a context of the ever-expanding scope of EU law; third, provide a new perspective on the debates about EU citizenship's finalité politique or political objectives by placing EU citizenship in a comparative perspective. The main argument of the first section is that the goal of creating European citizens has always been an essential element of the European project, rather than an afterthought accidentally introduced in the Maastricht Treaty. Hence the conference title of “Twenty Years On” is flawed; “Sixty Years On” (dating the genesis of European citizenship not to the 1990s but rather, correctly, to the 1950s) would be more appropriate. This article's second section describes the expanding scope and growth of supranational citizenship rights from workers to movers to citizens; the main idea is that this continuing expansion and growth of EU citizenship should mean the end of reverse discrimination, in which national law disadvantages those who cannot appeal to EU law but must rely on national law. The main argument of the third section is that EU citizenship is not sui generis or without precedent but rather should be seen as one manifestation of the ubiquitous tension between unity and diversity, a tension present within any political community but manifest most clearly in political systems (such as the EU and federal states) characterized by multilevel citizenship.

Type
Special Issue EU Citizenship: Twenty Years On
Information
German Law Journal , Volume 15 , Issue 5: Special Issue EU Citizenship: Twenty Years On , 01 August 2014 , pp. 797 - 819
Copyright
Copyright © 2014 by German Law Journal GbR 

References

1 For a short history of EU citizenship's development, see Willem Maas, European Union Citizenship in Retrospect and Prospect, in Routledge Handbook of Global Citizenship Studies (Engin Isin & Peter Nyers eds., 2014).Google Scholar

2 Treaty Establishing the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) preamble, Apr. 18, 1951, 261 U.N.T.S. 140 [hereinafter Treaty of Paris].Google Scholar

3 Schuman Declaration (May 9, 1950).Google Scholar

4 But achieving it would be difficult. As Jean Monnet wrote,Google Scholar

The fusion of the European peoples cannot result from the only road we are following. In the limited domains of coal and steel-atomic we seek full delegation of national powers to a supranational organization which will make decisions and be subject to controls that are also supranational. But the rest of the economy remains outside these actions. The Common Market itself is a sector as the general conduct of economic affairs—growth, taxes—remains national. The sentiment that their destiny is shared and their prosperity is shared has not been established between the peoples of Europe by the ECSC and will not be by Euratom. How to do it? It is very difficult to find a form that is satisfactory—indeed political— and that is accepted by the parliaments and peoples. We must continue to speak of the Common Market and as far as possible to achieve its beginning at least. But we must find the political opportunity that gives these countries of Europe the sense of a common destiny.Google Scholar

Entry in Diary of Jean Monnet (Aug. 5, 1956) (unpublished) (on file with the Fondation Jean Monnet pour l'Europe) (Willem Maas trans.). Grateful thanks to the Fondation Jean Monnet pour l'Europe and its Director, Gilles Grin, for allowing me to consult the archives.Google Scholar

5 Churchill, Winston, Speech Delivered at the University of Zurich (Sept. 19, 1946), in Winston Churchill, The Sinews of Peace: Winston Churchill's Post-War Speeches Collection 198–202 (Randolph S. Churchill ed., 1949). In the same speech, Churchill also said:Google Scholar

There is a remedy which, if it were generally and spontaneously adopted, would as if by a miracle transform the whole scene, and would in a few years make all Europe, or the greater part of it, as free and happy as Switzerland is today. What is this sovereign remedy? It is to recreate the European Family, or as much of it as we can, and to provide it with a structure under which it can dwell in peace, in safety and in freedom. We must build a kind of United States of Europe.Google Scholar

Id. Churchill added that the “structure of the United States of Europe, if well and truly built, will be such as to make the material strength of a single state less important. Small nations will count as much as large ones and gain their honour by their contribution to the common cause.” Id. Google Scholar

6 Churchill, Winston, Speech Delivered to the Congress of Europe (May 10, 1948) (transcript available in the Netherlands National Archives, catalog 2.19.109 Europese Beweging in Nederland en Voorgangers, inv. 95, http://www.gahetna.nl/collectie/archief/ead/index/eadid/2.19.109#c01:0.).Google Scholar

7 Id. Google Scholar

8 Spaak, Paul-Henri, The Continuing Battle: Memoirs of European, 1936–1966 (Henry Fox trans., 1971).Google Scholar

9 See Willem Maas, The Genesis of European Rights, 43 J. Common Mkt. Stud. 1009–25 (2005).Google Scholar

10 See id. Google Scholar

11 The Treaty on European Union, Feb. 7, 1992, 1992 O.J. (C 191) [hereinafter Maastricht Treaty]. Article 8 of the Treaty announced: “Citizenship of the Union is hereby established. Every person holding the nationality of a Member State shall be a citizen of the Union.” Id. Google Scholar

12 Viscount Étienne Davignon, European Commissioner, Speech Delivered to the European Parliament (1979).Google Scholar

13 Treaty Establishing the European Economic Community (EEC) preamble, Mar. 25, 1957, 298 U.N.T.S. 3 [hereinafter Treaty of Rome].Google Scholar

14 NL ‘Subsidiarity Review'—Explanatory Note, Ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken 1. See European Where Necessary, National Where Possible, Government of Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs (June 21, 2013), http://www.government.nl/ministries/bz/news/2013/06/21/european-where-necessary-national-where-possible.html; Benjamin Fox, UK Keen to Delete ‘Ever Closer Union’ From EU Treaty, EU Observer (Sept. 30, 2013), http://euobserver.com/political/121607.Google Scholar

15 Tonkiss, Katherine E., Experiences of EU citizenship at the sub-national level. in Routledge Handbook of Global Citizenship Studies (Engin Isin & Peter Nyers eds., 2014).Google Scholar

16 Christos Konstantinidis v. Stadt Altensteig - Standesamt and Landratsamt Calw - Ordnungsamt, CJEU Case C-168/91, para. 4 (Dec. 9, 1992), http://curia.europa.eu/.Google Scholar

17 Gerardo Ruiz Zambrano v. Office National de l'Emploi (ONEm), CJEU Case C-34/09, para 170 (Sept. 30, 2010), http://curia.europa.eu/.Google Scholar

18 For a good discussion of reverse discrimination as it relates to family reunification policies, see Anne Staver, Free Movement for Workers or Citizens? Reverse Discrimination in European Family Reunification Policies, in Democratic Citizenship and the Free Movement of People 57–89 (Willem Maas ed., 2013).Google Scholar

19 Maas, Willem, Creating European Citizens 5 (2007).Google Scholar

20 See Maas, , supra note 1; see also id. Google Scholar

21 Maas, Willem, Creating European Citizens, supra note 19.Google Scholar

22 Id. Google Scholar

23 Id. Google Scholar

24 Id. Google Scholar

25 See Zambrano, CJEU Case C-34/09.Google Scholar

26 Id. at para. 33.Google Scholar

27 Id. at para. 144.Google Scholar

28 Id. at para. 163 (emphasis in original).Google Scholar

29 Id. at para. 163 (emphasis in original).Google Scholar

30 Id. at para. 165.Google Scholar

31 See generally Maas, supra note 19.Google Scholar

32 Rudy Grzelczyk v. Centre Public d'Aide Sociale d'Ottignies-Louvain-la-Neuve, CJEU Case C-184/99, 2001 E.C.R. I-6193, para. 31.Google Scholar

33 See Treaty of Rome art. 7 (“Within the scope of application of this Treaty, and without prejudice to any special provisions contained therein, any discrimination on grounds of nationality shall be prohibited.”).Google Scholar

34 Marine Labour Code (Commission v. France), CJEU Case C-167/73, 1974 E.C.R. 373, para. 44.Google Scholar

35 Thus Schermers notes:Google Scholar

[I]t is striking that the Court has been reluctant until now to apply [the prohibition on discrimination on the basis of nationality] to cases of reverse discrimination to the detriment of the nationals of the Member State concerned. It is unclear how this limitation can be justified both in terms of fairness and of uniform application of Community law, as well as in view of the large wording of EC Article 12.Google Scholar

Henry G. Schermers, Judicial Protection in the European Communities 92 (1992).Google Scholar

36 See Druesne, Gérard, Remarques Sur Le Champ D'application Personnel Du Droit Communautaire: Des «discriminations À Rebours» Peuvent-Elles Tenir En Échec La Liberté de Circulation Des Personnes?, 15 Revue Trimestrielle de Droit Européen 429–39 (1979).Google Scholar

37 See J. Knoors v. Staatssecretaris van Economische Zaken, CJEU Case C-115/78, 1979 E.C.R. 399.Google Scholar

38 Id. at para. 24.Google Scholar

39 Id. Google Scholar

40 Id. at para. 25.Google Scholar

41 The Queen v. Vera Ann Saunders, CJEU Case C-175/78, 1979 E.C.R. 1129, summary.Google Scholar

42 Morson v. State of the Netherlands and Head of the Plaatselijke Politie within the meaning of the Vreemdelingenwet; Jhanjan v. State of the Netherlands, Joined CJEU Cases C-35 & 36/82, 1982 E.C.R. 3723, para. 16.Google Scholar

43 See Claude Gullung v. Conseil de l'Ordre des Avocats du Barreau de Colmar et de Saverne, CJEU Case C-292/86, 1988 E.C.R. 111.Google Scholar

44 Lee, Ian B., In Search of a Theory of State Liability in the European Union (Harvard L. Sch. Jean Monnet, Working Paper No. 9/99, 2000).Google Scholar

45 See infra notes 53–70 and accompanying text.Google Scholar

46 Maastricht Treaty art. 8.Google Scholar

47 Faccini Dori v. Recreb Srl, CJEU Case C-91/92, para. 53 (Feb. 9, 1994), http://curia.europa.eu/.; Cf. F.G. Jacobs, Citizenship of the European Union: A Legal Analysis, 13 Eur. L.J. 591 (2007).Google Scholar

48 The Queen v. Sec'y of State for the Home Dep't ex parte Shingara and Radiom, CJEU Case C-65/95 & C-111/95, para. 34 (June 17, 1997), http://curia.europa.eu/.Google Scholar

49 Tas-Hagen and Tas v. Raadskamer WUBO van de Pensioen- en Uitkeringsraad, CJEU Case C-192/05, para. 33 (Oct. 26, 2006), http://curia.europa.eu/.Google Scholar

50 Förster v. IB-Groep, CJEU Case C-158/07, para. 54 (Nov. 18, 2008), http://curia.europa.eu/.Google Scholar

51 Marie-Nathalie D'Hoop v. Office National de l'emploi, CJEU Case C-224/98, 2002 E.C.R. I-6191, para. 30. See also, Heikki Antero Pusa v. Osuuspankkien Keskinäinen Vakuutusyhtiö, CJEU Case C-224/02, 2004 E.C.R. I-5763, para. 18; Pirkko Marjatta Turpeinen, CJEU Case C-520/04, 2006 E.C.R. I-10685, para 20; Herbert Schwarz and Marga Gootjes-Schwarz v. Finanzamt Bergisch Gladbach, CJEU Case C-76/05, 2007 E.C.R. I-06849, para. 88.Google Scholar

52 Tryfonidou writes:Google Scholar

[T]he situation that now exists, under which there are different Treaty provisions governing the position of Member State nationals (i.e., the fundamental freedoms provisions, on the one hand, and the citizenship provisions on the other) should no longer be maintained; a vast topic which would appropriately form the basis of another extensive study and therefore will not be further discussed in this work.Google Scholar

Alina Tryfonidou, Reverse Discrimination in EC Law 160–61 (2010).Google Scholar

53 See Gerardo Ruiz Zambrano v. Office National de l'emploi, CJEU Case C-34/09, 2011 E.C.R. I-01177.Google Scholar

54 See Centro Europa 7 Srl v. Ministero delle Comunicazioni e Autorità per le garanzie nelle comunicazioni and Direzione generale per le concessioni e le autorizzazioni del Ministero delle Comunicazioni, CJEU Case C-380/05 (Sept. 12, 2007), http://curia.europa.eu/.Google Scholar

55 See Centro Europa 7 Srl v. Ministero delle Comunicazioni e Autorità per le Garanzie nelle Comunicazioni and Direzione Generale Autorizzazioni e Concessioni Ministero delle Comunicazioni, CJEU Case C-380/05, 2008 E.C.R. I-349.Google Scholar

56 Id. at para. 19.Google Scholar

57 Id. at para. 20.Google Scholar

58 Id. Google Scholar

59 Id. at para. 22.Google Scholar

60 Shirley McCarthy v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, CJEU Case C-434/09 (Nov. 25, 2010), http://curia.europa.eu/.Google Scholar

61 Id. at para. 31.Google Scholar

62 Id. at para. 39.Google Scholar

63 Id. at para. 40.Google Scholar

64 Id. at para. 41.Google Scholar

65 Id. Google Scholar

66 Id. at para. 52.Google Scholar

67 Id. at para. 53.Google Scholar

68 Id. at para. 58.Google Scholar

69 Id. at para. 60.Google Scholar

70 Heinz Huber v. Bundesrepublik Deutschland, CJEU Case C-524/06, para. 18 (Dec. 16, 2008), http://curia.europa.eu/.Google Scholar

71 See Maas, Willem, Unrespected, Unequal, Hollow?: Contingent Citizenship and Reversible Rights in the European Union, 15 Colum. J. Eur. L. 265–80 (2009).Google Scholar

72 See id. at 265.Google Scholar

73 See Vink, Maarten Peter & Bauböck, Rainer, Citizenship Configurations: Analysing the Multiple Purposes of Citizenship Regimes in Europe, 11 Comp. Eur. Pol. 621–48 (2013).Google Scholar

74 See Maas, Willem, Freedom of Movement Inside ‘Fortress Europe’, in Global Surveillance and Policing: Borders, Security, Identity 233–45 (Elia Zureik & Mark B. Salter eds., 2005). The Dutch populist Pim Fortuyn campaigned to reintroduce border controls within the EU, a perspective shared at various points by France's Front Nationale, the Austrian Freedom Party, the Danish People's Party, and others.Google Scholar

75 See, e.g., Democratic Citizenship and the Free Movement of People (Willem Maas ed., 2013); Willem Maas, Free Movement and Discrimination: Evidence from Europe, the United States, and Canada, 15 Eur. J. Migration & L. 91– 110 (2013).Google Scholar

76 See Longo, Matthew, Right of Way? Defining Freedom of Movement within Democratic Societies, in Democratic Citizenship and the Free Movement of People (Willem Maas ed., 2013).Google Scholar

77 Ontario, Canada v., [1937] 1 D.L.R. 673 (Can.).Google Scholar

78 Cairns, Alan C., The Charter: A Political Science Perspective, 30 Osgoode Hall L.J. 619 (1992).Google Scholar

79 See, e.g., Dori, CJEU Case C-91/92; Hagen, CJEU Case C-192/05.Google Scholar

80 Wiesbrock, Anja, The Zambrano Case: Relying on Union Citizenship Rights in ‘Internal Situations‘, Eur. Union Democracy Observatory on Citizenship, http://eudo-citizenship.eu/citizenship-news/449-the-zambrano-case-relying-on-union-citizenship-rights-in-internal-situations.Google Scholar

81 Id. Google Scholar

82 The post was removed from the PVV's website but may be accessed via the Internet Archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20110311032141/ http://pvv-europa.nl/index.php/component/content/article/38-daniel-van-der-stoep/2669-stop-de-ankerbabys.html (Willem Maas trans.).Google Scholar

83 See Maas, Willem, Migrants, States, and EU Citizenship's Unfulfilled Promise, 12 Citizenship Stud. 583–95 (2008).Google Scholar

84 Coutts, Stephen, Case C-434-09: Shirley McCarthy v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, Eur. Union Democracy Observatory on Citizenship (Nov. 26, 2013), http://eudo-citizenship.eu/citizenship-news/475-case-c-434-09-shirley-mccarthy-v-secretary-of-state-for-the-home-department.Google Scholar

85 See Shirley McCarthy v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, CJEU Case C-434/09, 2011 E.C.R. I-03375.Google Scholar

86 Wray, Helena, Family Life and EU Citizenship: A commentary on McCarthy C-434/09 5 May 2011, Eur. Union Democracy Observatory on Citizenship (Nov. 26, 2013), http://eudo-citizenship.eu/citizenship-news/479-family-life-and-eu-citizenship-a-commentary-on-mccarthy-c-43409-5-may-2011.Google Scholar

87 See Maas, Willem, Varieties of Multilevel Citizenship, in Multilevel Citizenship (Willem Maas ed., 2013).Google Scholar

88 Gerardo Ruiz Zambrano v. Office National de l'emploi, CJEU Case C-34/09, para. 3 (Sept. 30, 2010), http://curia.europa.eu/.Google Scholar

89 Id. Google Scholar

90 Thus, , Herwig Verschueren argues:Google Scholar

All EU citizens, including those who find themselves in a purely internal situation, should be able to rely on the prohibition of discrimination based on nationality and they should also be able to invoke the right not to be obliged to migrate if they want to claim the status which applies to those EU citizens who have made use of the right to free movement.Google Scholar

Herwig Verschueren, , Reverse Discrimination: An Unsolvable Problem?, in Rethinking the Free Movement of Workers: The European Challenges Ahead 118 (Paul Minderhoud & Nicos Trimikliniotis eds., 2009).Google Scholar

91 Hans Ulrich Jessurun d'Oliveira, Is Reverse Discrimination Still Permissible Under the Single European Act?, in Forty years on: the evolution of postwar private international law in Europe 84 (1990).Google Scholar

92 Tryfonidou, , supra note 52, at 162.Google Scholar

93 Tryfonidou, , supra note 52, at 166.Google Scholar

94 See Maas, , supra note 83.Google Scholar

95 See Maas, , supra note 71, at 270–71.Google Scholar

96 See Maas, , supra note 19, at 5, 7.Google Scholar

97 Van Rompuy, Herman, Toespraak van de heer Herman Van Rompuy, Voorzitter van de Europese Raad n.a.v. Koningsdag met als thema ‘Het Europees burgerschap’ EUCO 235/13 (Nov. 15, 2013) (Willem Maas trans.), available at http://www.consilium.europa.eu/searchresults?lang=en&search=235/13.Google Scholar