ICON S Conference 17 – 19 June 2016 Humboldt University Berlin

Giulio Napolitano: The future of comparative administrative
law: towards a plurality of methods?
Legal comparison in the field of administrative law
is traditionally less developed than in other sectors.
In my contribution to the panel, I will try to show why,
at the beginning of the 21st century, the landscape
is completely different from the past, revealing the
need for a much deeper and sophisticated comparison
in administrative law, both for private (through
strategic evaluation of the ease of doing business
in different countries) and public (by competing governments
in the global arena) use. In addition, I will
argue that administrative law is particularly fitted to
experience the application and integration of new
methods based on critical comparative law, comparative
law and economics, and numerical comparative
law. The approach based on national positivism, on
the contrary, must be overcome, because the idea of
separate legal orders is false. All jurisdictions face
similar problem and challenges (e.g. delegation and
accountability, procedural fairness, access to justice).
In so doing, they must comply with international
regulations and standards and with common constitutional
traditions.
Guy Seidman: Legal comparison in public law
Javier Barnes: Legal comparison in
administrative law
10 CONDITIONALITY IN THE
EUROZONE CRISIS
After the eruption of the Eurozone crisis, conditionality
has become a leitmotiv of the different instruments
adopted to face the debt crisis of EU Member
States. However, much on this novel instrument remains
unclear and highly contested. Our panel aims
at shedding light on different challenges posed by
the introduction of conditionality into the EU legal
framework. Michael Ioannidis’s paper addresses conditionality
in systemic terms, linking conditionality to
the normative, empirical and doctrinal foundations of
the EU. Poulou’s paper assesses financial assistance
conditionality from a human rights perspective. Hinarejos’
paper will focus on some of the effects that the
crisis and the imposition of conditionality has had on
social policy. Baraggia’s paper will focus on the CJEU
case law involving conditionality. Vita will engage in a
comprehensive mapping exercise of current spending
conditionality. Finally, Antpöhler’s paper assesses
the democratic legitimacy of conditionalities.
Participants
Name of Chair
Room
Michael Ioannidis
Anastasia Poulou
Antonia Baraggia
Viorica Vita
Carlino Antpöhler
Alicia Hinarejos
Anastasia Poulou
UL9 E14
Concurring panels 36
Michael Ioannidis: Conditionality and the Transformation
of the European Constitution
Conditionality came lately at the center of much attention,
both scholarly and political. Since 2008, eight
EU Member States had to comply with strict conditions
in order to gain access to EU financial assistance. Very
often, these conditions were connected to controversial
reforms of pension systems or the labor market,
sparking political tensions. Although the individual
repercussions of concrete conditions have already
been the subject of significant research, I would argue
that conditionality deserves attention also in systemic
terms: it is at the same time a response to the failure of
the EU and the cause of further significant challenges
for the European project. My paper argues that during
the Eurozone crisis, conditionality was used as the
main instrument to transform the European Economic
Constitution.
Anastasia Poulou: Financial Assistance
Conditionality And Human Rights Protection:
What Potential for the EU Charter of Fundamental
Rights?
National laws implementing EU financial assistance
conditionality were challenged for violating human
rights. Nevertheless, the making of financial assistance