19 minute read
INTERVIEW
INTERVIEW WITH THE DIRECTOR
In 2019, ERA renewed its Board of Trustees (“Kuratorium”) for the term 2020-2023. What 1. are the key features of the new Board, and what do you consider the main achievements of its predecessor?
Advertisement
ERA’s so-called Board of Trustees, which is essentially an advisory board providing guidance on the training needs of our target groups (the legal professions), top level expertise on a variety of EU law areas and key contacts to the main actors in European law and training is appointed for a term of four years. Normally appointment to the Board is renewable once; there is however also a category of life-time appointees whom we refer to as “honorary trustees” and who were instrumental in achieving important objectives in certain phases of ERA’s development. The latter category includes a former judge of the European Court of Justice (Sir David Edward), former senior officials of the EU’s three political institutions (Francesco de Angelis, Charles Elsen, Gregorio Garzón Clariana) and two former presidents of the CCBE (Hans-Jürgen Hellwig and Heinz Weil). Last year, former EP Vice President Diana Wallis and the long-serving chairwoman of the Board Pauliine Koskelo, now a judge of the European Court of Human Rights, were also appointed honorary trustees for life.
Besides the honorary members, we identify three categories of trustees: Advisers on strategy and representatives of EU institutions (10), Representatives of target groups and partner institutions (17) and Expert advisers (33). Of these 60 regular members, 36 have been appointed for the first time to the new Board, which was the largest renewal of the Board ever. Some of the new members, in particular those representing EU or partner institutions, are succeeding their colleagues which were also their predecessors in their institutional function. Some of these trustees however represent institutions which so far were never represented on the Board, such as three EU agencies supervising the market for financial services (the ECB, EBA and ESMA) or the European Pubic Prosecutor in person, Laura Codruța Kövesi. Among the expert advisers, a high number of practicing lawyers with an impressive variety of expertise have been appointed for the first time, and also business is very well represented through a record number of company lawyers. We are very much looking forward to working with the new Board and its members, even if our plans to launch first Board activities in early 2020 have unfortunately been thwarted by the current Covid-19 pandemic.
10
Advisers on strategy and representatives of EU institutions
( 10 )
Representatives of target groups and partner institutions
( 17 )
Expert advisers
( 33 )
Looking back at the achievements of the previous Board, I first wish to pay a tribute to all outgoing members for their tremendous contribution to ERA’s work and success over the past four years or more; in fact many former members had served for more than one term. The last Board was the first to work in a new framework: The category of members appointed to represent EU Member States and candidate countries was abolished; a ceiling of 60 ordinary members was introduced; and the principle of limiting the number of terms to a maximum of two full terms started to apply. We were less successful with the introduction of new and hopefully more efficient working methods; the increased use of small advisory groups outside plenary meetings was hardly practiced; external experts were not associated with the work of specific advisory groups, probably as the expertise available was considered sufficient; and plenary meetings continued to be held in every year of the past term as the wish to convene annually in pleno prevailed. But the breakout meetings of the specialised advisory groups in the framework of the annual plenaries proved to be ever more crucial for ERA’s conference planning and the regular meetings of the Business Strategy Committee and the presidium never failed to provide valuable guidance not least for the development of ERA’s next Development Strategy 2021-2027.
My heartfelt thanks go to all trustees who, over many years, have helped build our institute as it stands today. Most strongly I feel indebted to Pauliine Koskelo, who has been a very good and close friend since ERA’s early days when we first met in the nineties to discuss a project on European insolvency law on which she had worked as a senior official of the Finnish Ministry of justice. When we met, Pauliine had just joined the EIB in Luxembourg from where after five years she returned to Helsinki as a Justice of the Supreme Court in 2000. In 2002/2003, she helped persuade the Finnish authorities to make Finland a formal patron of ERA. From 2005 on, she was President of the Supreme Court and accepted my invitation to join the Board of Trustees as of 2008. Two years later, she was elected chairwoman of the Board and served for almost ten years in this position. As president of the trustees, she accompanied ERA’s growth and further maturing over the last decade with firm encouragement, untiring support and unconditional affection. I am relieved to know that as an honorary trustee she will remain “on board”.
Wolfgang Heusel, DIRECTOR OF THE ACADEMY
A n n u a l
R e p o r t
2 0 1 9
11
2. For many years, ERA has been recipient of an operating grant under the Jean Monnet programme which was launched in 1989, 30 years ago. What was ERA’s contribution to the programme’s 30 th anniversary?
ERA was established in 1992 following an initiative of the European Parliament, and it was Parliament that ensured the funding of ERA’s operations by creating a specific budget line alongside those of other European educational institutes such as the European University Institute and the College of Europe. When it became obvious that the provision of operating grants required an additional legal basis, such basis was created in 2004 by a Decision of Parliament and Council and replicated for the subsequent Financial Frameworks 2007-2013 and 2014-2020 as part of the Jean Monnet activities, with an express reference to ERA as an “institute pursuing an aim of European interest”. Hence for many years Jean Monnet has been the programme providing an important part of the financial basis for ERA’s activities, and in principle this should continue also in the next MFF 2021-2027.
ERA hence owes a huge part of its success to the Jean Monnet Programme and was delighted to contribute to the Programme’s 30 th anniversary year. ERA’s main contribution consisted in the organisation of a one-day conference entitled European Law Protecting our Common Values on 16 October 2019 in Brussels. The event hosted by the House of European History was opened by Commissioner Věra Jourová, incoming Vice President for Values and Transparency, who praised ERA’s contribution to strengthening the rule of law in the European area of justice and offered some insights into the priorities of the incoming Commission in this regard.
After a thorough analysis of the concept of “European values” by professor Armin von Bogdandy (Heidelberg), successive panels took a closer look at how European law defends these values against both external and internal threats and addressed the potential conflict between the values protected by EU law on the one hand and national constitutional law on the other. The programme featured top level speakers such as EP Vice President Katarina Barley, Diana Wallis, Paul Nemitz (European Commission), Judge Pauliine Koskelo (ECtHR), Justice Aileen Donnelly from the Irish Court of Appeal, Max Steinbeis (editor of Verfassungsblog), former Jurisconsulte of the Council Hubert Legal, former judge of the ECJ Christiaan Timmermans and former Vice President of the Bundesverfassungsgericht Ferdinand Kirchhof.
12
3. While ERA celebrated its 25 th anniversary in 2017, three major ERA partners commemorated quite different anniversaries in 2019. To which extent was ERA involved in these festivities?
Ecole Nationale de la Magistrature (ENM) ― BORDEAUX
National Institute of Justice (NIJ) ― SOFIA I t looks as if it were pure coincidence, but it is true that three judicial schools which have been close cooperation partners for ERA in the framework of the European Judicial Training Network, and which together with ERA were re-elected to the EJTN Steering Committee in June 2019, celebrated their anniversaries in 2019: the Ecole Nationale de la Magistrature (ENM) in Bordeaux turned 60, the Centro de Estudos Judiciários (CEJ) in Lisbon 40 and theНационалeн институт на правосъдието (National Institute of Justice – NIJ) in Sofia completed 15 years since its establishment. All of them invited ERA to address the audiences of their commemorative events and I enjoyed the honour and privilege to represent ERA at all three occasions.
To celebrate its 60 th anniversary, the ENM organised a colloquium in Bordeaux on 23-24 May entitled “Judicial training: a challenge for democracy” consisting of three panel discussions which examined the historic didactical approach of the school as well as its future challenges by digitalisation and AI; all of this against a political background which even questioned the very existence of the school. As the only non-French speaker at the conference I participated in the second panel, together with ENM director Olivier Leurent and representatives of the French Bar and academia, looking at current challenges for the training of lawyers in general and discussing the importance of training for an effective independence of the judiciary, which is a guarantor of unbiased democratic procedures, and of an interprofessional and pan-European exchange.
The Portuguese Judicial School under Director João Manuel da Silva Miguel held its jubilee conference on “The training of magistrates – tendencies and perspectives” on 10 and 11 October in Lisbon, which featured contributions by representatives of the domestic judiciary, academia and politics. International speakers included a representative of the European Commission, Director Olivier Leurent of the French ENM and me, allowing me to deliver a more fundamental speech on law, justice and the judiciary. Being invited to this event was particularly moving for me, as my first private visit to Lisbon goes back to the year 1979 when CEJ was founded and I then spent a three-month internship at the Portuguese-German chamber of commerce there in 1983, two years before Portugal’s accession to the EC.
Last not least, the Bulgarian National Institute for Justice celebrated its 15 th anniversary
on 21 October in Sofia with a conference entitled “25 years judicial training in Bulgaria – 15 years National Institute of Justice”. The event saw a panel discussion chaired by Director Miglena Tacheva with her two predecessors. Presentations from an international perspective were delivered by Markus Brückner, Secretary General elect of the EJTN, and myself, highlighting the relevance of EU law for the national judiciary and the need for a pan-European training. Here again our host added a memorable element to this visit by introducing us to the last tsar (1943-1946) and later Prime minister (2001-2005) of Bulgaria, Simeon Sakskoburggotski.
Finally let me add that 2019 also saw the publication of the contributions to ERA’s 2017 jubilee congress “The authority of EU law – do we still believe in it?” (Springer), with papers by eminent European law experts and practitioners including the presidents of the Court of Justice and the General Court of the EU.
13
4. At its meeting in November 2019, the ERA Governing Board adopted some crucial strategic decisions for ERA’s future. Why are they strategically relevant?
The first fundamental decision adopted by the Board concerns ERA’s legal status as an autonomous public foundation. This is the form which the original founders – Luxembourg, Rhineland-Palatinate and the city of Trier – chose in June 1992 to provide the institute not only with legal personality but also with the potential to grow both in patrons – all Member States were invited to join – and in activities. Most importantly, the legal form of a non-profit foundation was perfect to equip the institute with the necessary autonomy to conceive its own development strategy and a programme exclusively focused on its mandate, i.e. improving the efficient application and enforcement of European law through training knowledge and skills of law professionals, and providing them with a Europe-wide forum for exchange and networking.
However, given the uncertain funding perspectives of the institute in 1992 and the absence of other Member States in its starting phase, the state of Rhineland-Palatinate in setting up the Foundation pledged “in accordance with the budget in force, to cover the costs of the Foundation insofar as they are not covered by other income”. This pledge was expressed in a Letter of Comfort which became a genuine part of the founding act. In return for this fundamentally unlimited funding pledge, the Foundation Statute granted Rhineland-Palatinate special supervisory rights over the Foundation’s expenditure and a second “special” representative on the Governing Board. The Statute foresaw that any economic or staffing plans to be adopted by the Foundation would require the approval of this special representative.
This peculiar position of Rhineland-Palatinate combining a potentially strong financial liability with certain statutory privileges helped ERA to get through its difficult pioneer years but never strained its development as a genuine European training institute. While until the end of the current year and since 1992, Rhineland-Palatinate very generously will have paid ERA an accumulated operating grant of €23.5 million and “From a fledgling project, the institute has invested a similar amount in the Academy’s conference centre in Trier, the state was never called to cover any unforeseen contingent liabilities developed into a leading provider of EU law as set out in the comfort letter and it never hampered any strategic training and debate.” decision for ERA’s development or intervened in programme planning.
Compared with June 1992, ERA’s position has fundamentally changed. From a fledgling project, the institute has developed into a leading provider of EU law training and debate, incorporating all present and past EU Member States and expressly named as an institution “pursuing an aim of European interest” by the EU’s Jean Monnet Programme. Given this consolidation of the Foundation, there is no longer a need for Rhineland-Palatinate to undertake a legal obligation to assume costs not otherwise covered, and the particular prerogatives afforded to the State in the Foundation Statute no longer sit well politically with the European character of the Foundation. Following my proposal, the Governing Board hence decided to release RhinelandPalatinate from any further financial liability as a founding donor and to simultaneously abolish its reserved rights under the Statute so that the State is now placed on the same legal footing as all other patrons.
14
2 0 2 1 J e a n - P h i l i p p e R A G E A D E F u t u r e D i r e c t o r a s o f 1 J a n u a r y
The Board’s second strategic decision with far-reaching impact was the nomination of JeanPhilippe Rageade, our Programme Director, to succeed me as Director as of 1 January 2021. His nomination a good year before taking up office will allow for an orderly and smooth transition and provides sufficient time to recruit a qualified successor as Programme Director. I am particularly happy with this decision, as Jean-Philippe meets the requirements for the position at all levels, and both his many years of committed work at ERA and the experience and contacts he has acquired in the course of his work give rise to the expectation that once appointed Director he will continue to use these for the benefit of ERA and its staff. Like the Board, I place high trust in his abilities and qualities and will leave the institute without concern.
5. In 2019, ERA has worked on its new development strategy for the term 2021-2027, which it will finalise and adopt in the course of 2020. In your view, what will be the most important challenges for ERA’s development in the years to come?
In normal times, my response to this question would list the usual uncertainties for which you have to cater – to secure funding, to offer activities based on a careful needs and demand analysis, to keep track with technical developments both as far as they offer new activity tools and as they present legal challenges; briefly, to make sure that in all respects ERA will stay “ahead of the curve”. All of this remains true: As the EU is preparing the adoption of a new Mid-term Financial Framework for 2021-27 and we are entering a new phase of cooperation with our seat state Rhineland-Palatinate, it will be vital to ensure continuity in public funding for ERA. This should also allow to expand our activities to address new target groups, test new forms of adult education, address new legal challenges such as the emergence of an ever stronger presence of artificial intelligence (AI) in our private and professional lives including in the application of the law itself or, at an institutional level, the search of the European Union for strengthening its democratic basis and structure (the “Conference on the Future of Europe”). To achieve this, ERA will continue to depend on a highly qualified, motivated and committed staff.
15
But while I am writing these lines, we are going through the historic Corona pandemic lockdown which has paralysed economic and social life in all EU Member States. The pandemic has forced ERA to stop almost all of its face-to-face activities from mid-March until the summer break, but nobody can tell today whether in September 2020 we will be back to business as usual. Events which cannot take place now because of the lockdown have either been postponed or, exceptionally, cancelled; most of them will be offered as streams or webinars only, but the readiness of the market to accept this new online-only concept still needs to be tested. As a consequence, ERA is working short-time in April and May, and while it is certain that income from registration fees will decrease considerably, the financial impact of the crisis on ERA remains to be seen.
The challenges we would have to face in “normal” times are hence likely to appear in an aggravated, accelerated or extended shape. While EU funding for ERA was always dependant on political agreement on the overall MFF and the envelope allocated to the Erasmus+ and the Justice Programmes, this pending agreement is now further at risk given the economic crisis triggered by the pandemic and the need to set up a programme to restore the economy. While the lockdown is certain to end at some stage, it is impossible to predict when face-to-face events can be organised anew and whether there will be any appetite (and time and money) to attend them. The need for an increased use of distance-learning methods is certainly offering a chance, but will it also reduce law professionals’ zeal and interest to engage in face-to-face training? If, as so many say, life (or Europe) after the pandemic will not be the same as before, what will be ERA’s life after the pandemic? This will be a challenge nobody could anticipate, but I am confident that ERA will be able to cope with.
6. 2020 will be your last year as Director of ERA, the 21 st since your first appointment as from January 2000. What are your thoughts when looking back?
My first thought is that these years have been an incredible and intense experience, an unexpected adventure, and that I am immensely grateful for the chance of having been entrusted with this responsibility over so many years. I was first involved in the project to create the Academy in 1991 when I was a young judge seconded to the Rhineland-Palatinate Ministry of Justice in Mainz. The project had been repeatedly called for by the European Parliament, but it could only be launched locally by a joint initiative of the governments of Luxembourg and Rhineland-Palatinate. Its implementation was then left to the Minister of justice of the latter, Peter Caesar, who formed a team in 1991 to present the project to a European public of which it was yet unclear of whom it should consist and how it could be reached. The preparation of this first event to launch the Academy, which took the form of a major conference in November 1991 demonstrating the hoped-for achievements of this new initiative – discussing important issues of European law with outstanding law practitioners from EU (EC) institutions, business, judiciary and legal practice from old and new Member States, and facilitating cross-border encounter and exchange – was perceived as a huge success and led to the creation of the ERA Foundation in June 1992, six months before the envisaged completion of the Single Market.
16
My involvement in this founding phase, which in 1992 included setting up first contacts with former socialist countries which at the time did not even enjoy the official status of candidates for membership, made me accept the invitation to join the still very small ERA team in Trier in January 1993. The years until 1999, when I served as Programme Director, were true pioneer years and meant that the institute had to be built from scratch – staff, programme, bodies, contacts, networks, with the help of dedicated friends and the financial support provided by the European Parliament. It meant that we had to build trust in old and new Member States, trust in our capacities, in the quality of our work, in our motivation to serve the European good and not any national interests, which was not obvious given that the institute was new and unknown and that its patrons until 2000 were just Germany, the German states and Luxembourg.
But the proof that we managed was that in 2000, shortly after my appointment as Director, Ireland was the first further Member State to join, and in a very long, sometimes slow and cumbersome process all other 25 EU Member States followed suit, from Poland in 2001 to Estonia in 2018.
The breadth of its institutional basis and of its rich network of partner institutions and experts throughout Europe is certainly one of the strengths of ERA today. Another is the quality of its services and I feel sincerely committed to all my colleagues past and present who have been involved in building and maintaining this quality standard. The history of ERA, its origins and development is part of the history of European integration in the last 30 years. Being part of it has taught me a lot about European and national politics and interaction. To write this history some day might be another rewarding challenge for those who have lived it.
