After 12 Years…
| Date | 01 April 2016 |
| DOI | 10.1177/1023263X1602300201 |
| Published date | 01 April 2016 |
| Subject Matter | Guest Editorial |
23 MJ 2 (2016) 219
GUEST EDITORIAL
AFTER 12 YEARS…
V S *
Last year, the Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law had kindly asked
me to write a guest editorial as I was approaching t he end of my term as President of
the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU). Even if the o er was tempting to accept wh ile in
o ce, I felt that such a contribution would have more impact if it was done in serenity
a er the end of term. omas Biermeyer, the executive editor of the journal has agreed
that we renew our appointment for the current issue. Hav ing said that, the fact of cast ing
a retroactive look over the great honour I received by my ex-colleagues to be entrusted
with the task of presidi ng the Court for four consecutive mandates of a total for 12 years
calls for a caref ul selection of the aspects I should put fort h. If I mention in particula r the
length of the period t hat I served as a President, it is because in the rst place it covered
one h of the Cour t’s existence but it certain ly allowed me to steer this institution of
great importance for the European citiz en and the European construction through a
cascade of changes proven a er wa rds to b e ex tr eme ly p ert in ent, as wel l as over num ero us
judicial choices that had to be intert wined while respecting the institutional role of the
Court and its placement in the complex European struct ure. I take par ticular pride
in the fact that despite the increasing workload for the Cour t, we managed to ensure
coordination between the di erent components of the Court and mai ntain coherence in
its jurispr udence.
European justice is a f undamental g uarantee for the applicat ion of the rule of law
and democracy. But it is also a major factor of adjusting t he legislative choices to ongoing
societal changes. e institutional set up is such that calls for the Europea n judge to make
sure that legislative solutions adopted under given circumstances maintain their value
even in view of novel phenomena. It was not rare in such a context that t he Court was
even brought to annul the legislative choices that contradicted fu ndamental texts or
higher principles.
In the framework of the mai n functions that it is entrusted with, namely the
interpretation and uni form application of European law, the Court cr ystall ized in the past
basic principles such as the direc t e ect and supremacy of EU law. In a similar context,
during the period I ser ved, major questions in the area of the protection of fund amental
rights were brought to the attention of the European judge and the answers t hat were
* Former President of the Cou rt of Justice of the Europe an Union.
To continue reading
Request your trial