Reform of Epidemic Surveillance Exposing “Standardising” Decisions and Their Replacements by Regulations
| Authors | |
|---|---|
| Year of publication | 2023 |
| Type | Article in Periodical |
| Magazine / Source | European Papers - A Journal on Law and Integration |
| MU Faculty or unit | |
| 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: |