Make a Submission
Vol. 44 (2024)
General Articles

An Axiological Turn in European Constitutionalism?

PDF
  • Andrzej Wróbel
Andrzej Wróbel
Kozminski University

Published 2025-11-14

Keywords

  • values of the European Union,
  • general principles of EU law,
  • European constitutional pluralism,
  • rule of law,
  • Court of Justice of the European Union,
  • CJEU
    • ...More
    Less

How to Cite

An Axiological Turn in European Constitutionalism?. (2025). Polish Yearbook of International Law, 44, 203-234. https://doi.org/10.24425/PYIL.2025.156720

Abstract

Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), stipulating that the 
Union was founded on the values common to its Member States (MSs), has led to 
a shift towards values in the drafting, application and interpretation of EU law. 
This can be seen as a significant paradigm shift in the discourse on European consti
tutional pluralism. It represents a transition, yet not a departure, from the “Union 
of law” to the “Union of values”, from a Union that is neutral towards values to one 
that is value-friendly. This paradigm shift is especially symbolised and illustrated 
by the reference to values in the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union 
(known as Wertejurisprudenz), the promotion of values in the EU’s international 
relations and policies and the use of values to legitimise EU legislation and as a cri
terion for reviewing and assessing the MSs’ activity, even in domains that are within 
their exclusive purview.
 A characteristic feature of the values listed in Art. 2 TEU, on which the strength 
and scope of their impact on the EU legal and institutional system directly depend, is 
the fact that they are legal values forming – as internal values – an integral part of 
the founding Treaties. Due to their placement within the Treaty structure, they are 
fundamental values, and because of the Treaty’s role as a constitutional charter, they 
are also foundational values. The listing of these values in Art. 2 TEU has objectified 
them – their substance no longer depends on individual moral beliefs. They are legal 
norms that are legally binding on their addressees.
 In the literature, Art. 2 TEU is often given the status and role of a homogeneity 
clause. However, with all due respect for this interpretative approach, I consider it 
inconsistent with both the meaning of this provision, which was intended to strengthen  the Union’s legitimacy, and with the premises of European constitutional pluralism, 
which safeguard and protect the pluralism of values while opposing their uniformity 
and hierarchisation. It seems, however, that turning values into homogenising clauses 
that would unify the quantitatively and qualitatively diverse MSs’ constitutional 
value standards – with the CJEU monitoring their compliance with as-yet undeter
mined EU models – and deriving particular obligations for the MSs from these values 
in conjunction with other Treaty provisions is taking it too far

PDF

References

  1. Alexy R., Theorie der juristischen Argumentation. Die Theorie des rationalen Diskurses als Theorie der juristischen Begründung, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main: 1983.
  2. Avbelj M., Komárek J. (eds.), Constitutional Pluralism in the European Union and Beyond, Hart Publishing, Oxford: 2012.
  3. Avbelj M., Values, Constitutionalism and the Viability of European Integration, in: M. Avbelj (ed.), The Future of EU Constitutionalism, Hart Publishing, Oxford: 2023, pp. 35–52.
  4. Baraggia A., Bonelli M., Linking Money to Values: The New Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation and Its Constitutional Challenges, 23(2) German Law Journal 131 (2022), pp. 131–156.
  5. Bauerschmidt J., Rechtsstaatlichkeit in der EU und die Instrumente zu ihrer Verteidigung: Artikel 7 EUV, Rechtsstaatlichkeitsbericht und dialog, Haushaltskonditionalität, 59(3) EuR 300 (2024), pp. 300–321.
  6. Blum C., Value Pluralism versus Value Monism, 38 Acta Analytica 627 (2023), pp. 627–652.
  7. Blumenwitz D., Gornig G.H., Murswiek D. (eds.), Die Europäische Union als Wertegemeinschaft, Duncker & Humblot, Berlin: 2005.
  8. Böckenförde E.-W., Zur Kritik der Wertbegründung des Rechts, in: E.-W. Böckenförde (ed.), Recht, Staat, Freiheit, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main: 2006, pp. 67–91.
  9. Bogdandy A. Von, Founding Principles of EU Law: A Theoretical and Doctrinal Sketch, 16(2) European Law Journal 95 (2010), pp. 95–111.
  10. Bogdandy A. von, Founding Principles, in: A. von Bogdandy, J. Bast (eds.), Principles of European Constitutional Law, Hart Publishing, C.H. Beck, Oxford: 2009.
  11. Bogdandy A. von, Spieker L.D., Countering the Judicial Silencing of Critics: Article 2 TEU Values, Reverse Solange, and the Responsibilities of National Judges, 15(3) European Constitutional Law Review 391 (2019), pp. 391–426.
  12. Bonelli M., Claes M., Judicial Serendipity: How Portuguese Judges Came to the Rescue of the Polish Judiciary: ECJ 27 February 2018, Case C-64/16 Associação Sindical dos Juízes Portugueses, 14(3) European Constitutional Law Review 622 (2018), pp. 622–643.
  13. Broekman J.M., Changes of Paradigm in the Law, in: A. Peczenik, L. Lindahl, B.V. Roermund (eds.), Theory of Legal Science, Springer, Dordrecht: 1984, pp. 133–144.
  14. Calliess C., Schyff G. van der, Constitutional Identity Introduced, in: C. Calliess, G. van der Schyff (eds.), Constitutional Identity in a Europe of Multilevel Constitutionalism, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 2019, pp. 3–8.
  15. Case C-26/62 van Gend en Loos, EU:C:1963:1.
  16. Case C-157/21 Republic of Poland v. European Parliament and Council of the European Union, EU:C:2022:98.
  17. Case C-204/21 European Commission v. Republic of Poland, EU:C:2023:442.
  18. Case C-216/18 PPU Minister for Justice and Equality v. LM (Defciencies in the system of justice), EU:C:2018:586.
  19. Case C-284/16 Achmea v. Slovak Republic, EU:C:2018:158.
  20. Case C-294/83 Parti écologiste „Les Verts” v. European Parliament, EU:C:1986:166.
  21. Case C-430/21 RS (Effect of the decisions of a constitutional court), EU:C:2022:99.
  22. Case C-542/18 RX-II and C-543/18 RX-ITS Simpson v. Council of the European Union (T646/16 P) and HG v. European Commission (T693/16 P), EU:C:2020:232.
  23. Case C-64/16 Associação Sindical dos Juízes Portugueses v. Tribunal de Contas, EU:C:2018:117.
  24. Case C-791/19 European Commission v. Republic of Poland, EU:C:2021:596.
  25. Case C-896/19 Repubblika v. Il-Prim Ministru, EU:C:2021:311.
  26. Claes M., The Equality of Member States, Research Handbook on General Principles, in: K.S. Ziegler, P.J. Neuvonen, V. Moreno-Lax (eds.), EU Law: Constructing Legal Orders in Europe, Edward Edgar Publishing, Cheltenham: 2022, pp. 99–117.
  27. Claes M., The Primacy of EU Law in European and National Law, in: D. Chalmers, A. Arnull (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of European Union Law, Oxford University Press, Oxford: 2015, pp. 178–211.
  28. Conway G., The Limits of Legal Reasoning and the European Court of Justice, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 2012.
  29. Corrias L., The Passivity of Law: Competence and Constitution in the European Court of Justice, Springer, Dordrecht: 2011.
  30. Dworkin R., Justice in Robes, Belknap Press, Cambridge: 2006.
  31. Fabio U. di, Grundrechte als Werteordnung, 1 Juristen Zeitung 1 (2004), pp. 1–8.
  32. Fekete B., Paradigms in Modern European Comparative Law, Bloomsbury Publishing, Dublin: 2021.
  33. Galston W.A., The Implications of Value Pluralism for Political Theory and Practice, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 2004.
  34. Gaus G., Subjective Value and Justifcatory Political Theory, 28 Nomos 241 (1986), pp. 241–269.
  35. Giegerich T., Zwischen Europafreundlichkeit und Europaskepsis Kritischer Überblick über die bundesverfassungsgerichtliche Rechtsprechung zur europäischen Integration, 19 Zeitschrift für Europarechtliche Studie 3 (2016), pp. 3–48.
  36. Grimm D., The Constitution of European Democracy, Oxford University Press, Oxford: 2017.
  37. Gutmann J., Kantorowicz J., Voigt S., How Do Citizens Defne and Value the Rule of Law? A Conjoint Experiment in Germany and Poland, 32(4) Journal of European Public Policy 899 (2025), pp. 899–925.
  38. Habermas J., Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy, MIT Press, Cambridge: 1996.
  39. Herlin-Karnell E., The EU as a Promoter of Values and the European Global Project, 13(11) German Law Journal 1225 (2012), pp. 1225–1246.
  40. Hilf M., Schorkopf F., in: E. Grabitz, M. Hilf, M. Nettesheim (eds.), Das Recht der Europäischen Union, C.H. Beck, München: 2021, Legalis – commentary to Art. 2 TEU.
  41. Hofmann R., Heger A., Instrumente zum Schutz der Werteunion, 104(4) Kritische Vierteljahresschrift für Gesetzgebung und Rechtswissenschaft 340 (2021), pp. 340–363
  42. Hwang S.-P., Judikativer Werteschutz in der Europäischen Union: Eine verfassungsvergleichende Perspektive, 3 Europarecht 240 (2024), pp. 240–268.
  43. Wróblewski J. , Teoria racjonalnego tworzenia prawa [Theory of Rational Lawmaking], Ossolineum, Wrocław: 1985.
  44. Jaklic K., Constitutional Pluralism in the EU, Oxford University Press, Oxford: 2013.
  45. Joined Cases C185/24 RL and C189/24 QS v. Bundesrepublik Deutschland, EU:C:2024:1036.
  46. Judgment of the Belgian Constitutional Court on the Fiscal Stability Treaty handed down on 28 April 2016.
  47. Kaleta K.J., Rola i znaczenie wartości we współczesnym dyskursie konstytucyjnym [Role and Signifcance of Values in Contemporary Constitutional Discourse], in: M. Dudek, M. Stępień (eds.), Aksjologiczny wymiar prawa [Axiological Aspect of Law], Nomos, Cracow: 2015, pp. 122–144.
  48. Kochenov D., Busting the Myths Nuclear: A Commentary on Article 7 TEU, European University Institute, San Domenico di Fiesole: 2017.
  49. Kochenov D., The Acquis and Its Principles: The Enforcement of ‘Law’ versus the Enforcement of ‘Values’ in the EU Law, in: A. Jakab, D. Kochenov (eds.), The Enforcement of EU Law and Values Ensuring Member States’ Compliance, Oxford University Press, Oxford: 2017, pp. 9–27.
  50. Kochenov D.V., Dialogical Rule of Law in the Hands of the Court of Justice: Analysis and Critique, Central European University, Wien: 2023.
  51. Koncewicz T.T., Values, in: Oxford Encyclopedia for EU Law, available at: http://opil.ouplaw.com (accessed 30 June 2025).
  52. Kordela M., Teoria prawa Zygmunta Ziembińskiego [Zygmunt Ziembiński’s Theory of Law], 4(1) Filozofa Publiczna i Edukacja Demokratyczna 230 (2015), pp. 230–249.
  53. Kordela M., Zasady prawa jako normatywna postać wartości [Principles of Law as a Normative form of Values], 1 Ruch Prawniczy, Ekonomiczny i Socjologiczny 39 (2006), pp. 39–54.
  54. Kos K., Theories and Limitations of EU-Friendly Interpretation of the Polish Constitution, 12(1) Polish Review of International and European Law 47 (2023), pp. 47–57.
  55. Krzysztoszek A., European Commission to Release Frozen €137bn for Poland, Euractiv, 23 February 2024, https://tinyurl.com/2m9p5zjh (accessed 30 June 2025).
  56. Kuhn T., Objectivity, Value Judgment, and Theory Choice, in: The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientifc Tradition and Change, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago: 1977.
  57. Kuhn T.S., Postscript-1969, in: T.S. Kuhn (ed.), The Structure of Scientifc Revolutions, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago: 1970, pp. 174–210.
  58. Kuhn T.S., The Structure of Scientifc Revolutions, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago: 1970.
  59. Lenaerts K., La vie après l’avis: Exploring the Principle of Mutual (yet not Blind) Trust, 54(3) Common Market Law Review 805 (2017), pp. 805–840.
  60. Lenaerts K., The Court’s Outer and Inner Selves: Exploring the External and Internal Legitimacy of the European Court of Justice, in: M. Adams H. de Waele, J. Mrrusen, G. Straetmans (eds.), Judging Europe’s Judges, Hart Publishing, Oxford: 2013, pp. 13–60.
  61. Leszczyński L., Kryteria pozaprawne w sądowej wykładni prawa [Extralegal Criteria in Judicial Interpretation of Law], Wolters Kluwer, Warsaw: 2022.
  62. Linderfalk U., General Principles as Principles of International Legal Pragmatics: The Relevance of Good Faith for the Application of Treaty Law, in: M. Andenas, L. Chiussi (eds.), General Principles and the Coherence of International Law, Brill, Leide: 2019, pp. 100–116.
  63. Luciarelli S., Introduction, in: S. Luciarelli, I. Manners (eds.), Values and Principles in European Union Foreign Policy, Routledge, London: 2006, pp. 1–18.
  64. Luther R., Überlegungen zu einer positivistischen Integrationslehre. Die Bedeutung menschlicher Wertvorstellungen für die Interpretation des nationalen und europäischen Verfassungsrechts, Duncker & Humblot, Berlin: 2023.
  65. MacCormick N., Institutional Normative Order: A Conception of Law, 82 Cornell Law Review 1051 (1997), pp. 1051–1070.
  66. MacCormick N., Rhetoric and the Rule of Law: A Theory of Legal Reasoning, Oxford University Press, Oxford: 2005.
  67. Mader O., Wege aus der Rechtsstaatsmisere: Der neue EU-Verfassungsgrundsatz des Rückschrittsverbots und seine Bedeutung für die Wertedurchsetzung, 21 Europäische Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsrecht 917 (2021), pp. 917–922.
  68. Malleson K., The New Judiciary: The Effects of Expansion and Activism, Routledge, London: 1999.
  69. Mangiameli S., The Homogeneity Clause, in: H.-J. Blanke, S. Mangiameli (eds.), The Treaty on European Union (TEU): A Commentary, Springer, Heidelberg: 2013, pp. 109–156.
  70. Mayer F.C., Judikativer Werteschutz in der Europäischen Union: Grundlagen und Chancen, 3 Europarecht 219 (2024), pp. 219–239.
  71. Mazák J., Moser M., Adjudication by Reference to General Principles of EU Law: A Second Look at the Mangold Case Law, in: M. Adams, H. de Waele, J. Mrrusen, G. Straetmans (eds.), Judging Europe’s Judges: The Legitimacy of the Case Law of the European Court of Justice, Hart Publishing, London: 2013, pp. 61–86.
  72. Moreiro González C.J., Implementing the Rule of Law in the European Union: How Long Trapped in Penelope’s Spinning Wheel from Article 2 of the TEU?, 25 Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies 161 (2023), pp. 161–173.
  73. Muir E. (eds.), Judicial Activism at the European Court of Justice, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham: 2013.
  74. Nettesheim M., Die föderale Homogenitätsklausel des Art. 2 EUV, 3 Europarecht 269 (2024), pp. 269–299.
  75. Niedobitek M., Sommermann K.-P. (eds.), Die Europäische Union als Wertegemeinschaft. Forschungssymposium zu Ehren von Siegfried Magiera, Duncker & Humblot, Berlin: 2013.
  76. Nolte G., European and U.S. Constitutionalism: Comparing Essential Elements, in: G. Nolte (ed.), European and U.S. Constitutionalism, Cambridge University Press, New York: 2005, pp. 9–22.
  77. O’Leary S., Employment Law at the European Court of Justice: Judicial Structures, Policies and Processes, Hart Publishing, Oxford: 2002.
  78. Opinion 1/17 of the CJEU of 30 April 2019, EU:C:2019:341.
  79. Opinion 2/13 of the CJEU of 18 December 2014, EU:C:2014:2454.
  80. Opinion of Advocate General Ćapeta to Case C769/22 European Commission v. Hungary, EU:C:2025:408.
  81. Orsi F., Value Theory, Bloomsbury Publishing, London: 2015.
  82. Parsons T., Shils E., Naegele K.D., Pitts J.R. (eds.), Theories of Society: Foundations of Modern Sociological Theory, vol. 1, Free Press, New York: 1961.
  83. Pech L., Kochenov D., Respect for the Rule of Law in the Case Law of the European Court of Justice: A Casebook Overview of Key Judgments Since the Portuguese Judges Case, Swedish Institute for European Policy Studies, Stockholm: 2021.
  84. Pech L., Wachowiec P., Mazur D., Poland’s Rule of Law Breakdown: A Five-year Assessment of EU’s (In)action, 13(1) Hague Journal on the Rule of Law 1 (2021), pp. 1–43.
  85. Pellegrini D., I controlimiti al primato del diritto dell’Unione europea nel dialogo tra le Corti, Firenze University Press, Firenze: 2021.
  86. Polish Constitutional Tribunal, judgment of the 16 November 2011, SK 45/09.
  87. Polish Constitutional Tribunal, judgment of the 30 September 2008, K 44/07.
  88. Potacs M., Wertkonforme Auslegung des Unionsrechts?, 51 Europarecht 164 (2016), pp. 164–176.
  89. Přibáň J., Constitutional Values as the Normalisation of Societal Power: From a Moral Transvaluation to a Systemic Self-Valuation, 11 Hague Journal on the Rule of Law 451 (2019), pp. 451–459.
  90. Rensmann T., Grundwerte im Prozeß der europäischen Konstitutionalisierung Anmerkungen zur Europäischen Union als Wertegemeinschaft aus juristischer Perspektive, in: D. Blumenwitz, G.H. Gornig, D. Murswiek (eds.), Die Europäische Union als Wertegemeinschaft, Duncker & Humblot, Berlin: 2005, pp. 49–70.
  91. Rønnow-Rasmussen T., Intrinsic and Extrinsic Value, in: I. Hirose, J. Olson (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Value Theory, Oxford University Press, New York: 2015.
  92. Rossi L.S., Il valore giuridico dei valori. L’Articolo 2 TUE: relazioni con altre disposizioni del diritto primario dell’UE e rimedi giurisdizionali, 19 Federalismi.it, 17 June 2020, available at: https://www.federalismi.it/nv14/editoriale.cfm?eid=562 (accessed 30 June 2025).
  93. Ruggeri A., Valori e principi costituzionali degli Stati integrati d’Europa, 2–3 Teoria del Diritto e dello Stato 292 (2009), pp. 292–330.
  94. Rule of Law Framework, European Commission, https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/policies/justice-and-fundamental-rights/upholding-rule-law/rule-law/rule-law-framework_en#process (accessed 30 June 2025).
  95. Šadl U., Bengoetxea J., Theorising General Principles of EU Law in Perspective: High Expectations, Modest Means and the Court of Justice, in: S. Vogenauer, S. Weatherill (eds.), General Principles of Law: European and Comparative Perspectives, Hart Publishing, Oxford: 2017, pp. 41–52.
  96. Sadurski W., Constitutional Democracy in the Time of Elected Authoritarians, 18(2) International Journal of Constitutional Law 324 (2020), pp. 324–333.
  97. Schauer F., Playing by the Rules: A Philosophical Examination of Rule-Based Decision-Making in Law and in Life, Clarendon Press, Oxford: 1991.
  98. Scheppele K.L., Kochenov D.V., Grabowska-Moroz B., EU Values Are Law, After All: Enforcing EU Values through Systemic Infringement Actions by the European Commission and the Member States of the European Union, 39(1) Yearbook of European Law 3 (2020), pp. 3–121.
  99. Scholtes J., Constitutionalising the End of History? Pitfalls of a Non-regression Principle for Article 2 TEU, 19(1) European Constitutional Law Review 59 (2023), pp. 59–87.
  100. Scholtes J., The Abuse of Constitutional Identity in the European Union, Oxford University Press, Oxford: 2023.
  101. Schorkopf F., Der Wertekonstitutionalismus der Europäischen Union, 10 Juristen Zeitung 477 (2020), pp. 477–528.
  102. Schorkopf F., Staat und Diversität. Agonaler Pluralismus für die liberale Demokratie, Brill Schöningh, Boston: 2017.
  103. Spieker D.L., EU Values before the Court of Justice: Foundations, Potential, Risks, Oxford University Press, Oxford: 2023.
  104. Spieker L.D., Breathing Life into the Union’s Common Values: On the Judicial Application of Article 2 TEU in the EU Value Crisis, 20 German Law Journal 1182 (2019), pp. 1182–1213.
  105. Spieker L.D., Defending Union Values in Judicial Proceedings: On How to Turn Article 2 TEU into a Judicially Applicable Provision, in: A. von Bogdandy, P. Bogdanowicz, I. Canor, Ch. Grabenwater, M. Taborowski, M. Schmidt (eds.), Defending Checks and Balances in EU Member States: Taking Stock of Europe’s Actions, Springer, Berlin: 2021, pp. 237–268.
  106. Staudinger I., The Rise and Fall of Rule of Law Conditionality, 7(2) European Papers 721 (2022), pp. 721–737.
  107. Stone Sweet A., Constitutionalism, Legal Pluralism, and International Regimes, 16(2) Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies 621 (2009), pp. 621–645.
  108. Tridimas T., The General Principles of EU Law, Oxford University Press, Oxford: 2007.
  109. Wendel M., Mutual Trust, Essence and Federalism – Between Consolidating and Fragmenting the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice after LM, 15(1) European Constitutional Law Review 17 (2019), pp. 17–47.
  110. Wheatherill S., Law and Values in the European Union, Oxford University Press, Oxford: 2016.
  111. Wronkowska S., Ziembiński Z., Zarys teorii prawa [Outline of the Theory of Law], Ars Boni et Aequi, Poznań: 2001.
  112. Wróbel A., Art. 2, in: R. Grzeszczak, D. Kornobis-Romanowska (eds.), Traktat o Unii Europejskiej. Komentarz [Treaty on European Union: A Commentary], Wolters Kluwer, Warsaw: 2023, pp. 65–91.
  113. Wróbel A., in: A. Wróbel (ed.), Karta Praw Podstawowych Unii Europejskiej. Komentarz [Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union: A commentary], C.H. Beck, Warsaw: 2020, Legalis – commentary on art. 1 CFREU.
  114. Wróblewski J., Wartości a decyzja sądowa [Values Versus Judicial Decision], Ossolineum, Wrocław: 1973.
  115. Zajadło J., Wykładnia wroga wobec konstytucji [Interpretation Hostile to the Constitution], 1 Przegląd Konstytucyjny 26 (2018), pp. 26–36.

Similar Articles

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.