Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
EPPiSM Baner

No. 4 (2022)

Artykuły

Energy Sovereignty on the Basis of the ‘Fit for 55’ Package. Part 2

DOI: https://doi.org/10.52097/eppism.8667  [Google Scholar]
Published: 2024-05-15

Abstract

The purpose of this publication divided into two parts is to interpret one of the most difficult provisions of the European Union treaties contained in the second subparagraph of Article 194(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union introducing national energy sovereignty. Reference to Article 192(2)(c) in the second subparagraph of Article 194(2) shall be understood as meaning that if, when adopting measures in the environmental field, the energy objectives (Article 194[1]) do not prevail over the environmental ones (Article 191) and at least one of the conditions required for national energy sovereignty is met (the second subparagraph of Article 194[2]), then Article 192(2)(c) shall be invoked as the Treaty basis (unanimity of the Council). Only in the event that none of the three alternative conditions required for energy sovereignty are met and the energy goals prevail over the environmental ones, the ordinary legislative procedure provided for in the first subparagraph of Article 194(2) shall be followed. The “communitarisation” of energy sovereignty merely involves taking the energy solidarity into consideration (Article 194[1]) and adopting measures appropriate to the economic situation on an ad hoc basis (Article 122[1]) whilst taking into account the Declaration on Article 194 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which by referring to two treaty provisions strengthens the energy independence of Member States during a crisis within the meaning of Article 347 to such extent that in practice it necessitates at least a revision of the ‘Fit for 55’ package proposed by the European Commission. In accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 194(2) in conjunction with Article 194(1) the energy transformation shall take place on a national and not the EU level whilst at the same time taking into consideration the energy solidarity principle enshrined in the EU treaties, which has been rejected by Germany before the Court of Justice of the European Union (Germany v. Poland, C-848/19 P) in order to increase EU’s reliance on the supplies of Russian gas. The ‘Fit for 55’ package completely ignores these provisions despite the fact that according to some of the legislative proposals contained therein such regulations are applicable. Not only the Polish literature lacks publications on the Treaty basis of conclusions included in the ‘Fit for 55’ package.

References

  1. Banaszek H., „Fit for 55 – rewizja unijnego systemu handlu uprawnieniami do emisji (EU ETS) w ramach Europejskiego Zielonego Ładu”, Europejski Przegląd Sądowy, 2022, 2. [Google Scholar]
  2. Boute A., „The principle of solidarity and the geopolitics of energy. Poland v. Commission (OPAL pipeline)”, Common Market Law Review, 2020, 3 (57). DOI: https://doi.org/10.54648/COLA2020697 [Google Scholar]
  3. Buschle D., Talus K., „One for All and All for One? The General Court ruling in the OPAL Case”, Oil, Gas & Energy Law Intelligence, 2019, 5. [Google Scholar]
  4. Capacity Mechanisms in the EU Energy Markets: Law, Policy, and Economics, red. L. Hancher i in., wyd. 2, Oxford 2022. [Google Scholar]
  5. EU-Kommentar, red. U. Becker, A. Hatje, J. Schoo, J. Schwarze, wyd. 4, Baden-Baden 2019. [Google Scholar]
  6. EUV/AEUV. Das Verfassungsrecht der Europäischen Union mit Europäischer Grundrechtecharta. Kommentar, red. Ch. Calliess, M. Ruffert, wyd. 6, München 2022. [Google Scholar]
  7. Frenz W., Kane A.M., „Die neue europäische Energiepolitik”, Natur und Recht, 2010, 7 (32). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10357-010-1903-z [Google Scholar]
  8. Gontarski W., „Nowy system warunkowości w prawie Unii Europejskiej”, Acta Universitatis Lodziensis. Folia Iuridica, 2021, 97. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18778/0208-6069.97.01 [Google Scholar]
  9. Gundel J., „Die energiepolitischen Kompetenzen der EU nach dem Vertrag von Lissabon: Bedeutung und Reichweite des neuen Art. 194 AEUV”, Europäisches Wirtschafts- und Steuerrecht, 2011, 1. [Google Scholar]
  10. Hancher L., „Euratom, state aid and environmental protection: Hinkley Point”, Common Market Law Review, 2021, 5(58), LEX. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54648/COLA2021090 [Google Scholar]
  11. Hey J., „Das Einnahmesystem der Europäischen Union: neue Steuern als neue Eigenmittel?”, Europäische Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsrecht, 2021, 7. [Google Scholar]
  12. Kahl W., „Die Kompetenzen der EU in der Energiepolitik nach Lissabon”, Europarecht, 2009, 5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5771/0531-2485-2009-5-601 [Google Scholar]
  13. Krämer A., EU Environmental Law, wyd. 7, London 2012. [Google Scholar]
  14. Kuhlmann J., „Kompetenzrechtliche Neuerungen im europäischen Energierecht nach dem Vertrag von Lissabon”, Working Paper No. 79, Europainstitut Wirtschaftsuniversität Wien, Juni 2008 (https://epub.wu.ac.at/1072/1/document.pdf). [Google Scholar]
  15. Möstl M., „Case C-115/08, Land Oberösterreich v. CEZ, Judgment of the Grand Chamber of 27 October 2008”, Common Market Law Review, 2010, 4(47). DOI: https://doi.org/10.54648/COLA2010053 [Google Scholar]
  16. Münchmeyer H., Kahles H., Pause F., „Erfordert das europäische Beihilferecht die Einführung von Ausschreibungsverfahren im EEG?”, Würzburger Berichte zum Umweltenergierecht, 2014, 5 (https://stiftung-umweltenergierecht.de/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/stiftungumweltenergierecht_WueBerichte_05_Beihilferecht-Erfordernis-Ausschreibungen.pdf). [Google Scholar]
  17. Olthoff M., Bonin A. von, „Das »Hinkley Point« -Urteil des EuGH: Berücksichtigung von Nachhaltigkeitsaspekten in der beihilferechtlichen Prüfung sowie allgemein im EU-Kartell- und Fusionskontrollrecht”, Europäische Zeitschrift für Wirtschafts-recht, 2021, 5. [Google Scholar]
  18. Pakiet klimatyczno-energetyczny. Analityczna ocena propozycji Komisji Europejskiej, red. K. Maliszewska, Warszawa 2008. [Google Scholar]
  19. Papenkort K., Wellershoff J.-K., „Der Energietitel im Vertrag von Lissabon – Alter Wein in neuen Schläuchen”, Recht der Energiewirtschaft, 2010, 18. [Google Scholar]
  20. Parchimowicz-Gontarska I., „Artykuł 1 ust. 2 Protokołu nr 30 w sprawie stosowania Karty praw podstawowych a ogólny system warunkowości służący ochronie budżetu Unii Europejskiej”, Europejski Przegląd Prawa i Stosunków Międzynarodowych, 2021, 4, LEX. [Google Scholar]
  21. Probleme und Perspektiven im Energieumweltrecht, red. W. Cremer, J-Ch. Pielow, Stuttgart 2009. [Google Scholar]
  22. Przybojewska I., „Poszukiwanie i wydobywanie gazu niekonwencjonalnego w Polsce”, Europejski Przegląd Sądowy, 2012, 7. [Google Scholar]
  23. Research Handbook on Climate Change Mitigation Law, red. L. Reins i in., wyd. 2, Cheltenham 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781839101595.00006 [Google Scholar]
  24. Romanowicz M., „Gotowi na transformację? Polityka klimatyczna Unii Europejskiej w świetle Pakietu Fit for 55”, Europejski Przegląd Sądowy, 2022, 2. [Google Scholar]
  25. Ruffert M., „Vorgaben des Europarechts und nationale Gestaltungsspielräume”, Energieversorgung und Umweltschutz, 2010, tom 102. [Google Scholar]
  26. Schlacke S., „Klimaschutzrecht im Mehrebenensystem”, Neue Zeitschrift für Verwaltungsrecht, 2022, 13. [Google Scholar]
  27. Schlacke S., Knodt M., „Das Governance-System für die Europäische Energieunion und für den Klimaschutz”, Zeitschrift für Umweltrecht, 2019, 7–8. [Google Scholar]
  28. Schlacke S., Wentzien H., Thierjung E.-M., Köster M., „Implementing the EU Climate Law via the ‘Fit for 55’ package”, Oxford Open Energy, 2022, 1 (https://academic. oup.com/journals). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ooenergy/oiab002 [Google Scholar]
  29. Traktat o funkcjonowaniu Unii Europejskiej. Komentarz, tom 2 (art. 90–222), red. A. Wróbel i in., Warszawa 2012, LEX. [Google Scholar]
  30. Traktat o funkcjonowaniu Unii Europejskiej. Komentarz, tom 3 (art. 223–358), red. A. Wróbel i in., Warszawa 2012, LEX. [Google Scholar]
  31. Zajdler R., „Zastrzeżenia do decyzji Komisji Europejskiej z 28 października 2016 roku w sprawie zmiany zwolnienia dla gazociągu OPAL (sprawa C[2016]6950 final)”, Polityka i Społeczeństwo, 2018, 1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15584/polispol.2018.1.4 [Google Scholar]
  32. Zmiany klimatu w świetle prawa Unii Europejskiej i prawa polskiego na tle porównawczym, red. C. Mik, A. Borek, Warszawa 2021 [Google Scholar]

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.