In response to the dire need to further develop and theorise European Constitutional law in the face of increasing internal as well as external threats, the past two iterations of the Masterclass have taken up a EU law focus. The idea of the past year’s, 12th iteration of the Masterclass with Professors Floris and Bruno de Witte intended to juxtapose two generations of EU Law Scholars, with decidedly different ideas of how to conduct EU law scholarship, and to have them discuss on how to methodologically grasp the rapidly changing contours of the EU and its law.
This year’s 13th edition of the Max Planck Master Class continued in the exploration of that question by delving into the potential of Hegelian thought for EU law scholarship. The idea was to explore how Hegel’s political and legal philosophy can help EU law scholars normatively reconstruct EU law and rethink central legal questions of European integration, freedom, solidarity, and democratic legitimacy in the European Union.
The masterclass was taught by Dr. Ana Bobić, Senior Researcher at the Hertie School in Berlin, principal investigator of the DFG-funded project ‘Judicial conflict and the reconfiguration of control in the EU constitutional order’, and former référendaire at the European Court of Justice.
The first day of the Master Class was dedicated to the question of what it would mean to adopt a Hegelian methodology in the context of EU law. Ana Bobic in particular insisted on the utility of Hegels conceptually-led historical institutionalism with its insistence that legal concepts must be understood within their historical development. This provided an opportunity to revisit foundational questions about public authority, constitutional identity, and how we read EU law - and CJEU judgments in particular.
Each of the following days examined a central concept of Hegelian thought and its implications for European integration:
On the second day, the focus was on the concept of mutual recognition as a lens through which to view questions of belonging in the European Union. A recurring theme of the session was the coherence between the EU's demands of its Member States and its own practices. The recent Commission v Malta case served as a particularly illuminating example of this tension. Participants explored how migration, citizenship and integration policies shape belonging within the Union and how Hegel's concept of recognition could inform these debates.
On the third day, the focus shifted to the relationship between market integration and the social dimension of European integration, as seen through the Hegelian notion of civil society and its distinction from the state. Drawing on these conceptual categories, Dr Bobić suggested that the emphasis on market-making in European integration degraded the notion of the state to a mere market-correcting mechanism, something that Hegel warned would reduce the capacity of the state to act as an ethical whole within which all its citizens can find their final purpose.
On the fourth and final day, participants explored Hegel’s understanding of bureaucracy and Marx’s critique of it as a framework for critically examining contemporary European administration. The discussion encouraged reflection on the role of law and institutional independence in balancing universal principles with particular interests within the EU. Drawing on the European Central Bank as a case study, Dr Bobić demonstrated how a critical lens can reveal both the strengths and the limitations of existing institutional structures.
The programme included a Young Scholars' Workshop, in which three participants presented their research. These were Katarzyna Szczepańska (Assistant Professor at the University of Poznań, Poland), Klaas Müller (PhD candidate at Humboldt University) and Etienne Augustin (PhD candidate at Paris II Panthéon-Assas University).
