• Arbër Ndoi

Modern solutions to modern problems: Revising the Charter of Fundamental Rights

The definition and extent of freedom, as well as the determination and precedence of

rights are topics that have fueled and continue to fuel debates and whole systems of ideas

from Ancient Greece up until the 21st century; one can find a very deep-rooted beauty that

constitutes the subjective nature and uncertainty of any answer to these questions; one may

go as far as saying that God forbid the coming of the day when we know for sure what is right

or wrong and exactly how far is freedom allowed to go.


Therefore, a very simple but fundamental question is born: how does a committee go

about questions that not only do not have definite answers but also affect the happiness and

well-being of the world more than probably anything else? The first among equal

prerequisites is the non-breaking of the laws of logic and the non-falling prey to the low-hanging fruit of logical fallacies. Secondly, an open mind, or more exactly put, a mind free of

all kinds of prejudice is required when discussing such delicate matters drenched in nuance.

Furthermore, attention to detail and diligence is requested from the delegates: in this case, a

diligent pursuit of truth comes in handy much more than diligent and enthusiastic attempts

to spread inconsistent ideology.


Let’s briefly observe the problem of misinformation as an example. It is a serious

threat to democracy and –as experienced by all of us by now- to public health. A very

straightforward and simple solution would be banning accounts that spread mis- and

disinformation. But, why do some people fall for it and others do not? Why are government

officials and scientists perceived by some as doubtful, or even dishonest sources of

information, but individuals off the street receive the greatest deal of trust that millions of

people can ever give? Trying to find an answer to those questions reveals deep cavities in the

pillars of our societies, which go far beyond the disobedience of COVID-19 regulations or

nationalism.


The problems with the implementation of the Charter of the Fundamental Rights

show the difficulties met en route to fulfilling one of the most fundamental goals of the EU,

namely the bringing of Europe closer together. It is plausible to say that Europe can be

brought together with Member States having different, and even opposite values. While

values should indeed be taken into consideration, we shall not forget that they are forged and

passed from generation to generation in order to stimulate and support the well-being and

harmony within society and even humanity; therefore, it is necessary –no matter how painful-

to give them a different name when they do not serve that role anymore – concretely, when

values stubbornly refuse to take into consideration scientific evidence and accumulated

human experience, they should rather be called dogma. Ultimately, what will bring Europe

and the whole world together is the pursuit of happiness, harmony, and the solving of conflicts

and disagreements by constructive and productive debate.


This year’s Council of the European Union takes some heavy challenges upon its

shoulders. It should be of great interest to see how those challenges are approached and how

they get overcome if they get overcome in the first place.


9 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

The Council of the European Union moved on to their second topic on the agenda: the revision of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. The opening statements already promised a fruitful debate. The Europe

The Council of the European Union was the first committee to vote on their resolution draft of the first topic: the future of AI in the European Union. As predicted this topic only held smaller contra

Yesterday you were teaming up with Poland and Bulgaria, among others, with whom you were working on a Working Paper, but why do you have not submitted one yet? We think it is smarter that when we want