Re-calibrating Proportionality in EU Sanctioning Policy

I am delighted to share that my doctoral dissertation, "Fragmentation of EU legal system's Rule of Law and proportionality of cartel fines" (University of Helsinki, 2024) and my related research before it, stand as a definitive blueprint for a new, interdisciplinary paradigm in European administrative and criminal law. I will discuss my work on quasi-criminal sanctioning and value-coherence in this blog.

 
In this first post, I introduce the basic structure of my research.

My research relies on legal theory and philosophy, case law, and methodological understanding. I have introduced a unique three-dimensional framework that explicitly synthesizes:

1️⃣ Interpretative Legal Philosophy: anchoring legal order in core values and demands of procedural fairness.
2️⃣ Nussbaum's Capability Approach: re-evaluating consumer welfare in terms of fundamental rights and equal possibilities in dignified life, which means going beyond narrow economic metrics.
3️⃣ Kantian views + Von Hirsch's Retributivist Punishment Theory: establishing a strict limiting metric for state coercion and concentrating in human dignity as the core value of the legal system.
4️⃣ The idea of value-coherence *inner coherence*: upholding the identity of the legal system by subscribing to values enshrined in Article 2 TEU.
 

A core methodological contribution of my work alongside the introduction of logical value-coherence — is detailed extensively in Chapter 18.2. It is the model for "Ordinal and cardinal proportionality" as a de lege ferenda tool to recalibrate how administrative and quasi-criminal sanctions are calculated within the EU. I argue that system ethics must balance efficiency with substantive fairness to prevent the structural fragmentation of the Rule of Law. This view is compatible with a more nuanced value-anchored and effects-sensitive methodology combining proportionality and precaution.

As discussions regarding the intersection of administrative sanctions, EU corporate policy, and the Rule of Law continue to expand across Europe it is vital to maintain a transparent chronology of how these specific theoretical frameworks were discussed and built.

In my view, trained legal science progresses when we build openly upon existing, timestamped public records. My monograph remains fully accessible as a baseline for any contemporary framework analyzing ordinal proportionality, corporate moral agency, and the constitutional limits of general deterrence in the context of competition law.

You can review the full architecture of the approach in the original text, available via the University of Helsinki's digital repository. My later research outputs are published openly in SSRN. Enjoy and see you soon in terms of another blog post!