Individual countries within the EU have their own regulators who make their own enforcement decisions.
The EU isn't a super-state and EU law isn't applied by some overarching entity. On a technical level, each country ratifies and applies their own laws in their own ways.
Given this, other countries could act on this too, but it's the French regulator who has chosen to do so.
> The EU isn't a super-state and EU law isn't applied by some overarching entity
Yes-and-no: the EU Commission serves as the "executive branch" (Americanisms...) of the EU, and while the EU isn't a true federal superstate union yet, but there's enough similarities that the EU Commission probably does 80% of the work it would be doing if the EU were.
While the majority of EU directives are enforced by member states, the EU can enforce itself via several routes (e.g. there is now an EU public prosecution, and the EU parliament can vote to apply sanctions on its own members for non-compliance (e.g. Hungary).
> and EU law isn't applied by some overarching entity.
It is. EU law as a whole is ultimately applied by an entity, the Court of Justice of the European Union. It is overarching, over national courts, over national governments, and over EU bodies.
Then within EU law, you have several branches and distribution of who has authority etc. Primary EU law is the foundational basis (some would say a "constitution" effectively even though the word has been a political minefield) and does provide some "overarching entity" in some areas.
Then within Secondaru EU law, you have regulations, orders, directives, etc. Many regulations and orders have an EU overarching entity, and in many cases the European Commission has a central role.
> On a technical level, each country ratifies and applies their own laws in their own ways.
That is a gross mischaracterisation and overgeneralization of EU Directives.
EU Directives as a general rule* don't have "direct effect" in a Member State. They set a goal agreed at the EU level, and the Member State are bound to implement the means in their national laws to reach the goal. That usually (but not always) means at a national level the adoption of a legal act by national Parliament.
*as a general rule because as always there are exceptions.
They should, but it's up to each country to enforce EU regulation.
The other countries radio regulation agencies have either not made the same measures, not measured the iPhone emissions at all, or have not yet decided what they were going to do.
- EU ratification
- national implementation
- national enforcement
The ratification is typically accompanied by an implementation deadline (usually in years) so there'll be cases of some countries following EU regs earlier than others.
Finally there's enforcement which is entirely in the hands of nation states pretty much - just because something is written in statute doesn't necessarily always translate to actual action.
xnorswap|2 years ago
The EU isn't a super-state and EU law isn't applied by some overarching entity. On a technical level, each country ratifies and applies their own laws in their own ways.
Given this, other countries could act on this too, but it's the French regulator who has chosen to do so.
DaiPlusPlus|2 years ago
Yes-and-no: the EU Commission serves as the "executive branch" (Americanisms...) of the EU, and while the EU isn't a true federal superstate union yet, but there's enough similarities that the EU Commission probably does 80% of the work it would be doing if the EU were.
While the majority of EU directives are enforced by member states, the EU can enforce itself via several routes (e.g. there is now an EU public prosecution, and the EU parliament can vote to apply sanctions on its own members for non-compliance (e.g. Hungary).
hugoroy|2 years ago
True whatever that means :)
> and EU law isn't applied by some overarching entity.
It is. EU law as a whole is ultimately applied by an entity, the Court of Justice of the European Union. It is overarching, over national courts, over national governments, and over EU bodies.
Then within EU law, you have several branches and distribution of who has authority etc. Primary EU law is the foundational basis (some would say a "constitution" effectively even though the word has been a political minefield) and does provide some "overarching entity" in some areas.
Then within Secondaru EU law, you have regulations, orders, directives, etc. Many regulations and orders have an EU overarching entity, and in many cases the European Commission has a central role.
> On a technical level, each country ratifies and applies their own laws in their own ways.
That is a gross mischaracterisation and overgeneralization of EU Directives.
EU Directives as a general rule* don't have "direct effect" in a Member State. They set a goal agreed at the EU level, and the Member State are bound to implement the means in their national laws to reach the goal. That usually (but not always) means at a national level the adoption of a legal act by national Parliament.
*as a general rule because as always there are exceptions.
seszett|2 years ago
The other countries radio regulation agencies have either not made the same measures, not measured the iPhone emissions at all, or have not yet decided what they were going to do.
lucideer|2 years ago
- EU ratification - national implementation - national enforcement
The ratification is typically accompanied by an implementation deadline (usually in years) so there'll be cases of some countries following EU regs earlier than others.
Finally there's enforcement which is entirely in the hands of nation states pretty much - just because something is written in statute doesn't necessarily always translate to actual action.
plandis|2 years ago
See: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37492752#37495753