On 4 December 2025, the Dublin European Law Institute (DELI) at Dublin City University (DCU) hosted the event titled “The EU Social Contract in Uncertain Times: Protecting the Rule of Law and Democracy Post-Pandemic”. The event was moderated by Dr Beatrice Monciunskaite, Assistant Professor of Law at DCU, who leads DCU’s involvement in the EXPRESS2 project, a research initiative dedicated to constructing a more inclusive, democratic, and sustainable social contract in Europe.

Dr Monciunskaite opened the event and introduced the keynote speaker, Justice Gerard Hogan of the Supreme Court of Ireland. Justice Hogan addressed the rule of law in the European Union in a period of significant uncertainty and change. He stressed that the rule of law is critically important for the protection of democracy, while also recognising that the EU may need to re-evaluate some of its core legislative provisions to determine whether they remain effective and fit for purpose in the modern context.

Justice Hogan drew on a range of examples from the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union to illustrate the tension between preserving national legal traditions and ensuring uniform standards of judicial independence across the EU. In particular, he referred to the Association of Portuguese Judges case, which established key standards on judicial independence. He also highlighted the need to reassess certain EU legislative mechanisms in light of ongoing rule-of-law challenges in Poland.

This was followed by Professor Antoni Abat i Ninet of the Autonomous University of Barcelona. Professor Abat i Ninet outlined the aims and structure of the EXPRESS2 project, emphasising its strong focus on citizen engagement. He stressed that discussions on the social contract should take place with citizens themselves rather than being confined to professional analysts, stating that “we are not the ones to be called to talk about a social contract”. At the same time, he made clear that the founding values of the European Union and the Charter of Fundamental Rights are not open to debate. According to Professor Abat i Ninet, this approach is intended to provoke meaningful discussion among citizens and inhabitants, enabling the project to summarise public participation and deliberation and ultimately propose policy recommendations to EU institutions.

Professor Sacha Garben, Professor of EU Law at the College of Europe, then examined the relationship between the EU and the social contract, arguing that the Union has been in a near-constant state of crisis for approximately two decades. She contrasted the “Union method”, characterised by pragmatism and the search for common positions on shared problems, with the “Community method”, which places greater emphasis on legal integration and individual rights. She explained that the EU has alternated between these approaches in response to successive crises, relying on the Union method during the financial and migration crises and shifting towards the Community method during the COVID-19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine. This oscillation, she argued, has contributed to what she described as “constitutional fury”. Professor Garben concluded that the deeper issue is not merely how the EU social contract functions in times of crisis, but that the unsettled nature of the EU social contract itself constitutes its most profound crisis.

To conclude the panel, Dr Niels Kirst, Assistant Professor of EU Law at the DCU School of Law and Government, focused on the increasing polarisation surrounding the social contract within EU Member States, particularly Germany and France. He highlighted pension reform as a core element of the traditional social contract in both countries and noted the intense political and social instability generated by these debates. Dr Kirst emphasised that such developments demonstrate how contested and fragile traditional understandings of the social contract have become. He warned that the weakening of political stability in the EU’s two largest Member States risks undermining the Union’s ability to address broader challenges, including providing adequate support to Ukraine following Russia’s invasion.

Dr Kirst further cautioned against framing social security and geopolitical security as mutually exclusive objectives, arguing that there is an emerging consensus that both must be pursued simultaneously. He concluded by noting the generational dimension of the debate, observing that Generation Z, Millennials, Generation X, and older generations all understand the social contract differently. He stressed that a key challenge for the future will be finding a social contract capable of securing broad agreement across generations.

Overall, the event offered a comprehensive and critical examination of the EU social contract in a period of ongoing crisis and transformation. Through the contributions of Justice Hogan and the panel speakers, the discussion explored the relationship between the rule of law and the social contract, the importance of citizen participation, the impact of repeated crises on social cohesion, and the growing risks of political and social polarisation within the European Union.