Towards a borderless Europe

Legal tools enabling a cross-border cooperation without geographical borders

Keywords: Borderless Europe, Geographical border regions, Cross-border cooperation, Legal tools, Derogation clause

Abstract

The contribution answers the research question of which legal tools can be used to further develop cross-border cooperation away from cross-border cooperation in geographically or functionally defined border areas towards ubiquitous cross-border cooperation, i.e. applicable everywhere on the territory of the Member States. The contribution, which is based on jurisprudential methodology, discusses the possibility of non-territorial experimental and opening clauses and, by further developing the rights developed from EU citizenship, considers how the border can ultimately be overcome as an element of the offense, but at the same time also as an exclusionary element for the application of EU law.

Cross-border mobility as a cause and justification for cross-border cooperation no longer only takes place in geographical or functional border regions. Today, for example, a citizen entitled to freedom of movement can not only be active across borders, for example on foot or by bicycle between Strasbourg (F) and Kehl (D), but also between Stuttgart and Strasbourg or between Kehl and Paris (by high speed trains such as TGV), but also between Paris and Berlin (by plane) or even digitally from any location within the EU to any other location, for example in a home office. As a result, geographical or functional border areas are becoming useless as a justification for cross-border cooperation and exemptions developed for this purpose. The contribution shows how such exceptional provisions (such as the opening or experimental clauses popular at the political level) can be developed in the legislative process (by means of a cross-border impact assessment) in such a way that they do not require geographical differentiation criteria. With a view to overcoming the limits of the current legal system, the article considers whether a further development of EU citizenship might not also enable the ubiquitous application of EU law without a cross-border element, i.e. without the (internal) border as a point of reference, to create a legal system that is cross border friendly. A conclusion and an outlook resolve this contribution.

References

Beck, W. (2004). Die kommunalrechtliche Experimentierklausel als Reforminstrument. LKV, 2004(11), 488–491.

Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Bau und Stadtentwicklung. (2011). Metropolitane Grenzregionen. Abschlussbericht des Modellvorhabens der Raumordnung (MORO) „Überregionale Partnerschaften in grenzüberschreitenden Verflechtungsräumen“. https://www.bbsr.bund.de/BBSR/DE/veroeffentlichungen/ministerien/bmvbs/sonderveroeffentlichungen/2011/DL_MetropolitaneGrenzregionen.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=2

Chilla, T. (2020). Innerstaatliche Vernetzung von Grenzregionen. Bundesministerium des Innern, für Bau und Heimat. https://www.bmi.bund.de/SharedDocs/downloads/DE/veroeffentlichungen/themen/heimat-integration/innerstaatliche-vernetzung-grenzregionen.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=4

Dietlein, J. & Pautsch, A. (2025). BeckOK Kommunalrecht Baden-Württemberg. C.H.BECK.

Dürig, G., Herzog, R., & Scholz, R. (2024). Grundgesetz-Kommentar. C.H.BECK.

Ehlers, D. (2014). Europäische Grundrechte und Grundfreiheiten. De Gruyter.

Epping, V., & Hillgruber, C. (2025). BeckOK Grundgesetz. C.H.BECK.

Frey, M., & Müller, R. A. (2023). Experimentation Clauses as an Element of Cross-Border Friendly-Legislation - The Franco-German Treaty of Aachen as a Model for Future Cross-Border Cooperation in Germany's Border Areas?. German Yearbook of International Law, 66, 379–396.

Frey, M., & Müller, R. A. (in appearance). Cross border friendly legislation as a legal toolbox to implement EU-Citizenship and vice versa. In B. Wassenberg (Ed.), Borders, Cross-Border Cooperation and European Integration. Peter Lang.

Frey, M., & Müller, R.A. (2024). Statik trifft Dynamik: Grenzüberschreitende Zusammenarbeit in der Corona-Krise. In J. Beck, J. Henkes, & P. Terry (Ed.), Moderne Verwaltung und gesellschaftliche Entwicklung (pp. 481–506). Nomos. http://dx.doi.org/10.5771/9783748919537-481

German Bundestag. (2018). Sachstand Experimentierklauseln in der grenzüberschreitenden kommunalen Zusammenarbeit. Az. WD 3 - 3000 - 259/18. https://www.bundestag.de/resource/blob/573014/a6bfa652bd1d6b81e8f431e7c358a753/WD-3-259-18-pdf.pdf

Grabitz, E., Hilf, M., & Nettesheim, M. (2025). Das Recht der Europäischen Union. C.H.BECK.

Grzeszick, B. (1997). Öffnungsklauseln für die Kommunalverwaltung. Die Verwaltung, 4, 545–572.

Jarass, H. D., Pieroth, B., & Kment, M. (2024). Kommentar Grundgesetz für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland. C.H.BECK.

Niedobitek, M. (2001). Das Recht der grenzüberschreitenden Verträge – Bund, Länder und Gemeinden als Träger. Mohr Siebeck. https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157965-3

Schweisfurth, T. (2006). Völkerrecht. Mohr Siebeck.

Thym, D. (2016). Legal Framework for EU Entry and Border Control Policies. In K. Hailbronner, & D. Thym (Ed.), EU Immigration and Asylum Law. Commentary (pp. 31–51). Nomos.

Wassenberg, B. (2015). Grenzüberschreitende Zusammenarbeit in Europa als Mittel der „kleinen“ deutschen Außenpolitik: das Beispiel des Oberrheins. Revue d’Allemagne et des pays de langue allemande, 47(1), 77–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.4000/allemagne.459

Weber, K. (2024). Weber Rechtswörterbuch. C.H.BECK.

Wiedemann, G. (2020). Handbuch des Kartellrechts. C.H.BECK.

Wolf, H. A., Brink, S., & v. Ungern-Sternberg, A. (2025). BeckOK Datenschutzrecht. C.H.BECK

Published
2025-12-09