From the closure of London's nightclub Fabric to Duterte's drug war, law enforcement has become the policy choice par excellence for drug control by stakeholders around the globe, creating a rift between theory and practice, the former vehemently dismissing most of its alleged benefits. This paper provides a fresh look on the said regime, through examining its implications in the key areas of illicit drug markets, public health and broader society. Instead of adopting a critical stance from the start, as much of the literature does, the issue is evaluated from the perspective of a focus on the logic and rationality of drug law enforcement approaches, in order to showcase from within how problematic the latter are. The paper concludes by suggesting at least a re-conceptualisation of the concept, to give way to more sophisticated policies for finally tackling the issue of illegal drugs effectively.

Konstantinos Alexandris Polomarkakis * §1. Introduction Antitheses form the backbone of the European project. Intergovernmentalism versus federalism, enlargement versus containment-these are only some of the contradictory pairs that have informed the development of the European Union (EU). One of them, that between the economic and social elements of the Union might not have featured prominently in academic literature since the start of the European project but has certainly gained increasing momentum over time. Is the EU primarily an economic union, or could it also be a social one? What is the significance of the social market economy, the concept introduced by the Treaty of Lisbon? More specifically, how far should fundamental freedoms yield when confronted by social rights? These questions have occupied an important place in the Court of Justice's (CJEU) jurisprudence, yet it was not until the so-called Laval Quartet series of cases that the CJEU's approach provoked an overwhelmingly vivid debate. Not much has changed since then, at least not fundamentally, despite voices putting forward a reformulation of the balancing exercise. Subsequent case law has not managed to turn the tide, thereby showing that the CJEU was slow to pick up the developments that took place at the institutional level post-Lisbon, with the introduction of the social market economy paradigm, and the empowerment of the Charter, but also to respond to the critique of neoliberal deregulation that was promoted through the various bailout packages in crisis-hit Eurozone countries. This all-important issue was revisited by the CJEU in AGET Iraklis. The case concerned the compatibility of a Greek pre-authorization regime based-amongst other things-on

This article sets out to review the policies introduced by the European Pillar of Social Rights and its accompanying initiatives in light of their contribution to European Union (EU) social sustainability, particularly in comparison with their predecessors. The balance between economic and social policies at EU level has long been tipped in favour of the economic, leaving an atrophic social side a servant of market-based objectives. Social sustainability appeared absent from the European vocabulary, at least in substantive terms, something exacerbated by the effects of the 2008 crisis. The criticisms that ensued led to a resurgence of interest in establishing a socially sustainable Union, crystallized in the Pillar and its accompanying initiatives. Despite their potential, further commitment by the Member States as well as more concrete and legally binding proposals are necessary, for without them this social resurgence might once again surrender to economic hegemony.

The shortcomings in the handling of COVID-19 highlighted the salience of health and safety at work and fuelled discussions surrounding the desirability of a European Health Union. This article conceptualises occupational health and safety at the European Union (EU) level as a key driver for the creation of a European Health Union. Through recourse to the area’s roots and its relevance to the tackling of the COVID-19 pandemic, the benefits of putting occupational health and safety in the driving seat are set out. The implications of maintaining a healthy workforce are acute, from both a social and a public health perspective, especially in the time of a pandemic. Relying on a reflective approach that goes beyond the status quo, this article offers pragmatic yet imaginative proposals for strengthening the occupational health and safety acquis. The proposals act as the blueprint for health and safety in the workplace to lay the foundation for a European Health Union and advance the social dimension of the EU.

This article problematises the gendered dimension of litigation in EU equality case‐law. Relying on feminist readings of Bourdieu's concept of capital, it introduces the notion of gendered capital as an explanatory framework to illustrate and evaluate the distinct experiences between women and men litigants in the legal field. The article puts this framework to the test by undertaking a macro‐level mixed‐methods study of 352 preliminary references on EU non‐discrimination law, drawing on the Equality Law in Europe: A New Generation database. The findings confirm the plausibility of this framework, with gendered capital varying depending on the period when and the Member State where the case was lodged, as well as on the ground of discrimination raised. As a result, by looking at the role of litigants’ gender in EU equality case‐law, this article joins the emerging field of mixed‐methods studies offering novel insights into the effectiveness of judicial decision‐making.