So close and yet so far: the paradoxes of mutual recognition

Abstract

In these closing remarks I want to highlight three paradoxes of mutual recognition that emerge from this excellent set of contributions on mutual recognition. The first relates to the underlying theme of this volume: although mutual recognition is prima facie a conflicts rule, such a rule entails, in fact, a process of social decision-making that is best described as a form of governance. The second paradox is that, albeit presented as an instrument to promote integration while preserving diversity and the states' regulatory autonomy, mutual recognition has an important impact on states' sovereignty. Finally, the last paradox emerging from the different contributions arises from the relationship established between mutual recognition and mutual trust. Such a relationship highlights the extent to which the recognition of diversity entailed in mutual recognition actually depends on a certain degree of common identity, as only the latter can provide the basis for the mutual trust necessary to implement mutual recognition. None of these paradoxes necessarily challenges mutual recognition and its potential for application in different policy areas of integration. They allow us, however, to identify some usually hidden assumptions and processes of decision-making inherent in mutual recognition. This will, in turn, allow us to make a better normative judgement of its potential benefits and shortcomings in different policy areas.