Legal Protection Against the UN-Security Council Between European and International Law: A Kafkaesque Situation?

2007 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 279-293 ◽  
Author(s):  
Isabelle Ley

Constitutionalism beyond the state concerns itself with the relation among various legal levels and the position of the individual in a multilevel legal system. The question how human rights are protected against international organizations who increasingly take on executive powers cannot be thoroughly answered without confronting a fundamental debate in international law theory: the constitutionalism-fragmentation debate. The European Court of First Instance as well as the European Court of Justice (ECJ) had to deal recently and are still dealing with this complex in a number of cases.

Author(s):  
Sara De Vido

The purpose of this chapter is to analyse the case of Crimea from an international law perspective, by reflecting on the numerous pending cases in front of the European Court of Human Rights and on two cases decided by the European Court of Justice. The chapter will not take a position on the legitimacy or not of the facts that led to the current situation. It will rather focus on the current de facto situation, case law, and on two pivotal notions in international law: sovereignty and jurisdiction.


Author(s):  
Viktoriya Kuzma

This article presents the current issues in the law of international organizations and contemporary international law in general. It is pointed out that the division of international law into branches and institutions, in order to ensure the effective legal regulation of new spheres of relations, led to the emergence of autonomous legal regimes, even within one region, namely on the European continent. To date, these include European Union law and Council of Europe law. It is emphasized the features of the established legal relations between the Council of Europe and the European Union at the present stage. It is determined that, along with close cooperation between regional organizations, there is a phenomenon of fragmentation, which is accompanied by the creation of two legal regimes within the same regional subsystem, proliferation of the international legal norms, institutions, spheres and conflicts of jurisdiction between the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union. It is revealed that some aspects of fragmentation can be observed from the moment of establishing relations between the Council of Europe and the European Union, up to the modern dynamics of the functioning of the system of law of international organizations, the law of international treaties, law of human rights. Areas and types of fragmentation in relations between international intergovernmental organizations of the European continent are distinguished. One way to overcome the consequences of fragmentation in the field of human rights is highlighted, namely through the accession of the European Union to the Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950. Considerable attention has also been paid to defragmentation, which is partly reflected in the participation of the European Union in the Council of Europe’s conventions by the applying «disconnection clause». It is determined that the legal relations established between an international intergovernmental organization of the traditional type and the integration association sui generis, the CoE and the EU, but with the presence of phenomenon of fragmentation in a close strategic partnership, do not diminish their joint contribution into the development of the law of international organizations and contemporary international law in general. Key words: defragmentation; European Union; European Court of Human Rights; Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950; conflict of jurisdictions; «disconnection clause»; Council of Europe; Court of Justice of the European Union; fragmentation; sui generis.


2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 248 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dimitris Liakopoulos

Abstract: The present work is concentrated on the analysis of the jurisprudence between the European Court of Human Rights and the European Court of Justice in the sector of private international law. In particular, it deals with the differences, similarities, influences, impact, etc. in the sector of family law, insolvency and succession according the Regulations and the private international law and last but not least the recognition of sentences by the European Member States.Keywords: European Court of Human Rights, International private law, European Court of Justice, European family law, insolvency, succession.Resumen: El presente trabajo se concentra en el análisis de la jurisprudencia entre el Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos y el Tribunal de Justicia Europeo en el sector del derecho internacional privado. En particular, aborda las diferencias, similitudes, influencias, impacto, etc., en el sector del derecho de familia, la insolvencia y la sucesión de acuerdo con el Reglamento y el Derecho internacional privado y, por último, el reconocimiento de condenas por parte de los Estados miembros europeos.Palabras clave: Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos, Derecho Internacional Privado, Tribunal Europeo de Justicia, Derecho de Familia Europeo, insolvencia, sucesión.


2009 ◽  
Vol 78 (3) ◽  
pp. 343-359 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nikolaos Lavranos

AbstractWith its Kadi-judgment, the European Court of Justice firmly rejected the Kadi/Yusuf-judgments of the Court of First Instance. The Court of Justice made unambiguously clear that Community law, in particular its basic, core fundamental rights values prevail over any international law obligations of the EC and its Member States, including UN Security Council Resolutions and the UN Charter. As a consequence thereof, individuals targeted by UN sanctions must have access to full judicial review in order to be able to ensure the effective protection of their fundamental rights, including procedural rights as guaranteed by the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). As a result, the Court of Justice proved that the Community is indeed based on the rule of law and that the fight against terrorism – how important it may be – cannot be used as a justification for completely abrogating European constitutional law values as guaranteed within the Community and its Member States.


2009 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 237-264 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samantha Besson

Relationships between international, EU, domestic law – Different legal orders – Different jurisdictions – Validity, rank, effects of international law in EU legal order – Kadi – Court of First Instance in Kadi – Advocate-General in Kadi – European Court of Justice in Kadi – Pluralism concept of AG Maduro – European legal pluralism reconsidered


2021 ◽  
pp. 421-505
Author(s):  
Jan Wouters ◽  
Frank Hoffmeister ◽  
Geert De Baere ◽  
Thomas Ramopoulos

This chapter deals with the status of international law in the EU legal order under the Lisbon Treaty. It presents in great detail the most important cases of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on the incorporation of international agreements and their rank in the domestic legal order. The origins and current practice of the doctrine of direct effect for specific provisions in an international agreement are explained. Moreover, the chapter contains an assessment of the famous ECJ Kadi-jurisprudence on the significance of human rights in the implementation of UN Security Council Resolutions on counter-terrorism. Finally, it also shows with concrete examples how the Court of Justice developed the status of customary international law in the EU.


Climate Law ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 119-156
Author(s):  
Baine P. Kerr

Abstract Scholarship and practice before the European Court of Justice indicate that international organizations can unilaterally bind themselves under international law. This article evaluates whether the International Maritime Organization did so with its 2018 ‘Strategy’ to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from shipping. After first identifying the source of the imo’s mandate to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from shipping and its treaty obligations to do so, it finds that the imo has the institutional competence to unilaterally bind itself with respect to its function and purpose of regulating vessel-source pollution. It further finds that the imo imposed on itself an erga omnes obligation to mitigate climate change in order to meet the Paris Agreement’s global warming limitation goals. The article reflects on the implications of these findings for climate law and international law generally.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document