The EU’s institutional human rights architecture

Author(s):  
Monika Mayrhofer

The EU is neither a state nor a ‘normal’ international organisation, but has a unique institutional structure that is sometimes also referred to as a ‘sui generis’ institutional framework. The institutions of the EU have a pivotal role concerning EU human rights policies. This chapter will provide an analysis of how human rights competences are distributed among EU institutions. It will discuss the institutional architecture of human rights in the EU by analysing the European Council, the Council of the European Union and its human rights-related Working Parties, the European Parliament, the European Commission, the Court of Justice of the European Union, the European External Action Service and the Special Representative on Human Rights, the Fundamental Rights Agency, and the European Ombudsman. The analysis will be followed by a summary of opportunities and challenges, a presentation of areas for improvements and recommendations, and a brief conclusion.

2021 ◽  
pp. 203228442199593
Author(s):  
Wolfgang Schomburg ◽  
Anna Oehmichen ◽  
Katrin Kayß

As human rights have increasingly gained importance at the European Union level, this article examines the remaining scope of human rights protection under the EU–UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement. While some international human rights instruments remain applicable, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union did not become part of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA). The consequences, especially the inapplicability of the internationalised ne bis in idem principle, are analysed. Furthermore, the conditionality of the TCA in general as well as the specific conditionality for judicial cooperation in criminal matters are discussed. In this context, the risk that cooperation may cease at any moment if any Member State or the UK leave the European Convention of Human Rights is highlighted. Lastly, the authors raise the problem of the lack of judicial review, as the Court of Justice of the European Union is no longer competent.


Author(s):  
Petr YAKOVLEV

The decision on Britain’s secession from the European Union, taken by the British Parliament and agreed by London and Brussels, divided the Union history into “before” and “after”. Not only will the remaining member states have to “digest” the political, commercial, economic and mental consequences of parting with one of the largest partners. They will also have to create a substantially new algorithm for the functioning of United Europe. On this path, the EU is confronted with many geopolitical and geo-economic challenges, which should be answered by the new leaders of the European Commission, European Council, and European Parliament.


Author(s):  
Neil Parpworth

The aims of this chapter are threefold. It first briefly considers the events that have led to the creation of the European Community (EC) and the European Union (EU). Secondly, it introduces the reader to the principal institutions of the Union: the European Council; the Council of Ministers; the European Commission; the European Parliament; and the Court of Justice of the EU and General Court. The nature and functions of each of these bodies is considered. Thirdly, the chapter indicates, where appropriate, the nature of the institutional reforms which have occurred following the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty by the member states.


Author(s):  
Neil Parpworth

This chapter has three aims. It first briefly considers the origins of the what is now the European Union (EU). Secondly, it discusses the institutions of the Union, the European Council, the Council of Ministers, the European Commission, the European Parliament, and the Court of Justice of the EU and General Court. The nature and functions of these bodies is considered. Thirdly, the chapter indicates the nature of institutional reforms which have occurred following the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty.


2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 85-92
Author(s):  
Gábor Kemény ◽  
Michal Vít

The aim of the paper is to introduce the legal misfits between the standards of human rights as stated by the European Union and the Council of Europe and practical day to day experience related to EU member states. For this purpose, the article focuses on political and legal assessment of the so-called pushbacks at the Greek-Turkish external border and introduces the influencing factors, such as the various interpretation of the legislation, differences in the organisational structure and values. Authors concluded that these factors are endangering the fulfilment of the fundamental rights and the efficiency of the border protection thus the security of the EU and its member states.


IG ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 85-100
Author(s):  
Nicolai von Ondarza

The Brexit negotiations constituted unchartered political and institutional territory for the European Union (EU). This analysis shows how a new institutional approach enabled the EU-27 to present an unusually united front. The “Barnier method” is characterised by five elements: a strong political mandate from the European Council, a single EU negotiator based in the European Commission in the person of Michel Barnier, very close coordination with the Member States and the European Parliament, and a high degree of transparency. Lessons can also be drawn from this for the next phase of the Brexit negotiations and the EU’s relations with other third countries.


With the Treaty of Lisbon, the profile of human rights issues has greatly risen in relation to European Union (EU) policies, whether internal or external. The EU has made the commitment to ensure that all its actions are compliant with human rights, and to seek to promote them. Yet, the Union’s commitment has come under close scrutiny, not only for its groundbreaking character, but also because recent events have put it to the test. The EU has been faced with a number of crises such as the financial-economic crisis and the imposition of austerity measures, the migration crisis, and terrorist attacks. At the same time, the EU has made significant steps to implement its human rights commitment, such as through the binding character of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, the adoption of the Strategic Framework and Action Plan on human rights and democracy, and the adoption of human rights country strategies for a large number of third countries. This volume takes stock of these developments. It comprehensively discusses the conceptualisation and operationalisation of the EU’s commitment to human rights throughout its actions, legislative activities, policies, and relationships, and critically assesses them.


Author(s):  
Jan Wouters ◽  
Anna-Luise Chané ◽  
Manfred Nowak

Over the past decades, the European Union (EU or Union) has undergone a remarkable transformation—from a primarily economic integration project whose founding treaties were completely silent on human rights, to a political union of values that puts human rights front and centre. The Treaty of Lisbon, which entered into force one decade ago, on 1 December 2009, is widely regarded as the high point of the Union’s journey in that direction. Not only did the Treaty recognise human rights as one of the EU’s founding values, as the guiding principles and objectives of all EU external action, it also gave the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights the same legal value as the Treaties and obliged the Union to accede to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)....


IG ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 44 (4) ◽  
pp. 318-327
Author(s):  
Martin Selmayr

The executive of the European Union (EU) is currently led by two Presidents: the President of the European Commission and the President of the European Council. This double Presidency is the result of a compromise between the supranational and the intergovernmental schools of thoughts at the European Convention 2002/2003. However, in practice, the interplay of the two Presidents and their competencies, which are not always clearly separated by the provisions of the Treaty of Lisbon, occasionally leads to inefficiencies or even conflict in the external representation of the EU. This is why former Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker proposed, on 13 September 2017, to merge the functions of the two Presidents by always electing the President of the Commission as President of the European Council. The article explains the rationale of the Juncker proposal, which has the potential to make the EU easier to understand for its citizens and more efficient geopolitically, while overcoming the artificial distinction between national and European interests in the leadership of the Union. The current debate about the future of the EU and its more effective positioning in global affairs appears to be a good moment to look again at the Juncker proposal, which could be implemented without the need to change the Treaties.


2011 ◽  
Vol 105 (4) ◽  
pp. 649-693 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gráinne de Búrca

For many, the enactment of the European Union’s Treaty of Lisbon, with its range of significant human rights provisions, marks the EU’s coming of age as a human rights actor. The Lisbon Treaty inaugurated the legally binding character of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (EU Charter), enshrined a commitment to accede to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), and, in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), identified human rights as a foundational value. These changes have already drawn comment as developments that “will change the face of the Union fundamentally,” that take the protection of rights in the EU “to a new level,” and that indicate that “the arguments for improving the status of human rights in EU law… have finally been heard. There is general agreement, in other words, that the EU has reached the high point of its engagement with human rights.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document