Fundamental Rights and the Integrity of Union Law

Author(s):  
Julio Baquero Cruz

This chapter analyses another area of Union law that is highly controversial and relevant in structural terms—the protection of fundamental rights. It discusses the scope and standard of the protection offered at Union level, the consequences for national law, and the implications of the future accession of the Union to the European Convention on Human Rights. These issues are of fundamental importance for the integrity of Union law and of wider significance for the political understanding of the Union.

2021 ◽  
pp. 453-479
Author(s):  
Margot Horspool ◽  
Matthew Humphreys ◽  
Michael Wells-Greco

This chapter discusses Union citizenship and free movement of persons rights in the EU for Union citizens and their spouses, partners, children and dependants. It examines the Charter of Fundamental Rights, the European Convention on Human Rights, the Free Movement or Citizenship Directive and the principle of equal treatment. The chapter also considers the facets of Union citizenship and the political dimension of Union citizenship with reference to the European Citizens’ Initiative. It concludes with a discussion on some of the challenges of Union citizenship.


2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 53-85 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kimberley Brayson

This article highlights transnational consequences for access to justice of political posturing by national governments in respect of the European Convention on Human Rights (echr). It charts the uk context preceding the adoption of Protocol 15, which inserts the concepts of subsidiarity and the margin of appreciation into the echr preamble. The article argues that whilst this was an attempt to curb the European Court of Human Rights’ (ECtHR) powers, this proved limited in effect, as the court is too well established as a Supreme Court for Europe in the cosmopolitan legal order of the echr. The political-legal interplay which is the genesis of the echr system means that political manoeuvring from national governments is inevitable, but not fatal to its existence. However, the legitimacy of the ECtHR is secured only through political concessions, which act to expel surplus subjects from echr protection. The article concludes that the legitimacy of the ECtHR is therefore secured at the cost of individuals whose rights are worth less than the future of the court.


2014 ◽  
pp. 33-48
Author(s):  
Przemysław Florjanowicz-Błachut

The core function of the judiciary is the administration of justice through delivering judgments and other decisions. The crucial role for its acceptance and legitimization by not only lawyers, but also individulas (parties) and the hole society plays judicial reasoning. It should reflect on judge’s independence within the exercise of his office and show also judicial self-restraint or activism. The axiology and the standards of proper judicial reasoning are anchored both in constitutional and supranational law and case-law. Polish Constitutional Tribunal derives a duty to give reasoning from the right to a fair trial – right to be heard and bring own submissions before the court (Article 45 § 1 of the Constitution), the right to appeal against judgments and decisions made at first stage (Article 78), the rule of two stages of the court proceedings (Article 176) and rule of law clause (Article 2), that comprises inter alia right to due process of law and the rule of legitimate expactation / the protection of trust (Vertrauensschutz). European Court of Human Rights derives this duty to give reasons from the guarantees of the right to a fair trial enshrined in Article 6 § 1 of European Convention of Human Rights. In its case-law the ECtHR, taking into account the margin of appreciation concept, formulated a number of positive and negative requirements, that should be met in case of proper reasoning. The obligation for courts to give sufficient reasons for their decisions is also anchored in European Union law. European Court of Justice derives this duty from the right to fair trial enshrined in Articles 6 and 13 of the ECHR and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Standards of the courts reasoning developed by Polish constitutional court an the European courts (ECJ and ECtHR) are in fact convergent and coherent. National judges should take them into consideration in every case, to legitimize its outcome and enhance justice delivery.


Author(s):  
Henning Grosse Ruse-Khan

This chapter examines the human rights system and the way it deals with human creations and innovations that are the traditional core subject matter of intellectual property (IP) rights. It begins by reviewing the scope for protection under Article 27 (2) Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and Article 15 (1) (c) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). The chapter moves on to the protection of property in human rights law, especially on the regional, European level. It examines how IP can be protected as property under the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) and under the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (EU Charter). Finally, the chapter looks at some of the overlaps with international IP rules and the conflict norms in the human rights system to address such overlaps.


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.


2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 239-273 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tobias Lock

EU Accession to the European Convention on Human Rights – Hurdles erected by Opinion 2/13 of 18 December 2014 – Analysis of soundness of the ECJ’s reasoning – Discussion of necessary changes to the Draft Accession Agreement – Criticism that not all obstacles can be removed by amending the Draft Agreement – Treaty change may be necessary – Question whether accession is worth it from a human rights perspective under these conditions


2015 ◽  
Vol 17 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 273-286
Author(s):  
Matthew Seet

There is a growing movement (globally and in Europe) addressing statelessness, and the July 2014 decision of Kim v Russia illustrates the role of the Strasbourg Court as a guardian of one of the most important fundamental rights of the ‘legally invisible’ in Europe. The court held that Russia’s two-year detention of a stateless person with a view to expulsion violated his right to liberty and security under Article 5(1) of the European Convention of Human Rights. This comment argues that Kim v Russia represents an important step forward by the Strasbourg Court in safeguarding the stateless person’s right to liberty and security of person under echr doctrine, by highlighting and addressing the special vulnerability of stateless persons to prolonged, indefinite and cyclical detention in immigration control proceedings, although the court should have gone further and indicated general measures explicitly recommending for Russia to introduce statelessness determination procedures.


2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 188-207 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jorg Sladič

Legal privilege and professional secrecy of attorneys relate to the right to a fair trial (Article 6 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)) as well as to the right to respect for private and family life (Article 8 ECHR). The reason for protecting the lawyer via fundamental rights is the protection of fundamental rights of the lawyer’s clients. All legal orders apply legal privileges and professional secrecy; however, the contents of such are not identical. Traditionally there is an important difference between common and civil law. The professional secrecy of an attorney in civil law jurisdictions is his right and at the same time his obligation based on his membership of the Bar (that is his legal profession). In common law legal privilege comprises the contents of documents issued by an attorney to the client. Professional secrecy of attorneys in civil law jurisdictions applies solely to independent lawyers; in-house lawyers are usually not allowed to benefit from rules on professional secrecy (exceptions in the Netherlands and Belgium). On the other hand, common law jurisdictions apply legal professional privilege, recognized also to in-house lawyers. Slovenian law follows the traditional civil law concept of professional secrecy and sets a limited privilege to in-house lawyers. The article then discusses Slovenian law of civil procedure and compares the position of professional secrecy in lawsuits before State’s courts and in arbitration.


2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 09-22
Author(s):  
Rodrigo Pinto de Andrade ◽  
Rogerio De Almeida Souza

Este texto tem como objetivo analisar a vida e a obra de Jaime Nelson Wright (1927-1999), pastor presbiteriano, opositor do regime militar no Brasil e intelectual engajado na luta pela defesa dos direitos humanos. Foi uma das vozes que mais combateu a ditadura militar no interior do protestantismo brasileiro. Desde a deflagração do golpe em 1964, fez a opção político/religiosa de não aderir ao regime autoritário. Wright se vinculou ao movimento estudantil e dedicou-se ao amparo religioso/pastoral dos perseguidos políticos. Sua contribuição como intelectual, perpassa o campo religioso. Ele atuou junto aos organismos internacionais voltados para a defesa dos direitos humanos e fundamentais à vida e denunciou as atrocidades do regime militar no Brasil. Para a efetivação da pesquisa foram utilizadas as seguintes fontes: documentos e imagens disponibilizados pelo projeto Brasil: Nunca Mais; jornais da época: entrevistas e matérias; decretos e leis. Os dados revelados pelas fontes indicam que a vida e obra de Jaime Wright contribuíram decisivamente para o processo de redemocratização do Brasil. This text analyzes the life and work of Jaime Nelson Wright (1927-1999), a Presbyterian pastor, a fierce opponent of the military regime in Brazil, and intellectually engaged in the struggle for the defense of human rights. He was one of the voices that most fought the military dictatorship in the Brazilian Protestant movement. Since the outbreak of the coup in 1964, he made the political and religious choice of not joining the authoritarian regime. Wright joined the student movement and dedicated himself to the religious support of the politically persecuted. His contribution as a committed intellectual goes beyond the clerical field. He was involved with international organizations dedicated to the defense of human rights and the fundamental rights to life. He also exposed the military regime's atrocities. For the realization of the research were used the following sources: documents and images made available by the Project Brazil: Never Again; newspapers of the time: interviews and stories; decrees and laws. The data revealed by the sources, indicate the life and work of Jaime Wright contributed in a decisive way to the re-democratization process in the Brazilian society.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document