Binding the EU to International Human Rights Law

The paper introduces the theme and topics of this Special Issue on the extraterritoriality of EU law and human rights in the fields of trade and public procurement since the entry into force of the 2009 Treaty of Lisbon. It briefly explores the meaning of extraterritoriality in international (human rights) law and the EU legal order highlighting the complexity of such notion in both legal systems. In so doing, it provides the context and focus of analysis of the collection of papers that make up this Special Issue, which addresses a number of topical questions concerning the extraterritorial conduct of the EU, as well as the extraterritorial effects of EU law in those specific fields, from the perspective of human rights.

Download Full-text

Equality and Non-discrimination Law in the EU

The European Union and Human Rights ◽

10.1093/oso/9780198814177.003.0007 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 387-462

Author(s):

Jan Wouters ◽

Michal Ovádek

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

International Human Rights Law ◽

The European Union ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

International Human Rights ◽

Men And Women ◽

Treaty Of Rome ◽

International Human ◽

The Right ◽

The Eu

This chapter addresses equality and non-discrimination, which are explicitly acknowledged as foundational values in the EU context in Article 2 TEU. Similarly, the right to non-discrimination enjoys wide recognition in international human rights law. In the EU, non-discrimination had a specific role to play from the outset of European integration. Despite being founded without explicit reference to human rights, the original Treaty of Rome nonetheless prohibited discrimination on the basis of nationality (now Article 18 TFEU), as well as discrimination regarding pay between men and women (now Article 157 TFEU). Today, the scope of non-discrimination was enlarged, paving the way for Directives on racial equality and non-discrimination in the field of employment on the grounds of religion, disability, age, and sexual orientation. Moreover, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) identified the principle of equality as a general principle of EU law.

Download Full-text

Towards ever greater coherence? Human rights policies in the evolving EU

The European Union and Human Rights ◽

10.1093/oso/9780198814191.003.0026 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 569-588

Author(s):

Lisa Ginsborg ◽

Graham Finlay

Keyword(s):

Economic Policy ◽

Human Rights ◽

Policy Making ◽

International Human Rights Law ◽

The European Union ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

International Human Rights ◽

Structural Coherence ◽

International Human ◽

The Eu

Coherence remains one of the most important challenges facing the European Union (EU) with respect to its commitment to human rights. While perfect coherence in EU human rights policy may never be possible, and is perhaps not even desirable, the normative coherence of EU human rights policy-making under international human rights law remains essential to uphold such a commitment and ultimately to avoid human rights violations by EU actors themselves. ‘Hard interests’, including security, managing migration, or economic policy, must never be used as an excuse to violate human rights, especially by the EU. The present chapter offers a number of suggestions to overcome different types of incoherence, and to promote normative, interest-based, and structural coherence in EU human rights action. Starting from this three-fold typology of incoherence, the chapter identifies different ways in which incoherence is a challenge for EU human rights policy, and offers suggestions to EU actors for opportunities to promote coherent human rights policy and best practices in this regard. Despite the EU’s complex institutional structure and web of competences, significant opportunities remain for the EU and its Member States to act coherently for human rights, both through law—in particular international and regional human rights law—and through the practice of EU actors themselves.

Download Full-text

Integrating human rights in emerging regulation of Corporate Social Responsibility: the EU case

International Journal of Law in Context ◽

10.1017/s1744552311000048 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 7 (2) ◽

pp. 139-179 ◽

Cited By ~ 12

Author(s):

Karin Buhmann

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Corporate Social Responsibility ◽

International Human Rights Law ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

International Human Rights ◽

International Human ◽

Multi Stakeholder ◽

Corporate Social ◽

The Eu

AbstractThis article analyses the EU Commission's policy-based approach to regulating Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and the role of international human rights law as a normative source for the regulatory output in two initiatives launched in 2002 and 2006. The article argues as a starting point that the understanding of CSR as ‘beyond law’ tends to shroud the contributions that international human rights law and legal theory based regulatory technique lend to CSR normativity and regulation, not only outside the EU but also within. The EU experience shows that due to power relations and their impact on multi-stakeholder negotiations and their outcome, this potential does necessarily unfold. It also shows that the procedural design of reflexive multi-stakeholder regulatory processes is significant for bringing forth the normative contributions of international law to CSR in public–private regulation. Finally, the article suggests that within the public policy context in which EU CSR regulation is emerging, the normative role of international human rights law which the Commission suggests for CSR in Europe and the application of the reflexive regulatory technique contribute to a substantive as well as procedural juridification of CSR, especially in the formative stage of defining CSR normativity. The latter adds a significant new perspective to the understanding of CSR and its relation to law, although it need not conflict with the understanding of CSR being ‘voluntary’ in the sense of action beyond direct legal obligations.

Download Full-text

An EU Right to Interim Protection during Appeal Proceedings in Asylum Cases?

European Journal of Migration and Law ◽

10.1163/157181610x535764 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 12 (4) ◽

pp. 407-434 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Marcelle Reneman

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

International Human Rights Law ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

International Human Rights ◽

Human Rights Treaties ◽

International Human ◽

Effective Remedy ◽

The Right ◽

Judicial Protection ◽

The Eu

AbstractDoes EU law provide for a right to interim protection in asylum cases and if so under what circumstances and in what form? These questions are addressed in this article on the basis of relevant EU legislation, the EU principle of effectiveness and the right to effective judicial protection, and finally international human rights law, which serves as a source of inspiration for these principles. It is argued that Article 39 of the Procedures Directive, interpreted in the light of the EU principle of effectiveness and the EU right to effective judicial protection, requires a remedy with automatic suspensive effect in all asylum cases, regardless of their arguability. It is therefore conceivable that this provision offers broader protection than the right to an effective remedy, laid down in international human rights treaties, such as Article 13 ECHR.

Download Full-text