scholarly journals Assessing Maritime Security and Human Rights: The Role of the EU and its Member States in the Protection of Human Rights in the Maritime Domain

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 325-347
Author(s):  
Sofia Galani
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Maritime Security ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Eu

Abstract Over the years, the European Union (EU) and its Member States have taken significant steps to enhance maritime security. However, these initiatives are mostly focused on the safety of ships and the protection of the marine environment rather than the protection of human rights at sea. Without belittling the importance of these initiatives, this article argues that it is time the protection of human rights at sea was also incorporated in the efforts to enhance maritime security. This argument is supported by the analysis of the legal framework which shows that the EU and its Member States as flag, coastal or port States have assumed responsibility to protect human rights at sea under the law of the sea, human rights law and EU law.

The European ombudsman as a body for the protection of the rights of individuals and legal entities in the European Union

2021 ◽  
pp. 55-61
Author(s):  
Ivanna Maryniv ◽  
Andriy Kotenko
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Annual Reports ◽  
Main Body ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Association Agreement ◽  
The Eu

Formulation of the problem. Today, the EU faces new challenges due to the globalization policy pursued by most EU member states, migration and the global pandemic - COVID-19. In the new conditions, the protection of human rights acquires a fundamentally new meaning. Therefore, the question of the role of the EU Ombudsman in the process of protection of individual rights and control over the activities of bodies is very relevant. By choosing the path of European integration and committing itself under the Association Agreement to adapt a number of areas in line with the acquis communautaire, Ukraine should also focus on the experience of the European Ombudsman. Since taking office as the Ukrainian Parliamentary Commissioner for Human Rights in 1998, it will not be an exaggeration to state that there are a number of problems in overseeing the proper activities of the authorities in respecting human and civil rights and freedoms. That is why, given the shortcomings and the chosen vector of development, the experience of the European Ombudsman is of great importance for Ukraine in order to improve the activities of the Ukrainian Parliament’s Commissioner for Human Rights. Target of research is to examine the role of the EU Ombudsman in the process of investigating good governance in the EU institutional mechanism. Article’s main body. The article is devoted to the study of the legal status of the European Ombudsman as a body that must investigate improper bodies of the activities of institutions, agencies to ensure the restoration of violated rights guaranteed by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. The analysis of the practice of the European Ombudsman in the official annual reports, as well as the development strategy is carried out. With the help of EU legislation research and conducting of the legal analysis of the Ombudsman’s annual reports, strategic development documents and enquiries, opened by the Ombudsman in the last decade, the complexity of the European ombudsman’s contribution to the implementation of the sustainable development principle within EU’s supranational legal framework. Conclusions. After analyzing the development of Ombudsman’s legal status and the results of his enquiries, conducted in the last decade, a conclusion has been made, that the European ombudsman considerably influences all the institutional system of the EU. His initiatives have far-reaching consequences which might have caused their effect on the whole legal framework of the EU, in case if the European ombudsman had been given some more legal powers. Though, having only recommendation mechanisms in possession, this body influences the governing system of the EU largely, causing positive changes, meeting the leading principles of the functioning of the EU.

THE COHERENCE OF EU LAW: THE PROMOTION OF INVESTMENTS VS. THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS

2014 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-112 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eduardo Savarese
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Eu Policy ◽  
Exceptions And Limitations ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Investment Agreements

Among the challenging legal questions which the new competence of the European Union (EU) in the field of investments abroad raises, one deserves particular attention, namely coherence between the protection of investments and the promotion of human rights and democracy within EU law. After examining general EU policy, the paper then examines the normative and procedural relationship between investment law and human rights law that emerges from arbitral case law. While areas of convergence exist, these two regimes appear to operate within a legal framework of mutual indifference. However, human rights law and related concerns represent both general principles of EU law and EU policy of paramount importance in the development of external relations. As a result, EU institutions must ensure the coherence of investment policy with human rights law and policy. The issue of coherence may be viewed from a policy perspective, with particular regard to the specific powers entrusted to the Commission, the Parliament and the Council of Europe and the current exercise of such powers. In this regard, the more the standards of investors’ protection under investment agreements are premised on clear definitions, exceptions and limitations, the more the adoption of State measures for the protection of human rights will fall within the circumstances precluding wrongfulness. In addition, the coherence issue has a normative component which concerns the compatibility of future EU International Investment Agreements (IIAs) with primary and secondary EU law. Conflicts between future EU IIAs and EU law may undermine the uniform application of EU law. Similarly, these conflicts may lead the assertion of the supremacy of EU law resulting in the violation of EU IIAs. Normative conflicts can and ought to be minimized.Among the challenging legal questions which the new competence of the European Union (EU) in the field of investments abroad raises, one deserves particular attention, namely coherence between the protection of investments and the promotion of human rights and democracy within EU law. After examining general EU policy, the paper then examines the normative and procedural relationship between investment law and human rights law that emerges from arbitral case law. While areas of convergence exist, these two regimes appear to operate within a legal framework of mutual indifference. However, human rights law and related concerns represent both general principles of EU law and EU policy of paramount importance in the development of external relations. As a result, EU institutions must ensure the coherence of investment policy with human rights law and policy. The issue of coherence may be viewed from a policy perspective, with particular regard to the specific powers entrusted to the Commission, the Parliament and the Council of Europe and the current exercise of such powers. In this regard, the more the standards of investors’ protection under investment agreements are premised on clear definitions, exceptions and limitations, the more the adoption of State measures for the protection of human rights will fall within the circumstances precluding wrongfulness. In addition, the coherence issue has a normative component which concerns the compatibility of future EU International Investment Agreements (IIAs) with primary and secondary EU law. Conflicts between future EU IIAs and EU law may undermine the uniform application of EU law. Similarly, these conflicts may lead the assertion of the supremacy of EU law resulting in the violation of EU IIAs. Normative conflicts can and ought to be minimized.Among the challenging legal questions which the new competence of the European Union (EU) in the field of investments abroad raises, one deserves particular attention, namely coherence between the protection of investments and the promotion of human rights and democracy within EU law. After examining general EU policy, the paper then examines the normative and procedural relationship between investment law and human rights law that emerges from arbitral case law. While areas of convergence exist, these two regimes appear to operate within a legal framework of mutual indifference. However, human rights law and related concerns represent both general principles of EU law and EU policy of paramount importance in the development of external relations. As a result, EU institutions must ensure the coherence of investment policy with human rights law and policy. The issue of coherence may be viewed from a policy perspective, with particular regard to the specific powers entrusted to the Commission, the Parliament and the Council of Europe and the current exercise of such powers. In this regard, the more the standards of investors’ protection under investment agreements are premised on clear definitions, exceptions and limitations, the more the adoption of State measures for the protection of human rights will fall within the circumstances precluding wrongfulness. In addition, the coherence issue has a normative component which concerns the compatibility of future EU International Investment Agreements (IIAs) with primary and secondary EU law. Conflicts between future EU IIAs and EU law may undermine the uniform application of EU law. Similarly, these conflicts may lead the assertion of the supremacy of EU law resulting in the violation of EU IIAs. Normative conflicts can and ought to be minimized.

scholarly journals The Threat of Destitution as a Deterrent against Asylum Seeking in the European Union

Refuge ◽  
2006 ◽  
pp. 81-93 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sylvie Da Lomba
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Host Countries ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

The problematization of asylum has detrimentally impacted on the provision of support for asylum seekers in host countries. The threat of destitution has become instrumental in restrictive asylum policies and is increasingly used as a deterrent against asylum seeking. The EU experience reveals acute tensions between the EU asylum agenda and the EU Member States’ obligations under international refugee and human rights law. The provision of support for asylum seekers challenges narrow approaches to the realization of socio-economic rights for “others” and to host countries’ duties in that respect. The EU Reception Conditions Directive, which aims to set out standards for the reception of asylum seekers across the Union, exemplifies this predicament. Yet international refugee and human rights law provides a legal framework that establishes minimum standards critical to dignified living for asylum seekers and the protection of the right to seek refugee status in the EU and beyond.

The preliminary ruling procedure at the court of justice of the European Union and transformation of European anti-discrimination law

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (3) ◽  
pp. 66-72
Author(s):  
Elena Sorokina
Keyword(s):  
Legal System ◽  
Essential Feature ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Judicial Cooperation ◽  
Member States ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Eu

The preliminary ruling procedure is an essential feature of the EU legal system, which is a unique cooperation tool as part of the dialogue between the Court of Justice of the EU and national courts of the Member States. Its main purpose is to ensure uniform interpretation and application of the provisions of EU law with all Member States and to preserve the uniformity of the European legal system. The continuous use by national courts of the Member States of the mechanism of preliminary ruling and constructive inter-judicial cooperation, the Court of Justice has developed an extremely extensive case law on the prohibition of discrimination and with the result to introduce substantial changes in European anti-discrimination law.The preliminary rulings of the Court of Justice have shown its inclination to expand notions of what constitutes discrimination and in most cases the Court prompt by the desire to interpret the provisions of European law so as to ensure the full effectiveness of the law, as well as a willingness to promote and strengthen protection against discrimination in Europe. While the protection against discrimination on some grounds is stronger than others, however, the preliminary rulings of the Court of Justice are important contribution to the transformation of anti-discrimination law, promote change in the national legislation of the Member States and provide the more effective protection of human rights in general.

scholarly journals Inequalities in the European Union—A Partial Order Analysis of the Main Indicators

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (11) ◽  
pp. 6278
Author(s):  
Lars Carlsen ◽  
Rainer Bruggemann
Keyword(s):  
Indicator System ◽  
Partial Ordering ◽  
Disposable Income ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Per Capita ◽  
Educational Aspect ◽  
The Eu

The inequality within the 27 European member states has been studied. Six indicators proclaimed by Eurostat to be the main indicators charactere the countries: (i) the relative median at-risk-of-poverty gap, (ii) the income distribution, (iii) the income share of the bottom 40% of the population, (iv) the purchasing power adjusted GDP per capita, (v) the adjusted gross disposable income of households per capita and (vi) the asylum applications by state of procedure. The resulting multi-indicator system was analyzed applying partial ordering methodology, i.e., including all indicators simultaneously without any pretreatment. The degree of inequality was studied for the years 2010, 2015 and 2019. The EU member states were partially ordered and ranked. For all three years Luxembourg, The Netherlands, Austria, and Finland are found to be highly ranked, i.e., having rather low inequality. Bulgaria and Romania are, on the other hand, for all three years ranked low, with the highest degree of inequality. Excluding the asylum indicator, the risk-poverty-gap and the adjusted gross disposable income were found as the most important indicators. If, however, the asylum application is included, this indicator turns out as the most important for the mutual ranking of the countries. A set of additional indicators was studied disclosing the educational aspect as of major importance to achieve equality. Special partial ordering tools were applied to study the role of the single indicators, e.g., in relation to elucidate the incomparability of some countries to all other countries within the union.

The EU's Economic Cooperation with North Korea: The Possibility as a Useful Tool to Complement Korea-US Cooperation

2009 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 125-149 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jong-Sue Lee
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Korean Peninsula ◽  
North Korea ◽  
The United States ◽  
Policy Position ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
The North ◽  
The Eu

North Korea conducted 2nd nuclear test on May 25, 2009. It made a vicious circle and continued military tension on the Korean Peninsula. North Korea regime got a question on the effectiveness of the six party talks and ‘security-economy exchange model’. In addition, the North Korea probably disappointed about the North Korea issue has been excluded from the Obama administration's policy position. So the dialogue or relationship recovery with the United States and North Korea through six-party talks or bilateral talks will be difficult for the time being. This paper examines the EU policy on North Korea. Based on the results, analyzes the EU is likely to act as a balancer on the Korean Peninsula. Through the procedure of deepening and expanding the economic and political unification, the EU utilizes their cooperative policies towards North Korea as an ideal opportunity to realize their internal value and to confirm the commonness within the EU members. The acceleration of the EU's unification, however, began to focus on human rights, and this made their official relationship worse. Yet, the EU is continuously providing food as wells as humanitarian and technological support to North Korea regardless of the ongoing nuclear and human rights issues in North Korea. Also, the number of multinational corporations investing in North Korea for the purpose of preoccupying resources and key industries at an individual nation's level has been increasing. The European Union has unique structure which should follow the way of solving the problem of member states like subsidiary principle. It appears to conflict between normative power of the European Union and strategic interests on member states. This paper examines if the European Union is useful tool to complement Korea-US cooperation in the near future.

Fixing, Adjusting, Regulating, Protecting Human Rights - The Shifting Uses of Regularisations in the European Union

2011 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 297-316 ◽  
Author(s):  
Albert Kraler
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Irregular Migrants ◽  
National Human ◽  
Almost All ◽  
Human Rights Based Approach ◽  
The Eu

AbstractAlmost all Member States in the European Union currently make use, or in the past have made use of some form of regularisation of irregular immigrants, although to greatly varying degrees, in different ways and as a rule only reluctantly. A distinct feature of recent regularisations has been the shift towards a humanitarian justification of regularisation measures. In this context, regularisation has become reframed as an issue of the protection of irregular migrants’ human rights. As a result, regularisation has to some extent also been turned from a political tool in managing migration into an issue of international, European and national human rights law. While a human rights framework indeed offers a powerful rationale and at times compelling reasons why states ought to afford a legal status to irregular migrants, I argue that a human rights based approach must always be complemented by pragmatic considerations, as a human rights based justification of regularisation alone will be insufficient to find adequate responses to the changing presence of irregular migrants in the EU, not all of which can invoke human rights based claims to residence.

Beyond Visibility, Rights, and Citizenship: Critical Notes on Sexual Politics in the European Union Christian Klesse

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Klesse
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Social Movements ◽  
Sexual Minorities ◽  
Sexual Politics ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
New Member States ◽  
Lesbian And Gay ◽  
The Eu

The accession of ten new member states has opened up new political and discursive spaces for challenging homo-, bi-, and transphobia in the new member states and the European Union (EU) as a whole. There has been widely felt sense of hope that the accession will ultimately increase the possibilities of political action, result in democratisation, and better the political conditions for sexual minorities to fight discrimination and struggle for equal treatment before the law (ILGA Europe 2001, Vadstrup 2002, Pereira 2002, Neumann 2004, ILGA 2004, Stonewall 2004). Such sentiments were also expressed in the call-for-papers for the Conference ‘Europe without Homophobia. Queer-in(g) Communities’ that took place from May 24 to May 26, 2004 at Wroclaw in Poland, for which I wrote the first draft of this paper. Participants were asked to reflect upon ‘how we can contribute to making sexual minorities in the European Community visible, heard, safe, and equal before the law’ and to ‘investigate the practical ways (including legal actions, information campaigns, political participation, etc.) of achieving the bold vision suggested in the title: Europe without homophobia’ (Organizing Committee 2004). Human rights groups and lesbian and gay organisations both in the (prospective) new and the already existing member states sensed that access to funding by EU bodies and the ability to address political and/or legal institutions of the EU (and/or the Council of Europe) opened up ‘new space’ for political activism and enabled access to a new range of political discourses and strategies (cf. Stychin 2003). Already many years before accession, human rights organisations and lesbian and gay campaigning groups started to utilise the transformative potential of this prospective economic-political and socio-legal change for campaigns against human rights abuse and legal discrimination on the grounds of gender and sexuality in states applying for accession. ILGA Europe, for example, emphasised that accession should be made dependent on the applying states complying to the high human rights standard that the EU is supposed to stand for. Due to the uneven power structure between the institutions of the EU and the states applying for membership, the logic and rhetoric of ‘enlargement’ structured the negotiations about accession. The power imbalances at the heart of the process are further indicated by the fact that accession is frequently discussed in the scientific literature in the terminology of ‘Europeanization’ (cf. Schimmelfenning and Sedelmeier 2005a). In this context, ‘Europeanization’ signifies ‘integration’ into the economic organisations and politico-legal institutions of the EU, a process that, according to Schimmelfenning and Sedelmeier, can be characterised as ‘a massive export of EU rules’ (2005b: 221). Because accession has been such a recent moment in history, research on the effects of the EU enlargement on the national polities of the new or prospective member states is still scarce. In particular, sexual politics has remained an under-researched topic (for an exception, see Stychin 2003). However, there is sufficient reason to speculate that accession will significantly affect the discourses and strategies of social movements struggling around sexuality and gender in the new member states. Even if it cannot be predicted at this stage, how political actors and social movements will respond and position themselves with regard to these newly emerging ‘political opportunity structures’ (Kriesi et al. 1995), the evolving institutional, economic, and discursive context will without any doubt impact on their politics.

scholarly journals The European Union's policy on human rights and Chinese sovereignism: The case of Xinjiang

2021 ◽  
Vol 73 (1) ◽  
pp. 58-86
Author(s):  
Dragan Trailovic
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Individual Case ◽  
The Other ◽  
Individual Member ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
The One ◽  
Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region ◽  
Rights Issues ◽  
The Eu

The article explores the European Union's approach to human rights issues in China through the processes of bilateral and multilateral dialogue on human rights between the EU and the People's Republic of China, on the one hand. On the other hand, the paper deals with the analysis of the EU's human rights policy in the specific case of the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, which is examined through normative and political activities of the EU, its institutions and individual member states. Besides, the paper examines China's response to the European Union's human rights approaches, in general, but also when it comes to the specific case of UAR Xinjiang. ?his is done through a review of China's discourse and behaviour within the EU-China Human Rights Dialogue framework, but also at the UN level and within the framework of bilateral relations with individual member states. The paper aims to show whether and how the characteristics of the EU's general approach to human rights in China are reflected in the individual case of Xinjiang. Particular attention shall be given to the differentiation of member states in terms of their approach to human rights issues in China, which is conditioned by the discrepancy between their political values, normative interests and ideational factors, on the one hand, and material factors and economic interests, on the other. Also, the paper aims to show the important features of the different views of the European Union and the Chinese state on the very role of Human Rights Dialogue, as well as their different understandings of the concept of human rights itself. The study concluded that the characteristics of the Union's general approach to human rights in China, as well as the different perceptions of human rights issues between China and the EU, were manifested in the same way in the case of UAR Xinjiang.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document