Dismantling the Dublin System: M.S.S. v. Belgium and Greece

2012 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Violeta Moreno-Lax
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Member State ◽  
Individual Case ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Dublin Regulation ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Impact

Abstract The Dublin Regulation establishes criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for asylum lodged in the European Union by a third-country national. The system is based on the presumption that Member States may be considered ‘safe countries’ for asylum seekers, for which reason transfers from one Member State to another are supposed not to violate the principle of non-refoulement. The fact that all Member States have acceded to the 1951 Refugee Convention and to the European Convention on Human Rights, that they share a pledge to establish a Common European Asylum System comprising harmonized protection standards, and that, as members of the Union, are obliged to respect and protect fundamental rights, constitute the unspoken premises on which the supposition rests. However, the Dublin Regulation does not establish whether the presumption should be considered absolute or rebuttable, and how and when, in the latter situation, it should be deemed refuted in the individual case. How the ‘principle of refutability’ has come into being in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights constitutes the focus of the present analysis. The review of the Strasbourg jurisprudence is accompanied by an assessment of the diverging practices that have proliferated across the EU in this regard. The paper concludes with some reflections on the impact of the M.S.S. judgement on the forthcoming reform of the Dublin system.

12. Limiting Powers

2021 ◽  
pp. 451-496
Author(s):  
Robert Schütze
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Eu Fundamental Rights

This chapter investigates each of the European Union’s three bills of rights and the constitutional principles that govern them. It starts with the discovery of an ‘unwritten’ bill of rights in the form of general principles of European law. The chapter then moves to an analysis of the Union’s ‘written’ bill of rights: the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, which was adopted to codify already existing human rights in the Union legal order. It also considers the formal relationship between the European Union and the European Convention on Human Rights. Finally, the chapter explores the relationship between EU fundamental rights and the Member States. Despite being primarily addressed to the Union, EU fundamental rights can, in some situations, also bind the Member States (and even their nationals). National courts may thus sometimes be obliged to review the legality of national law in the light of EU fundamental rights.

12. Limiting Powers

2021 ◽  
pp. 451-496
Author(s):  
Robert Schütze
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Eu Fundamental Rights

This chapter investigates each of the European Union's three bills of rights and the constitutional principles that govern them. It starts with the discovery of an ‘unwritten’ bill of rights in the form of general principles of European law. The chapter then moves to an analysis of the Union's ‘written’ bill of rights: the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, which was adopted to codify already existing human rights in the Union legal order. It also considers the formal relationship between the European Union and the European Convention on Human Rights. Finally, the chapter explores the relationship between EU fundamental rights and the Member States. Despite being primarily addressed to the Union, EU fundamental rights can, in some situations, also bind the Member States (and even their nationals). National courts may thus sometimes be obliged to review the legality of national law in the light of EU fundamental rights.

scholarly journals ”New” and ”Existing” Rights in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 16-32
Author(s):  
Gabriela Nemţoi ◽  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Cultural Rights ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Political Economic

Considered a fundamental document, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union aims to bring together all the civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights that citizens and residents of the Community can enjoy in order to outline the EU’s obligation to respect these fundamental rights. Thus, from the perspective of the content of the Charter, civil and political rights can be understood as those rights necessary for the assertion of the individual and defined by the action of their holder[1] and in contrast are the economic, social and cultural rights that can be understood as those rights recognized to individuals, in their capacity as members of certain social categories. Through its content, the Charter reaffirms the rights that arise from the content of national constitutions and international obligations, common to the Member States. Thus, these rights stand out as a foundation that is built on the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, on the Social Charters adopted by the EU, on the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights. In this context, it should be noted that the Charter is the first normative act that manages to codify in a single document, the main civil, political, economic and social rights[2], enshrined in previous Community Treaties. Under the auspices of the Charter, we will try to point out the innovative aspect that this document enjoys as a legal instrument for the protection of fundamental human rights.

scholarly journals Suspending Horizontal Solange: A Decentralized Instrument for Protecting Mutual Trust and the European Rule of Law

2021 ◽  
pp. 183-206
Author(s):  
Iris Canor
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Member State ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Basic Structure ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Mutual Trust ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Vertical Relationships ◽  
The Individual

AbstractMutual trust is the basis on which the Member States’ judiciaries are expected to deal with each other in the European Union. By constitutionalizing the principle of mutual trust, the CJEU has introduced an axiological addition to the basic structure of the European Union. From a Union which concentrated on the vertical relationships between each Member State and the central Union’s institutions, the Union has turned out to be additionally preoccupied with the horizontal relationships among the Member States, which are based on what might be called a doctrine of Horizontal Solange.According to the principle of mutual trust, each Member State must presume that all other Member States are in compliance with EU law, in particular promote its values and respect European fundamental rights. This presumption, however, can be rebutted in exceptional circumstances. These exceptional circumstances are based on a two-prong test: first, the violation of the values or the fundamental rights must amount to a systemic deficiency; second, there is a need for an assessment whether the individual concerned will be the victim of this systemic deficiency.This contribution critically analyses these exceptional circumstances. Regarding the first prong, it is argued that the existence of systemic deficiencies should ideally be established by the CJEU via preliminary ruling references or via direct infringement proceedings. Alternatively, such systemic deficiencies may also be established by domestic courts in a host Member State. Regarding the second prong, it is argued that the individual test is redundant in cases where the systemic deficiency imposes challenges to the existing legal order of the Member State in question. Finally, it is argued that the suspension of mutual trust can serve as a decentralized instrument for protecting the European rule of law by pressuring the violating state to restore the rule of law.

scholarly journals The UK Government’s Covid-19 Response and Article 2 of the ECHR (Title I Dignity; Right to Life, Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU)

Laws ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 19
Author(s):  
Miroslav Baros
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact

The purpose of this article is to assess the impact of the UK government’s response to the Covid-19 outbreak from a human rights perspective, particularly its apparent tension with Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in relation to non-Covid-19 patients whose lives were put at risk by not being able to attend appointments and treatments for pre-existing conditions and illnesses. The UK has also rejected the application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union with the European Union Withdrawal Act 2018, which will leave the population even more exposed to potential human rights violations. This seems to be a direct consequence of the narrative and slogan employed by the government: “Stay Home; Protect the NHS; Save Lives”. Other potentially threatened categories, the NHS staff and prisoners are also mentioned in the same context. The latter have already launched a judicial review application along the same lines: Article 2 of the ECHR and the due regard duty stemming from the Equality Act 2010. The NHS staff were directly at risk, and evidence was emerging almost on a daily basis that implied authorities’ responsibility for the shortage of personal protective equipment and testing kits. While there have been a number of discussions on other issues in relation to the lockdown and the strategy directly or indirectly impacting human rights, it appears that no discussion on the impact of the strategy for non-Covid-19 patients and other categories from a human rights perspective has taken place. This gap in analyses and literature merits the present analysis.

Human rights and the rule of law in judicial cooperation in criminal matters under the EU–UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement

2021 ◽  
pp. 203228442199593
Author(s):  
Wolfgang Schomburg ◽  
Anna Oehmichen ◽  
Katrin Kayß
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Cooperation Agreement ◽  
Judicial Cooperation ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Criminal Matters ◽  
The Eu

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.

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.

6. General principles of law

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lorna Woods ◽  
Philippa Watson ◽  
Marios Costa
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
General Principles Of Law ◽  
Relationship Of ◽  
The Relationship

This chapter examines the development of the general principles by the Court of Justice (CJ) to support the protection of human rights in the European Union (EU) law. It analyses the relationship of the general principles derived from the CJ’s jurisprudence to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), and the European Charter of Fundamental Rights (EUCFR). It discusses the possible accession of the EU to the ECHR and the implications of Opinion 2/13. It suggests that although the protection of human rights has been more visible since the Lisbon Treaty and there are now more avenues to such protection, it is debatable whether the scope and level of protection has increased.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document