scholarly journals Preventive counter-terrorism and non-discrimination assessment in the European Union

2011 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 89-101 ◽  
Author(s):  
Quirine Eijkman

AbstractAs a result of the 9/11 terrorist attacks and the bombings in Madrid and London, a prevention-focused counter-terrorism approach has developed across the European Union. Preventive counter-terrorism is appealing because it implies interventions that remove the ability or, better still, the motivation of potential terrorists to carry out their lethal designs. Member states such as the United Kingdom and the Netherlands that primarily have experience in addressing 'home-grown' terrorism, have developed preventive counter-terrorism measures in response. Even though the majority of these laws, regulations and policies recognize the importance of the rule of law and human rights, it remains relevant to examine whether in theory and in practice particular measures have had disproportionate effects on ethnic and religious minorities and thereby violate non-discrimination standards.

Author(s):  
Artur Nowak-Far

AbstractAt present, the European rule of law enforcement framework under Article 7 TEU (RLF) is vulnerable to unguaranteed, discretionary influences of the Member States. This vulnerability arises from its procedural format which requires high thresholds in decision-making with the effect that this procedure is prone to be terminated by the EU Member States likely to be scrutinized under it, if only they collude. Yet, the Framework may prove effective to correct serious breaches against human rights (in the context of ineffective rule of law standards). The European Commission is bound to pursue the RLF effectiveness for the sake of achieving relative uniformity of application of EU law (at large), and making the European Union a credible actor and co-creator of international legal order. The RLF is an important tool for the maintenance of relative stability of human rights and the rule of law in the EU despite natural divergence propensity resulting from the procedural autonomy of the EU Member States. By achieving this stability, the EU achieves significant political weight in international dialogue concerning human rights and the rule of law and preserves a high level of its global credibility in this context. Thus, RLF increases the EU’s effectiveness in promoting the European model of their identification and enforcement.


2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-17
Author(s):  
Juha Raitio

The concept of the rule of law has lately become a topical and controversial issue. For example, the existence of effective judicial review is an inseparable part of the rule of law and some problems in this respect have been analysed. This article advocates for a thick concept of the rule of law. This refers to the idea that the rule of law has both material and formal content. The controversial part seems to be the question of material content and whether it obscures the essential meaning of the rule of law as a requirement of legality. However, the material aspect of the rule of law can be linked to the value-base of the European Union. For example, during its EU Presidency, Finland strongly emphasized the significance of the value base and the rule of law in Article 2 teu for the development of the EU. Democracy, the rule of law, and the actualisation of fundamental and human rights in particular are connected together, combined in a trinity where all the components form preconditions for the others. This stance is not a novelty in Finland, since Jyränki, for one, two decades ago already maintained that human rights protect the individual’s position and thus belong to the sphere of the material concept of the rule of law. I have employed the metaphor of a musical triangle. A triangle can only make a sound if all three of its corners are connected to each other, thereby connecting the sides of the triangle. Observance of the core values of the EU is a precondition for mutual trust between Member States, which in turn is necessary for a well-functioning European Union and good governance.


2014 ◽  
Vol 1 (33) ◽  
pp. 99
Author(s):  
Antonio Bar Cendón

La UE se fundamenta en un conjunto de valores que son enunciados en el Art. 2 del TUE de manera explícita: el respeto de la dignidad humana, la libertad, la democracia, la igualdad, el Estado de Derecho y el respeto de los derechos humanos. Valores que el mismo precepto considera que son comunes a todos los Estados miembros. Hasta ahora, la protección de estos valores fundamentales se encuentra en el mecanismo previsto en el Art. 7 del TUE. La existencia de este mecanismo no ha logrado, sin embargo, evitar la vulneración de los valores fundamentales de la UE por parte de varios de sus Estados miembros. En este sentido, este trabajo propone la formulación de un nuevo mecanismo —«mecanismo de Copenhague»— que sea capaz de hacer un seguimiento permanente de la actuación de los Estados para evitar que se produzcan esas vulneraciones, pero que sea capaz también de imponer las sanciones más graves a las vulneraciones de estos valores fundamentales, incluida la expulsión de la UE.The UE is founded on a set of values which are mentioned in an explicit manner in Art. 2 of the TEU: respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights. Values which the same article states that are common to the Member States. Until now, the protection of these fundamental values is based on the mechanism foreseen in Art. 7 of the TEU. The existence of this mechanism though has not prevented the violation of these fundamental values by several of the Member States from taking place. This is why this article proposes the establishing of a new mechanism - the «Copenhagen mechanism» - which would be able to monitor the performance of the Member States on a permanent basis in order to prevent the violations from taking place, but which would also be able to impose the most serious penalties to the most serious violations of these fundamental values, including the expulsion of the UE.


Author(s):  
Tatjana Gerginova

Security system of each country constitute the internationallegal documents and acts as well as national security that allow system isorganized as a part of the state apparatus, which system will to enable tomake possible the safety and independence of other states, as well as thelaw protection of basic human rights and freedoms. International documentsfor protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms, as well as legalacts of any national state determines the universal significance of humanrights and freedoms, whose observance is an important factor of peace,justice and security necessary to ensure the development of friendly relationsand cooperation among states, but also a precondition for progress on theestablishment of lasting peace, security, justice and cooperation in Europe. Fullrespect for human rights and fundamental freedoms and the development ofsocieties based on pluralistic democracy and the rule of law are prerequisitesfor progress in ensuring lasting peace, security, justice and cooperation inEurope. The Treaty establishing the European Union, signed in Maastricht in1992 stipulates that respect for human rights is one of the main prerequisitesfor membership in the European Union and the guarantees of human rightsestablished and guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights,are respected by Union as general principles of Union law. One of the mainobjectives of the common foreign and security policy of the Member States ofthe European Union is the development of democracy and the rule of law andrespect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. Republic of Macedoniain the processes of democratization incorporate the recommendations of theCouncil of Europe and other international institutions in finding appropriateeffective mechanisms by which holders of public authority will exerciseits powers with respect for and protection of human rights. Respect andprotection of human rights legislation in line with international standards inthis area, should be a primary task of each authority responsible for enforcingthe law.


2005 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 377-378
Author(s):  
ERIK-JAN ZÜRCHER

Turkey is about to start accession negotiations with the European Union. The question of whether Turkey qualified as a European country in terms of history and culture, was put on the European agenda by conservative European politicians in the mid-1990s and seemed to have been solved in Turkey's favour at the Helsinki summit of 1999, but it was hotly debated again throughout 2004. At the same time, a parallel debate developed among those who accepted Turkey's European credentials in principle (or felt they had to accept them). This was the debate about Turkey's state of preparedness and the degree to which the country fulfilled the so-called ‘Copenhagen Criteria’, which stipulated that candidates for membership of the EU should have a stable democracy, the rule of law, respect for human rights and a functioning market economy. In the end, as we know, the attempts of the ‘fundamentalist’ opposition to Turkey's candidature on the part of people like former Eurocommissioner Bolkestein, German CDU/CSU leaders Merkel and Stoiber or ex-president Giscard d'Estaing failed. Turkey's progress towards fulfilment of the Copenhagen Criteria was deemed sufficient by the European Commission, and on 17 December 2004 the momentous decision to start the accession process was taken unanimously at the summit in The Hague.Interest in the question of Turkey's candidature has meant that an extraordinary number of studies, reports, papers have appeared, analysing the current situation and drawing scenarios for the future. The authors of this Focus have not intended to add to this, or to investigate the chequered history of Turkish-European relations since the signing of the accession treaty in 1963.


2020 ◽  
pp. 27-37
Author(s):  
Stanislav Kuvaldin ◽  

Article 7 of the Treaty on the European Union provides for a mechanism for responding to violations by member states of the values of democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights proclaimed by the Union, as well as the introduction of sanctions against the violating state. Nevertheless, the EU structures are extremely cautious about this mechanism, despite the reasons for its use. The article analyzes the history of the appearance of Article 7 in European legislation and the first attempts of a pan-European influence on dubious decisions of the member states. Based on the example of Poland and Hungary in respect of which the possibility of applying sanctions under the Article 7 procedure is now being discussed, it is concluded that such an outcome is unlikely. It is shown that Article 7 was deliberately created in such a way as to limit the actions of pan-European structures, to leave decisions in the hands of national governments and to provide an opportunity to solve the problem through negotiations. It also shows the process of searching for alternative ways of influencing the violating states.


2008 ◽  
Vol 67 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-91 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arthur Chaskalson

There are two themes that recur in previous Sir David Williams lectures. First, that it is a considerable honour to be invited to give the lecture. Secondly, that it is a daunting task to do so in the presence of Sir David, particularly in a field in which he has expertise. Since that covers most of the law there is no escape from this dilemma. Let me then acknowledge the privilege of having been asked to give this year's lecture, and confess that it is with some trepidation that I do so. The subject, terrorism and human rights, is not exactly uncharted territory. When I looked into the internet for some guidance on what might be relevant to terrorism and human rights, the response to my Google search informed me that in .03 seconds 32,900,000 references had been found. This seemed to indicate that it was unlikely that I would be able to say anything that has not already been said. But there are some subjects that are of such importance that there is value in reminding ourselves of the issues that are at stake, and if necessary for that purpose, repeating what others have said. And it is with that in mind that I approach my chosen topic.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document