scholarly journals Extraterritoriality of EU law and human rights after Lisbon: The case of trade and public procurement

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samantha Velluti ◽  
Vassilis P. Tzevelekos
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Public Procurement ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
International Human ◽  
The Eu

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.

Equality and Non-discrimination Law in the EU

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.

Part IV Normative Evolution, Ch.23 Jus Cogens and Obligations Erga Omnes

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
de Wet Erika
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
State Practice ◽  
International Human ◽  
Jus Cogens ◽  
Formal Recognition

This article examines the relation between jus cogens and erga omnes obligations in the context of international human rights law. It discusses the content of jus cogens and its relevance within the domestic legal order and explains the relevant provisions of Article 53 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 1969 (VCLT). This article highlights the increasing formal recognition in state practice and doctrine of a hierarchy of norms in international law in the form of jus cogens which indicates increased recognition of core values throughout the international community of states.

scholarly journals The “Essence” of International Human Rights

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (6) ◽  
pp. 924-939
Author(s):  
Pierre Thielbörger
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Socioeconomic Rights ◽  
International Human

AbstractWhile the “essence” of EU fundamental rights has received much attention following the CJEU’s Schrems decision, the concept of “essence” remains much less examined in international human rights law. Nonetheless, a concept of “essence” for human rights can also be found in international law. This Article discusses different aspects of the “essence” concept in international human rights law, namely non-derogability, non-restrictability, and minimum core, in three steps. First, the Article looks at civil political rights and socioeconomic rights separately and identifies two different approaches to the concept of essence for each of the two categories: While for civil and political rights the concept of essence is mainly linked to the notions of non-derogability and non-restrictability, for socioeconomic rights, the concept refers mainly to the states’ obligation to guarantee an essential level of protection independent of their resource limitations. Second, the Article continues by reading the two approaches together and identifies certain elements of an overarching “essence” concept. Finally, the Article discusses the relationship between the CJEU’s “essence” jurisprudence and the related concepts in international law and concludes with two theses: First, international law deserves more attention when reflecting on the EU’s concept of essence. It equally employs concepts of “essence” and also informs the development and interpretation of EU law. Second, when engaging with the question of whether the EU law should draw lessons from its international counterpart on the notion of “essence,” one must contemplate drawbacks for EU law that the concept has presented for international law.

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

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.

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

2011 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 139-179 ◽  
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.

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

2010 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 407-434 ◽  
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.

Kant, cosmopolitanism and systems of constitutional justice in Europe and beyond

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 562-580
Author(s):  
ALEC STONE SWEET ◽  
CLARE RYAN
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
European Court ◽  
Constitutional Justice ◽  
International Human ◽  
Special Symposium

AbstractIn A Cosmopolitan Legal Order: Kant, Constitutional Justice, and the ECHR, we sought to demonstrate the power of Kantian theory to explain – or at least meaningfully illuminate – (1) the defining characteristics of modern, rights-based constitutionalism; (2) the evolving law, politics and constitutional architecture of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR); and (3) the emergence of a global, cosmopolitan commons, featuring inter-judicial dialogue at its core. This article responds to contributors to the special symposium on the book. In Part I, we defend our account of a Kantian-congruent, domestic system of constitutional justice. Part II reflects on the ECHR as an instantiation of a cosmopolitan legal order, and on the European Court’s case law – particularly its enforcement of the proportionality principle. In Part III, we assess the evidence in support of a broader ‘constitutionalization’ of international human rights law.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document