Restrictive Measures As Tools of EU Foreign and Security Policy: Promoting EU Values, from Antiterrorism to Country Sanctions

2021 ◽  
pp. 187-214
Author(s):  
Charlotte Beaucillon
Keyword(s):  
Security Policy ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
Restrictive Measures

scholarly journals The Court of Justice of the European Union and the autonomous restrictive measures against natural and legal persons and non-state entities within the EU common foreign and security policy

2021 ◽  
Vol 60 (91) ◽  
pp. 117-139
Author(s):  
Boris Tučić
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
General Relation ◽  
Supporting Evidence ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
The One ◽  
Restrictive Measures ◽  
The Eu

As a part of its specific policies, the EU creates and implements numerous restrictive measures against different subjects. In recent years, the most interesting ones, especially from the perspective of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), have been the autonomous restrictive measures against natural and legal persons and other non-state entities within the Union`s Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). After years of legal wandering in this regard, the Lisbon Treaty finally offered an explicit legal basis for this kind of measures, envisaging, as well, for the first time, the CJEU`s jurisdiction in the field of CFSP in some cases, including the one related to reviewing the legality of decisions providing for restrictive measures against natural or legal persons adopted by the Council of the EU on the basis of Chapter 2 of Title V of the Treaty of the European Union. In this regard, the subject matter of this paper are the activities of the EU courts related to the autonomous restrictive measures against individual subjects, analyzed at several relevant although inseparable levels. The first one considers the intention of the CJEU to "use" the situation regarding the autonomous restrictive measures in order to strengthen its position and competences within the CFSP. The second one is oriented to the efforts of the courts to secure the balance between the effectiveness of the CFSP instruments, on the one hand, and the protection of some of the major principles and values of the EU legal order, on the other hand, such as the rule of law, legal certainty, effective judicial protection or the protection of human rights as guaranteed by the EU Law in general. Thirdly, a very important step in this context has been the jurisprudential identification of the key procedural requirements that the Council`s decisions providing for restrictive measures must fulfill as well (aka the designation criteria, statements of reasons criteria and supporting evidence criteria). By constantly insisting on the fulfillment of these criteria, the EU courts exerted a pressure on the Council to improve its decisions providing restrictive measures in a qualitative manner. Recent jurisprudence, such as the Rosneft or Bank Refah Kargaran cases, shows that there is still enough space for the Court`s interventions in this field, and that some interesting Court`s decisions, related to its position within the CFSP or the general relation between the CFSP and other forms of Union`s external activities, could be expected in the years to come.

scholarly journals Common Foreign and Security Policy and the EU’s external action objectives: an analysis of Article 21 of the Treaty on the European Union

2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 584-608 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luigi Lonardo
Keyword(s):  
Policy Development ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
External Action ◽  
Global Strategy ◽  
The European Union ◽  
External Relations ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
Eu Policies ◽  
Multilateral Diplomacy ◽  
Restrictive Measures

Boundaries within EU policies – Common Foreign and Security Policy – EU external relations – Management of boundaries – Institutional interpretation – External action objectives – Linking policies to objectives – Restrictive measures – Area of Freedom Security and Justice – Securitisation of migration – Energy policy – Development – Multilateral diplomacy – Global strategy

scholarly journals Restrictive measures - sanctions compliance, implementation and judicial review challenges in the common foreign and security policy of the European Union

ERA Forum ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 159-181
Author(s):  
Nadia Zelyova
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Comprehensive Overview ◽  
Legal Evolution ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
The Common ◽  
Restrictive Measures ◽  
The Eu

AbstractThis article provides a comprehensive overview of EU restrictive measures applicable within the EU, the competences and legal evolution which lead to the implementation of Common Foreign and Security Policy restrictive measures (CFSP sanctions), and considers procedural issues, developments in the latest case law, and the challenges of securing compliance with EU sanctions, which reach beyond the territory of the EU.

scholarly journals Conceptualization of Restrictive Measures Policy in the Context of European Security Issues: New Approaches

2021 ◽  
Vol 107 (7) ◽  
pp. 72-83
Author(s):  
Adel Abdullin ◽  
◽  
Maria Keshner ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Security Policy ◽  
Shared Responsibility ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Security ◽  
Ability To Act ◽  
The World ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
International Responsibility ◽  
Restrictive Measures ◽  
The Eu

The changing international situation and growing external challenges have given a new impetus to the further development of the Foreign and Security Policy of the EU. Promoting European interests and values on the world stage and enhancing the EU's ability to act autonomously are among the significant directions of the new strategic agenda of the European Union for 2019‒2024. One of the important foreign policy instruments in the EU's arsenal are restrictive measures against states, individuals and organizations (in the broadest sense). The aim of the study is the processes of conceptualization of the European policy of the application of restrictive measures: the formation of the regulatory framework and the implementation mechanism, taking into account the modern realities of the international and European legal order, in combination with the accumulated doctrinal resources and elements of the progressive development of the law of international responsibility. It is noted that it is in the EU space that the doctrinal potential is being formed, catalyzing the process of diversifying the formats of normative regulation in the sphere of implementing international responsibility. As a result of the study, the authors test the hypothesis that the following substantive components of the noted conceptualization processes correspond to the tasks of “autonomization” of the EU foreign and security policy and “a stronger Europe in the world”: countermeasures of third states; jurisdictional countermeasures; shared responsibility.

China’s South Asia Policy in the ‘New Era’

2019 ◽  
Vol 75 (2) ◽  
pp. 137-154
Author(s):  
Sanjeev Kumar
Keyword(s):  
South Asia ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Xi Jinping ◽  
New Era ◽  
Low Profile ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
Neighbouring Region ◽  
Rise Of China ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Rise Of China

In recent years, there has been a rise in China’s profile in South Asia. It is no surprise that Chinese experts have used terms, such as ‘new springtime’ in China–South Asia relations, ‘rediscovery of the strategic status of South Asia’ and ‘most relevant region with regard to the rise of China’.    The objective of this article is to examine the nature and drivers of China’s South Asia policy, especially under the leadership of Xi Jinping vis-à-vis China’s policy towards the region in the past. It is not sufficient to only examine international factors or foreign and security policy in the context of the neighbouring region, such as South Asia. China’s ‘domestic periphery’ presents a significant threat to its national security. These areas are linked to neighbouring countries of South Asia and Central Asia. The announcement by Chinese President Xi Jinping of a ‘New Era’ or ‘third era’ in the history of Communist Party of China (CPC) represents a China which is known for its dictum ‘striving for achievement’ ( fenfa youwei). This is different from the second era’s policy of ‘keeping a low profile and biding the time’ proposed by Deng Xiaoping. Of course, the name of Mao Zedong is synonymous with the first era beginning from 1949.

Judicial review of Common Foreign and Security Policy by the ECtHR and the (re)negotiation on the accession of the EU to the ECHR

2021 ◽  
pp. 1023263X2198824
Author(s):  
Maria José Rangel de Mesquita
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Regional Level ◽  
Judicial Control ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
Conclusion Section ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
The Eu

The article addresses the issue of judicial control of the implementation of Common Foreign and Security Policy at international regional level within the framework of the relaunching of the negotiation in view of the accession of the EU to the ECHR. Considering the extent of jurisdiction of the CJEU in respect of Common Foreign and Security Policy field in the light of its case law (sections 1 and 2), it analyses the question of judicial review of Common Foreign and Security Policy within international regional justice by the ECtHR in the light of the ongoing negotiations (section 3), in the perspective of the relationship between non-national courts (section 3.A), having as background the (2013) Draft Agreement of accession (section 3.B.1). After addressing the relaunching of the negotiation procedure (section 3.B.2) and the issue of CFSP control by the ECtHR according to the recent (re)negotiation meetings (section 3.B.3), some concrete proposals, including for the redrafting of the accession agreement, will be put forward (section 3.B.4), as well as a conclusion (section 4).

Judicial review of Common Foreign and Security Policy by the ECtHR and the (re)negotiation on the accession of the EU to the ECHR

2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 356-370
Author(s):  
Maria José Rangel de Mesquita
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Regional Level ◽  
Judicial Control ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
Conclusion Section ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
The Eu

The article addresses the issue of judicial control of the implementation of Common Foreign and Security Policy at international regional level within the framework of the relaunching of the negotiation in view of the accession of the EU to the ECHR. Considering the extent of jurisdiction of the CJEU in respect of Common Foreign and Security Policy field in the light of its case law (sections 1 and 2), it analyses the question of judicial review of Common Foreign and Security Policy within international regional justice by the ECtHR in the light of the ongoing negotiations (section 3), in the perspective of the relationship between non-national courts (section 3.A), having as background the (2013) Draft Agreement of accession (section 3.B.1). After addressing the relaunching of the negotiation procedure (section 3.B.2) and the issue of CFSP control by the ECtHR according to the recent (re)negotiation meetings (section 3.B.3), some concrete proposals, including for the redrafting of the accession agreement, will be put forward (section 3.B.4), as well as a conclusion (section 4).

The Intergovernmental Constitution of the EU's Foreign, Security & Defence Executive

2011 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 453-480 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Thym
Keyword(s):  
Security Policy ◽  
External Action ◽  
Foreign Affairs ◽  
Executive Order ◽  
Policy Changes ◽  
Defence Policy ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
Pillar Structure ◽  
The Eu

European Union – Common Foreign and Security Policy – Changes with the abolition of the pillar structure by the Lisbon Treaty – Common Security and Defence Policy – Executive order of the EU – Between supranationalism and intergovernmentalism – The role of the High Representative – Joint political leadership – The European External Action Service as an administrative infrastructure – Constitutionalisation of foreign affairs

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document