scholarly journals Rights of Young People and the European Social Charter

2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Luis Jimena Quesada

The European Social Charter (alongside the case-law of the European Committee of Social Rights) forms the most striking binding legal source for young people’s social rights, providing a framework for synergies with both the European Union and the Council of Europe’s other instruments and mechanisms in this area. In the current times of pandemic, the most important thing is preventing the COVID-19 crisis (which has economic, political and social dimensions) from becoming a crisis of values among young people. From this perspective, on the one hand, the paper focuses on access of young people to education, labour market and housing. On the other hand, it proposes measures aimed at raising awareness of the Social Charter among young people and to capitalise on it in practice instead of insisting on drafting a specific European instrument on their rights. Finally, the author insists that all Council of Europe Member States should accept (if they have not yet done so) in the spirit of the “Turin process,”the collective complaints procedure and the revised European Social Charter.

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 4-19
Author(s):  
Luis Jimena Quesada

The author highlights the paradoxical evolution of CJEU’s case-law in the field of social rights and how in the past, it has played a praetorian role in a context of implied powers and modest EU primary legal provisions whereas now, it is showing clear self-restraint under explicit competences and an evolved EU primary law [including the Charter of Fundamental Rights (CFREU)]. From this perspective, the author proposes the opening of the CJEU to the new framework of the European Pillar of Social Rights, as part of the broader Turin process for the European Social Charter, through positive judicial willingness (by taking into account the synergies between the EU and the Council of Europe – including the case-law from the European Committee of Social Rights).


2017 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 353-362
Author(s):  
Anne Pieter van der Mei

This contribution presents an overview of the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the period April–September 2017 on social security matters. The relevant rulings concern first and foremost the rules determining the applicable legislation as enshrined in Regulation 883/2004 and Regulation 1408/71. In addition, the Court of Justice has delivered important rulings concerning posted worker and the binding effect of A1 certificates, the social security rights of third country nationals holding a single-permit and the protection of social rights in the context of financial crisis and austerity measures.


Author(s):  
Oliver Lewis

This chapter presents an overview of the adjudicative bodies of the Council of Europe—namely, the European Court of Human Rights (established by the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR)) and the European Committee of Social Rights—and outlines their mandates with regard to integrating UN human rights treaties. It analyses how these two bodies have cited the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). The dataset was forty-five cases dealt with by the Court and two collective complaints decided by the Committee that cite the CRPD up to 2016. Notwithstanding the relatively small size of the dataset, the conclusions are that the Council of Europe system has yet to engage seriously in the CRPD’s jurisprudential opportunities. The reasons for this cannot be ascertained from a desk-based methodology, and further research is required.


2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 1073-1098 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mattias Derlén ◽  
Johan Lindholm

AbstractThe case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) is one of the most important sources of European Union law. However, case law's role in EU law is not uniform. By empirically studying how the Court uses its own case law as a source of law, we explore the correlation between, on the one hand, the characteristics of a CJEU case—type of action, actors involved, and area of law—and, on the other hand, the judgment's “embeddedness” in previous case law and value as a precedent in subsequent cases. Using this approach, we test, confirm, and debunk existing scholarship concerning the role of CJEU case law as a source of EU law. We offer the following conclusions: that CJEU case law cannot be treated as a single entity; that only a limited number of factors reliably affect a judgment's persuasive or precedential power; that the Court's use of its own case law as a source of law is particularly limited in successful infringement proceedings; that case law is particularly important in preliminary references—especially those concerning fundamental freedoms and competition law; and that initiating Member State and the number of observations affects the behavior of the Court.


2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (100) ◽  
pp. 849
Author(s):  
Miguel Agudo Zamora

Resumen:Este trabajo analiza la situación en el modelo constitucional español del principio de no regresividad de los derechos sociales. Se parte del análisis sucinto del modelo social de nuestra Constitución lo que implica el reconocimiento de derechos económicos y sociales. Este reconocimiento es la plasmación constitucional de los principios de solidaridad y de cohesión social. El principio de cohesión social ha sido definido por el Consejo de Europa e incluido explícitamente en los tratados constitutivos de la Unión Europea. La necesidad de lograr la cohesión social fundamenta la inclusión en las Constituciones y en los tratados internacionales del principio de no regresividad de los derechos sociales. En la Constitución española de 1978 este principio no se incluye expresamente. La no inclusión en la Constitución de este principio supone un peligro para la cohesión social en tiempos de crisis económica. Por su parte, el Tribunal Constitucional ha sentado una doctrina ambigua sobre este asunto, que ha sido analizada en este trabajo, así como las más significativas aportaciones doctrinales sobre la materia. Para saber cuáles son los limites de la regresividad de los derechos sociales que dotan de contenido este principio se ha realizado una comparativa internacional y de los principios constitucionales. Del estudio del ordenamiento internacional y de los valores y principios constitucionales se ha obtenido una serie de límites a la regresividad del contenido, eficacia y protección de los derechos sociales. Concluye este trabajo sugiriendo una propuesta de reforma constitucional que incluya el principio de no regresividad de los derechos sociales en el texto constitucional estableciendo una serie de requisitos de aquellas medidas que puedan suponer una regresión de contenido de los mismos tales como que deberán justificarse plenamente en referencia a la totalidad de los derechos, valores y principios recogidos en la Constitución y en los tratados internacionales suscritos por el Estado español y en el contexto del aprovechamiento pleno del máximo de los recursos de que se disponga; se aplicarán tras el examen más exhaustivo de todas las alternativas posibles; tendrán en todo caso carácter temporal hasta que las circunstancias económicas permitan restablecer el ámbito material de contenido, eficacia, protección y garantía prexistente de los derechos sociales afectados; en todo caso respetarán el contenido mínimo esencial de los derechos sociales como manifestación de la dignidad humana; serán razonables y estarán suficientemente motivadas; no vulnerarán, entre otros, los principios de seguridad jurídica, confianza legítima, no discriminación e irretroactividad de disposiciones restrictivas de derechos individuales, serán proporcionadas y respetarán los principios de solidaridad, cohesión y sostenibilidad social. Summary1. State, solidarity and social cohesion. 2. Doctrinal and jurisprudential notes on the principle of non-regressivity of social rights. 3. Limits to the regressivity of social rights. a) Limits derived from international law. b) Limits derived from dignity as essential content of social rights. c) Limits derived from the prohibition of arbitrariness: the need for sufficient motivation. 4. Conclusion: constitutionalamendment and non-regressivity of social rights.Abstract:This paper analyzes the constitutional recognition of the principle of non-regressivity of social rights in Spain. It starts from the succinct analysis of the social model of our Constitution which implies the recognition of economic and social rights. This recognition is the constitutionalization of the principles of solidarity and social cohesion. The principle of social cohesion has been defined by the Council of Europe and explicitly included in the constitutive treaties of the European Union. The need to achieve social cohesion underpins the inclusion in the Constitutions and international treaties of the principle of non-regression of social rights. In the Spanish Constitution of 1978 this principle is not expressly included. The non-inclusion in the Constitution of this principle poses a danger to social cohesion in times of economic crisis. For its part, the Constitutional Court has established an ambiguous doctrine on this subject, which has been analyzed in this work, as well as the most significant doctrinal contributions on the subject. In order to know which are the limits of the regressivity of the social rights that give content of this principle an international comparison has been made as well as a study of constitutional principles. Limits to the regressivity of content, effectiveness and protection of social rights have been obtained from the study of international order and constitutional values and principles. This paper concludes by suggesting a proposal for constitutional amendment that includes the principle of non-regressivity of social rights in the Spanish Constitution establishing some requirements of those measures that imply a regression of their content such as: they shall be fully justified in relationship with all the rights, values and principles contained in the Constitution and in the international treaties signed by the Spanish State and in the context of full exploitation of the maximum resources available; Shall be applied after a more comprehensive examination of all possible alternatives; Shall in any case be of a temporary nature until the economic circumstances permit the restoration of the content, effectiveness, protection and pre-existing guarantee of the social rights affected; In any case they will respect the essential minimum content of social rights as a manifestation of human dignity; Shall be reasonable and sufficiently motivated; Shall not infringe, inter alia, the principles of legal certainty, legitimate expectations, non-discrimination and non-retroactivity of provisions restricting individual rights; Shall be proportionate and shall respect the principles of solidarity, cohesion and social sustainability.


Author(s):  
Rafael Bustos Gisbert

El artículo examina los documentos elaborados sobre independencia judicial por distintos órganos del Consejo de Europa. Tiene en cuenta la diferente aproximación en los mismos antes y después de la crisis del Estado de Derecho en algunos de los Estados europeos a partir de 2010. Tras resumir los estándares básicos elaborados en tales textos, se estudia su influencia en el Consejo de Europa y en la UE. En el primer sentido se examina su presencia en la jurisprudencia del TEDH. Respecto a la UE se examina el modo en que ha condicionado la labor de la Comisión en la supervisión del respeto al Estado de Derecho por los Estados miembros desde que comenzara a usarlos para evaluar las candidaturas de los países del Este a ingresar en la UE a finales del pasado siglo, hasta su incorporación al Informe sobre el Estado de Derecho en la UE aprobado en octubre de 2020.This essay focuses on the documents on judicial independence drafted by Council of Europe bodies. It takes into account its diverse approaches before and after the rule of Law backsliding in some European States since 2010. The basic standards elaborated are summarized. Its influence is addressed both at the Council of Europe and at the European Unión. In the first sense it examines the influence of this soft law in the European Court of Human Rights case law. Secondly it focuses in the way it has conditioned the European Commission task of monitoring the effectiveness of rule of law in EU member states. This influence began when they were used to evaluate the candidatures of Eastern European countries to join the EU at the end of the last century but it has kept inspiring the Commision’s activities until the Report on Rule of Law issued in October 2010.


Author(s):  
Elaine Dewhurst

In 2008, Ireland faced an economic crisis without parallel in its recent history. To address this crisis, a large programme of financial assistance was obtained from the European Union and the IMF, and the Irish government set about the process of reforming the structure and financing of social security benefits and the healthcare system to ameliorate the effects of the crisis. While much can be said about the legislative reforms, their rationale, necessity, and impact, this chapter addresses the legacy of the crisis on the Irish constitutional system and, particularly, on the Irish constitutional protection of social rights (or lack thereof). Following an analysis of the limited case law surrounding the reforms imposed during the economic crisis, it is contended that the economic crisis had the effect of highlighting the lack of explicit constitutional protection of social rights, a deficiency which in turn created an opportunity for the utilisation of other existing and emerging constitutional rights. While the future of social rights in the Irish Constitution is still unclear, it is evident that the economic crisis has left an indelible mark on the Irish constitutional landscape.


Author(s):  
Bruno de Witte

This chapter retraces the post-enlargement trajectory of the protection of fundamental social rights in Europe. The chapter selects three years that signpost this trajectory: 2000, when the EU’s Charter of Fundamental Rights was adopted, with the inclusion of a social rights chapter; 2009, when the Lisbon Treaty seemed to contain a renewed promise of social progress in the Union; and 2017, when the European Union launched a European Pillar of Social Rights, as part of an effort to revitalize the social protection agenda of the European Union after the disappointing post-Lisbon years.


2020 ◽  
pp. 507-528
Author(s):  
Marios Costa ◽  
Steve Peers

This chapter examines the social rights that arise as part of free-movement rights under Articles 21, 45, 49 and 59 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). It highlights the extensive interpretation given by the Court of Justice (CJ) to these rights ensuring equality of treatment for those migrants who are economically active. As well as dealing with the provisions in the Citizens’ Rights Directive (CRD) (Directive 2004/38) and Regulation 492/2011 on the free movement of workers, the chapter deals briefly with the provisions relating to social security and EU citizenship.


2013 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-35
Author(s):  
Mirela Matei ◽  
Marian Catalin Voica

The concept of corporate social responsibility is in constant development. It passes from the sphere of large transnational companies to the smaller sized companies, in the field of SMEs. Although SMEs don’t have the impact of great corporations, they have a duty to carry out social responsibility programs. An SME, as a singular unit, does not have the social impact of transnational corporations, but the large number of SMEs creates a social impact comparable to the one generated by large corporations. Due to competitive pressures, large transnational companies have outsourced some activities. SMEs that have taken over these activities have taken over responsibility for social programs to offset the negative effects arising


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document