scholarly journals Protection of Whistleblowers by the European Union, the Council of Europe, and the European Court of Human Rights

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 25-36
Author(s):  
Sára Kiššová
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
European Court ◽  
Financial Interests ◽  
Internal Sources ◽  
Illegal Activities

Whistleblower protection in the European Union is undergoing significant developments. The new Directive (EU) 2019/1937 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2019 on the protection of persons reporting breaches of Union law sets a minimum standard for the protection of whistleblowers. It is awaiting implementation in Member States' national law by December 2021. However, a certain level of protection is also guaranteed by the European Court of Human Rights case law principles. Reports of illegal activities provided from close internal sources can strengthen the protection of the EU's financial interests. Adequate protection is needed to prevent retaliation against whistleblowers. As the deadline for transposing this directive approaches, the article aims to analyse the Directive 2019/1973 and compare it with the protection guaranteed by Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Present and Future Relations between the ECJ and the ECtHR

ICL Journal ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosmarie Doblhoff-Dier ◽  
Sandra Kusmierczyk
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
The Road ◽  
European Court ◽  
On The Road ◽  
The Relationship

AbstractBy acceding to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), the EU’s role as supranational player in the complex human rights architecture of Europe will be finally recognized. On 5 April 2013, the negotiators of the accession procedure of the European Union to the ECHR agreed on a package of draft accession instruments. Constituting a mile­stone on the road to accession, the now revised Accession Agreement still leaves vast room for discussion. By critically scrutinizing some of its modalities, this article will evaluate its impact on the human rights jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and the Eu­ropean Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the relationship between both courts. To this end, it will address the somewhat disproportionate involvement of the European Union in the future jurisdiction of the ECtHR and in the decision making of the Council of Europe in matters linked to the ECHR. Furthermore, it will focus on the compatibility of the Draft Agree­ment with the principle of autonomous interpretation of European Union Law: a highly rel­evant discussion for the ECJ’s future Opinion under Article 218 (11) TFEU on the compatibil­ity of the finalized draft agreement with the Treaties - the next hurdle for accession.

‘Unionisation’ of the European Court of Human Rights’ ne bis in idem jurisprudence: the Case of Mihalache v Romania

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 227-239
Author(s):  
Cedric Serneels
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Ne Bis In Idem ◽  
Relevant Case

This article analyses the decision of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in the case of Mihalache v Romania. In the judgment, the Court, dealing with the application of the ne bis in idem principle, further elaborates on the different components of the concept ‘final acquittal or conviction’ under Article 4 of Protocol No 7 to the European Convention on Human Rights. The author studies this aspect of the ruling through the lens of judicial dialogue and examines in particular the influence of relevant case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union on the ECtHR’s reasoning.

The Relationship Between the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights: an Originalist Analysis

2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 482-511
Author(s):  
Stephen Brittain
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
The Relationship

European Convention on Human Rights and the European Union Charter of Fundamental Rights: relationship – Teleological method of interpretation of the European Court of Justice: meaning, justifications, and criticisms – Originalist method of interpretation: meaning, justifications, and criticisms – Original meaning of Article 52(3) of the Charter: text, drafting history, case law – Conclusion: case law of European Court of Human Rights not strictly binding on the Court of Justice of the European Union.

Enforcing EUCHR Principles and Fundamental Rights in Environmental Cases

2012 ◽  
Vol 81 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-74 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicolas de Sadeleer
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Clean Environment

So far, EU treaty law does not encapsulate any individually justiciable rights to a clean environment or to health. The article explores whether individuals can rely on the environmental duties embodied in the European Union Charter of Human Rights (EUCHR), and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in cases falling within the scope of EU environmental law. Moreover, it takes a close examination of the case law of both the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights regarding the standing of individuals whose environment is impaired.

Narratives of Constitutionalization in the European Union Court of Justice and in the European Court of Human Rights’ Case Law

ICL Journal ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-41
Author(s):  
Maurizio Arcari ◽  
Stefania Ninatti
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
The Core ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court

Abstract Constitutionalization is a peculiar process which characterizes the whole fabric of modern international law. It may however display different levels of evolution and different implications when distinct legal sub-systems are considered: this appears to be especially true at the European level, in particular in the context of the European Union law and of the European Convention on Human Rights. This article aims at unveiling the key elements of the constitutionalization process as developed by the judges sitting in Luxembourg and Strasbourg. In their relevant case law, both the EU Court of Justice (ECJ) and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) have identified the core concepts and elements lying behind the constitutionalization of their respective legal systems. The analysis of the ECJ and ECtHR case law will be divided into two different parts dealing with the internal dimension from one side, and external one from the other side. While presenting nuances and implications that are linked to the diverse degree of integration of the two legal systems, it may be submitted that the core elements of constitutionalization depicted by the Luxembourg and Strasbourg judges reveal some common patterns.

scholarly journals Adesão da União Europeia à Convenção Europeia de Direitos do Homem e a Interação entre o Tribunal de Justiça da União Europeia e a Corte Europeia de Direitos Humanos

2014 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Monique Fernandes Santos Matos
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Community Law ◽  
Substantive Content ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court

ADESÃO DA UNIÃO EUROPEIA À CONVENÇÃO EUROPEIA DE DIREITOS DO HOMEM E A INTERAÇÃO ENTRE O TRIBUNAL DE JUSTIÇA DA UNIÃO EUROPEIA E A CORTE EUROPEIA DE DIREITOS HUMANOS EUROPEAN UNION’S ACCESSION TO THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE INTERACTION BETWEEN THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION AND THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS Monique Fernandes Santos MatosRESUMO: Dentre os valores que devem fundamentam a União Europeia - UE, o Tratado de Lisboa prescreve: o respeito à dignidade humana, liberdade, democracia, igualdade, Estado de Direito e respeito aos direitos humanos, incluídos os direitos das pessoas pertencentes às minorias. Neste contexto, é importante a análise da importância do papel exercido pela corte supranacional (Tribunal de Justiça da União Europeia - TJUE) e pela corte internacional (Corte Europeia de Direitos Humanos – Corte EDH), ambas atuantes no cenário europeu, especialmente a interação de suas jurisprudências em matéria de direitos humanos. Para tanto, cabe retratar a forma institucional de interação de tais cortes após a adesão da UE à Convenção Europeia de Direitos Humanos, especialmente as atribuições e competências e observância às jurisprudências adotadas por cada uma delas. Não será objeto deste estudo, dado aos limites do objeto, o conteúdo material das jurisprudências de tais cortes em matéria de direitos humanos, nem as questões políticas envolvidas nessa interação institucional. Observa-se uma crescente fertilização e fecundação cruzadas, bem como um diálogo de juízes entre esses tribunais, contribuindo para a harmonização da jurisprudência em matéria de direitos humanos no Direito comunitário. O estudo desse processo é importante para a compreensão da harmonização de direitos humanos no Direito comunitário, bem como para outros contextos regionais que possam porventura utilizar o modelo europeu como referência. PALAVRAS-CHAVE: Direito Internacional dos Direitos Humanos; Direito Comunitário; Sistema Europeu de Proteção aos Direitos Humanos; Tribunal de Justiça da União Europeia; Diálogo de juízes. ABSTRACT: Among the values that ought to base the European Union - EU, the Lisbon Treaty prescribes: respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, rule of law, and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. In this context, it is important to analyze the relevance of the role played by the supranational court (Court of Justice of the European Union) and the international court (European Court of Human Rights), both active on the European scene, especially the interaction of its case law on human rights. To do so, it is worth to delineate the institutional form of interaction of these courts after the EU’s accession to the European Convention of Human Rights, especially the tasks and powers, and the abiding by the case law adopted by each of them. It will not be the object of this study, given the limits of the object, neither the substantive content of the case law of such human rights courts nor the political issues involved in this institutional interaction. It is observed a growing cross-fertilization, as well as a dialogue of judges between these courts, contributing to the harmonization of case law on human rights in the context of EU law. The study of this process is important for the understanding of the harmonization of human rights in community law, as well as for other regional contexts that may possibly use the European model as reference.KEYWORDS: International Law of Human Rights; Community law; European System of Human Rights Protection; Court of Justice of the European Union; Dialogue of judges.SUMÁRIO: 1. Introdução: a importância da proteção aos direitos humanos para o Direito comunitário. 2. Estática das organizações europeias na proteção aos direitos humanos. 2.1. O Tribunal de Justiça da União Europeia - TJUE. 2.2. O Sistema Europeu de Proteção aos Direitos Humanos - SEDH: marco regulatório, estrutura e funcionamento. A Corte Europeia de Direitos Humanos – Corte EDH.  3. Dinâmica da interação entre o TJUE e a Corte EDH.  3.1. Adesão da União Europeia à Convenção Europeia de Direitos Humanos - CEDH. 3.2. Fertilização e fecundação cruzadas e diálogo de juízes entre o TJUE e a Corte EDH. 4. Considerações finais. 5. Referências.

Standardy należytego uzasadnienia w świetle orzecznictwa Trybunału Konstytucyjnego i Europejskiego Trybunału Praw Człowieka

2014 ◽  
pp. 33-48
Author(s):  
Przemysław Florjanowicz-Błachut
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
European Court ◽  
Judicial Reasoning ◽  
The Right

The core function of the judiciary is the administration of justice through delivering judgments and other decisions. The crucial role for its acceptance and legitimization by not only lawyers, but also individulas (parties) and the hole society plays judicial reasoning. It should reflect on judge’s independence within the exercise of his office and show also judicial self-restraint or activism. The axiology and the standards of proper judicial reasoning are anchored both in constitutional and supranational law and case-law. Polish Constitutional Tribunal derives a duty to give reasoning from the right to a fair trial – right to be heard and bring own submissions before the court (Article 45 § 1 of the Constitution), the right to appeal against judgments and decisions made at first stage (Article 78), the rule of two stages of the court proceedings (Article 176) and rule of law clause (Article 2), that comprises inter alia right to due process of law and the rule of legitimate expactation / the protection of trust (Vertrauensschutz). European Court of Human Rights derives this duty to give reasons from the guarantees of the right to a fair trial enshrined in Article 6 § 1 of European Convention of Human Rights. In its case-law the ECtHR, taking into account the margin of appreciation concept, formulated a number of positive and negative requirements, that should be met in case of proper reasoning. The obligation for courts to give sufficient reasons for their decisions is also anchored in European Union law. European Court of Justice derives this duty from the right to fair trial enshrined in Articles 6 and 13 of the ECHR and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Standards of the courts reasoning developed by Polish constitutional court an the European courts (ECJ and ECtHR) are in fact convergent and coherent. National judges should take them into consideration in every case, to legitimize its outcome and enhance justice delivery.

scholarly journals Refl ections on the Principle of Equal Treatment in EU Law and the Jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Convention on Human Rights

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-23
Author(s):  
Marija Daka
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Equal Treatment ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Complex Approach

The paper presents some of the most relevant aspects of European nondiscrimination law established th rough European Union law and the European Convention on Human Rights, looking also at the evolution of the norms and milestones of case-law on equal treatment within the two systems. The paper gives an overview of the non-discrimination concept as interpreted by the Court of Justice of the European Union and by the European Court of Human Rights. We examine the similar elements but also give insight into conceptual differences between the two human rights regimes when dealing with equal treatment. The differences mainly stem from the more complex approach taken by EU law although, based on analysed norms, cases, and provisions, the aspects of equal treatment in EU law are largely consistent with the practice of the ECtHR. Lastly, the paper briefl y places the European non-discrimination law within the multi-layered human rights system, giving some food for thought for the future potential this concept brings.

The Impact of the Pan-European General Principles of Good Administration on Swiss Law

2020 ◽  
pp. 353-374
Author(s):  
Nadja Braun Binder ◽  
Ardita Driza Maurer
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
European Court ◽  
Swiss Law ◽  
Written Law ◽  
The Impact

This chapter is dedicated to exploring the impact on Swiss administrative law of the pan-European general principles of good administration developed within the framework of the Council of Europe (CoE). The chapter claims that the standards stemming from the European Convention on Human Rights and the case law of the European Court of Human Rights have been adopted in an exemplary way by Swiss authorities. The influence was especially strong in the 1980s and 1990s. The same cannot be said regarding other documents of the CoE, whose impact remains disparate because many aspects of the pan-European general principles of good administration were already part of the national written law. The chapter concludes that despite the exemplary integration of CoE instruments heated debates on the content of these instruments are not excluded from Switzerland.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document