scholarly journals Abweichungsfeste Verfassungsgrundsätze des Unionsrechts als ordre public-Vorbehalt gegenüber dem Völkerrecht

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philipp Tamblé

Since the Kadi judgment, the ECJ has repeatedly emphasised that obligations imposed by international agreements cannot have the effect of prejudicing the constitutional principles of Union law. Based on a case law analysis, the study examines these constitutional principles of Union law, which have so far lacked contours. The focus is on the effect of these principles in relation to acts of Union law and international treaties of the Union that are determined by international law. Based on the results, individual constitutional principles are elaborated. A comparison also shows clear similarities of the concept with ordre public exceptions. An outline of the role of constitutional principles in solving current issues rounds off the work.

1998 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 475-527 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rotem M. Giladi

On February 24, 1998, the government submitted the International Treaties (Approval by the Knesset) Bill, 1998 to the Knesset. This governmental bill represents the culmination of fifty years of exchange between the Executive and the Legislature concerning the constitutional authority to conclude international agreements on behalf of the State of Israel.Normally, it would have been preferable to await the completion of the enactment process before commenting on the new legislative arrangements. Due to the constitutional importance of the Bill and the fact that it raises several important questions, the regular practice will be abandoned in this case.Despite the availability of an abundance of materials on the treatymaking practice of the State of Israel and the status of treaties under municipal Israeli law both in English and in Hebrew, an in-depth analysis of the Bill requires an extensive expositionde lex lataon both these questions. Only then will the provisions of the Bill be presented. This will take the form of an issue-by-issue analysis, with conclusions drawn in each segment. The review will conclude with several additional observationsde lege ferenda.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 102-130
Author(s):  
Kirill Entin

The article examines the provisions of EU and EAEU law regarding the role and place of international agreements and international customary law in their respective legal orders. The duty of regional integration organisations to comply with international law necessitates the creation of mechanisms allowing incorporating international law norms into the EU and EAEU legal systems while ensuring the independent (autonomous) character of these legal orders. The case law of supranational courts plays a prominent role in resolving this issue. The author focuses primarily on issues that are relevant not only for the EU but for the EAEU at the current stage of its development: ensuring that international agreements with third parties are compatible with the main rules and principles of the functioning of the integration organization; the possibility for individuals to challenge the validity of EU/EAEU institutions/bodies acts on the ground that they are contrary to international treaty or customary law as well as to the binding nature for a regional integration organisation of international agreements concluded by Member States in fields where the competence has been transferred to the supranational level. The author comes to the conclusion that despite the fact that the mechanisms provided by the EAEU Treaty are insufficient, the gaps can be partially filled by the EAEU Court through its case law. In that regard the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union represents an important benchmark, although it needs to be assessed critically. Thus, the strict approach of the CJEU regarding the direct effect of universal international agreements as well as its application of the functional succession doctrine in relation to international agreements concluded by Member States makes it difficult for individuals to rely on international law in order to protect their rights.


2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 95-103
Author(s):  
Komang Sukaniasa

International agreements are agreements between international subjects that give rise to binding obligations in international rights, which can be bilateral or multilateral. Based on these opinions, an understanding can be taken that international treaties are agreements or agreements entered into by two or more countries as subjects of international law that aim to cause certain legal consequences. International agreements, whether ratified or through approval or acceptance or accession, or other methods that are permitted, have the same binding force as ratified international treaties established in the Ratification Law of International Treaties. Once again, it is equally valid and binding on the state. Therefore, the authors consider that the position of international treaties are not made in the form of the Ratification Act of the International Agreement but are binding and apply to Indonesia. Then Damos Dumoli Agusman argues that ratification originates from the conception of international treaty law which is interpreted as an act of confirmation from a country of the legal acts of its envoys or representatives who have signed an agreement as a sign of agreement to be bound by the agreement.


1999 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 489
Author(s):  
John Salmond

This article is a report from the New Zealand Mail, 1 August 1906, which covered Professor John Salmond's inaugural address as the chair of law at Victoria College (now Victoria University of Wellington). Professor Salmond dealt with the subject of international law with regards to the conditions of modern warfare. He discusses important international treaties, the role of the civil population, and what would happen if war came to New Zealand. Professor Salmond concludes that a key player in resolving international disputes was arbitration, which he believed was full of hope and promise for the future. 


Author(s):  
Heiss Helmut

This chapter looks at Liechtenstein perspectives on the Hague Principles. Rules on choice of law, including international commercial contract law, have been codified by virtue of the Act on Private International Law 1996 (Liechtenstein PILA). The Liechtenstein PILA does not expressly state that conventions will take precedence over national laws. However, it has been held by the Liechtenstein Constitutional Court that international treaties are of at least equal status to regular national laws and that national law must be interpreted in line with public international law. Moreover, an international convention will often be considered to be a lex specialis and be given precedence over national rules on that ground. Liechtenstein courts will refer first of all to (old) Austrian case law and legal literature when dealing with matters pertaining to the parties’ choice of law. Whenever these sources leave ambiguity to a specific question, Liechtenstein courts may and most likely will consider other persuasive authorities. The Hague Principles may constitute such persuasive authority.


Author(s):  
Zaher Khalid

This chapter examines Moroccan perspectives on the Hague Principles. In Morocco, the sources of private international law applicable to international commercial contracts are both of a national and an international nature. International sources include mainly treaties and, to a lesser extent, international customs to which the Moroccan courts may refer in particular cases. National sources are statutory law, case law, and scholarly writings. Case law has always played a vital role in the development and the interpretation of the rules applicable to international commercial contracts. It is indeed the role of the courts to determine the scope of law chosen by the parties and to delimit the boundaries of international public policy as a limit to the application of the law chosen by the parties. Moroccan courts consider international customs as important sources in respect of international contracts and arbitration. Having frequently used the universally accepted principles of private international law, Moroccan courts could easily draw on the Hague Principles to find solutions to certain questions that have not been addressed by the legislature.


2017 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 467-483
Author(s):  
Dolores Morondo Taramundi

This article aims to address a number of distinct characteristics of the European debate on legal pluralism as a means for accommodating religious diversity and religious normative orders. In contrast with the us and Canada, where there is a long-standing and varied tradition in jurisprudence that underpins theoretical debates and proposals, European case law is characterised by the prominent role of private international law. Public discussion has also been highly influenced by the uk controversy surrounding the application of Sharia law in arbitration. This article explores how this background shapes the space for religious normative orders, their potential as a means of accommodating religious diversity and the reasons and challenges ahead in the move from private international law to constitutional law for pluralistic arrangements.


2016 ◽  
Vol 23 (6) ◽  
pp. 1009-1039 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Ott

The European Parliament's role in EU external relations and treaty-making has increased over the years through constitutional practice and Treaty amendments. Finally, with the Treaty of Lisbon, the European Parliament's constitutional rights in treaty-making establish – in the words of the European Court of Justice (CJEU) – ‘symmetry between legislation-making and treaty-making in compliance with institutional balance provided for by the Treaties’. In a comparative overview, the European Parliament has ascertained more extensive powers over treaty-making compared to the majority of national parliaments which are only involved in politically important international treaties. This contribution addresses the consequences of this symmetry or parallelism and asks whether it leads to structural symmetry or even procedural symmetry which synchronizes the acts of legislating and treaty-making with each other. This contribution analyses the role of the European Parliament in the different phases of international treaty-making against the backdrop of this constitutional practice. This constitutional practice is shaped by intergovernmental agreements, bilateral arrangements and European Parliament resolutions and is influenced by the mounting case law of the CJEU. It also assesses the European Parliament's role in concluding international administrative agreements concluded by the Commission and Europol and how far the constitutional practice is in line with EU primary law.


2010 ◽  
Vol 5 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 173-197 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stéphane Paquin

This article aims to assess the effectiveness of two systems of governance with respect to the making of international treaties: the Canadian system, where the decision-making process is more centralized and where intergovernmental mechanisms are poorly institutionalized; and the Belgian system, where sub-state actors have the role of co-decision and where intergovernmental mechanisms are highly institutionalized. The central question to be discussed is: is the fact that one gives an important role to sub-state actors in the making of a country’s treaty by means of institutionalized intergovernmental mechanisms something that negatively or positively affects the foreign policy of a state? And is this a positive- or a negative-sum game at the level of the conclusion and implementation of treaties? The article concludes that the Belgian system is more effective, largely because its sub-state actors have an important role at every step of the conclusion of a treaty.


2021 ◽  
Vol 93 (2) ◽  
pp. 435-456
Author(s):  
Milana Pisarić

The Criminal Procedure Code stipulates that court decisions may not be based on evidence which is, directly or indirectly, by itself or in the manner of obtaining it, contrary to the Constitution, this Code, other laws or the generally accepted rules of international law and ratified international treaties, except in proceedings conducted for the purpose of obtaining such evidence. Illegal evidence cannot be used in criminal proceedings and is therefore separated from the case file. If the judgment is based on illegal evidence, it can be challenged by the appeal against the judgment, but also by the request for the protection of legality. The subject of the paper is the analysis of the recent case law of the Supreme Court of Cassation (in the period from January 1, 2019 to December 31, 2020) regarding the requests for the protection of legality stated in connection with illegal evidence.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document