scholarly journals Canaries in a coal mine: Rule of law deficiencies and mutual trust

Pravni zapisi ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 371-395
Author(s):  
Petra Bárd

The value decline in the EU has manyfold consequences. It jeopardizes the very essence of Europe as a community of values. At the same time it endangers legal principles, such as mutual recognition, which is based on mutual trust presuming that all Member States are based on the rule of law and protect fundamental rights. Once trust is rebutted, Member States' judicial authorities will refuse to cooperate and recognise each other's judgments in order not to become complicit in individual rights violations and not to contradict the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. This paper argues that EU law must allow for such considerations and suspend mutual recognition-based laws not only on a case-by-case basis, as it happens today in practice, but in general with regard to Member States undergoing rule of law decline, in order to uphold the EU's fundamental rights culture, and EU law's equivalency with the Convention's human rights regime.

Author(s):  
Lorna Woods ◽  
Philippa Watson ◽  
Marios Costa

This chapter examines the development of the general principles by the Court of Justice (CJ) to support the protection of human rights in the European Union (EU) law. It analyses the relationship of the general principles derived from the CJ’s jurisprudence to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), and the European Charter of Fundamental Rights (EUCFR). It discusses the possible accession of the EU to the ECHR and the implications of Opinion 2/13. It suggests that although the protection of human rights has been more visible since the Lisbon Treaty and there are now more avenues to such protection, it is debatable whether the scope and level of protection has increased.


Author(s):  
Chiara Altafin ◽  
Karin Lukas ◽  
Manfred Nowak

The chapter presents and assesses the various normative layers—domestic, European, regional, international—on which the European Union’s (EU’s) commitment to human rights is built. It analyses the interaction of EU primary law, general principles of law derived from constitutional traditions of Member States, and international human rights law, including relevant regional instruments such as the European Convention on Human Rights, the European Social Charter, and the Istanbul Convention. It is contended that, despite an impressive and pioneering normative framework on human rights, the EU currently faces a number of challenges that call for a strong stance on human rights realisation in all areas of its competence and influence. Enduring deficiencies in the relevant normative framework include the absence of a fully fledged EU competence to legislate in the area of human rights protection and the application of ‘double standards’ in the EU’s approach to human rights internally and externally, leading to a deep divide between internal and external policies guided by starkly different logics. Further areas of concern include the difficulties of the Charter of Fundamental Rights implementation in view of EU institutions and Member States’ competencies, which have become particularly apparent in the EU’s response to the Eurozone crisis and the arising tensions between EU and Member States’ austerity measures, as well as the uneven nature of the EU and Member States’ human rights obligations with regard to the international legal framework, leading to gaps and overlaps.


2001 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 125-134
Author(s):  
FRANÇOISE TULKENS

The question of effectiveness is the main theme of this article, notably as this refers to the rights contained in the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and to the main issues at stake today. The second part of the article, explains the role played by the European Convention on Human Rights among all the universal and regional instruments for the protection of human rights. Finally there is a critical look at what might be termed a degree of ‘inflation’ of the fundamental rights.


2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (5) ◽  
pp. 409-420
Author(s):  
Anna Podolska

Abstract There are various forms of jurisdictional dialogue. In addition to drawing from the case law of another court or seeking direct assistance of such another court in passing the judgment, we can notice in practice situations when by issuing a verdict the courts are communicating with each other. The rulings of the Bundesverfassungsgericht, the Court of Justice of the European Union, and the European Court of Human Rights regarding the free movement of judgments in the European Union and protection of fundamental rights are the example of such activities. Each of these bodies was interpreting separately the extent to which the mechanisms of recognising and executing the judgments may interfere with the level of protection of fundamental rights. A common conclusion concerns assigning the priority to protection of fundamental rights, while individual bodies were determining differently the standards of such protection. The analysed judgments can be construed as a communication between these bodies. Although no direct discussion takes place between these courts, this is still a form of interaction which affects the development of the case law and understanding of the boundaries of mutual recognition of judgments and protection of human rights within judicial proceedings.


2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 81
Author(s):  
Nyoman Satyayudha Dananjaya ◽  
Fuchikawa Kazuhiko

This paper aims to examine the protection of the environment in Indonesia which is part of the realization of a law state that guarantees the constitutional rights of its citizens. It is a legal research that reviews Indonesian constitutional and statutory provisions, besides adding a comparative perspective from a Japanese Constitution and legal system. It is found that the concept of a law state in Indonesia does not specifically follow the concept of a law state like what is meant in “rechtsstaat” or “the rule of law”. It has peculiar characteristics which indeed seem to adopt the noble values ??of those two concepts which clearly confesses in the constitution along with the elements and characters stated in it. One of the most prominent characteristics of a law state is the recognition and protection of human rights. In the Indonesian Constitution 1945, human rights as the fundamental rights of human beings have been arranged and compiled which is legally legitimized become constitutional rights. Among human rights, rights related to the environment include essential rights in array of international human rights formulations. Article 28 letter H of the Indonesian Constitution 1945 expressly states the rights to habitable and wholesome environment for citizen. The protection form can be a normative arrangement in the constitution or in a formal juridical through legislation. Protection of citizens' constitutional rights related to the environment is faced with due process of environmental protection that requires consistency in order to achieve the intention and direction of the Indonesian law state itself.


Author(s):  
Sandra Joksta

Ability to perform advocate’s duty is irrevocably linked to advocate’s immunity concept. The article provides an insight about the scope of advocate’s immunity concept in the age of money laundering. The purpose of it is to analyse the modern tendency to overstep the red lines guarding this concept, when applying legal enactments for money laundering evasion purposes. In the article, the judgment of 19 November 2020 in case “Klaus Mueller vs Germany” made by European Court of Human Rights, is analysed, where the issue of advocate’s immunity was considered in joint connection with the Clause 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The sometimes-exaggerated need for transparency at all costs conflicts with privacy protection aspects of individuals. Legislative enactments of money laundering and terrorism financing and proliferation evasion systemically contradicts Law of Advocacy and causes collision with other norms of higher legal rank such as fundamental rights enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights to fair trial and justice and rights to choose an occupation and engage in work. Keywords: advocate’s immunity concept, advocate’s rights to professional secret and confidentiality, legal certainty, money laundering and terrorism financing and proliferation evasion, principle of sound legislation, uncertain privilege.


Author(s):  
Olga T. Tur ◽  
Marta B. Kravchyk ◽  
Iryna Yu. Nastasiak ◽  
Myroslava M. Sirant ◽  
Nataliya V. Stetsyuk

National and international courts are increasingly turning to generally recognised international legal principles to regulate private law relations. This is necessitated, in particular, by the fact that the issues and disputes that modern participants in private law relations address to the courts are becoming more widespread. Thus, the practice of international justice and justice in Ukraine demonstrates that such international principles as the principle of justice, equality, non-discrimination, evolutionary interpretation, proportionality, legal certainty, and the rule of law are increasingly used in dispute resolution. This study investigated the application of international principles in private law relations. Based on the general legal research methods, the nature of international legal principles was analysed, the study considered their application in the above-mentioned Ukrainian court cases to the European Court of Human Rights, as well as the Constitutional and Anti-Corruption Courts of Ukraine. The study investigated the judicial practice of the European Court of Human Rights, whose decisions raise the issue of violation of rights and fundamental freedoms stipulated in the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and non-compliance with basic international legal principles, as well as highlighted the main trends of these disputes. Based on the results of the analysis, the study identified an insufficient level of the content specification regarding the principle of the rule of law and its features in the current legislation of Ukraine, which must be properly observed by both state authorities and citizens of Ukraine. Based on the conducted research, the authors formulated their scientific positions and conclusions aimed at improving the system of principles of private law relations


Author(s):  
Tobias Lock

Nothing in this Charter shall be interpreted as restricting or adversely affecting human rights and fundamental freedoms as recognised, in their respective fields of application, by Union law and international law and by international agreements to which the Union or all the Member States are party, including the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, and by the Member States’ constitutions.


2021 ◽  
pp. 451-496
Author(s):  
Robert Schütze

This chapter investigates each of the European Union’s three bills of rights and the constitutional principles that govern them. It starts with the discovery of an ‘unwritten’ bill of rights in the form of general principles of European law. The chapter then moves to an analysis of the Union’s ‘written’ bill of rights: the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, which was adopted to codify already existing human rights in the Union legal order. It also considers the formal relationship between the European Union and the European Convention on Human Rights. Finally, the chapter explores the relationship between EU fundamental rights and the Member States. Despite being primarily addressed to the Union, EU fundamental rights can, in some situations, also bind the Member States (and even their nationals). National courts may thus sometimes be obliged to review the legality of national law in the light of EU fundamental rights.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document