12. Human Rights in the EU

EU Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 414-462
Author(s):  
Paul Craig ◽  
Gráinne de Búrca
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Political Conditionality ◽  
Development Policies ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter discusses EU human rights law, and the way in which the ECJ developed fundamental rights as part of the Community legal order. The analysis includes the drafting of the EU Charter of Rights, and its application in the post-Lisbon world in which it is legally binding on the EU and on Member States when they act in the scope of EU law. The EU has gradually integrated human rights concerns into a range of its policies. The EU actively promotes its ‘human rights and democratization’ policy in many countries around the world, and uses human rights clauses in its international trade and development policies. It has imposed a human rights-based ‘political conditionality’ on candidate Member States, and claims to integrate human rights concerns throughout its common foreign and security policy. The UK version contains a further section analysing the relevance of EU conceptions of fundamental rights in relation to the UK post-Brexit.

12. Human Rights in the EU

EU Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 430-480
Author(s):  
Paul Craig ◽  
Gráinne de Búrca
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Political Conditionality ◽  
Development Policies ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter discusses EU human rights law, and the way in which the ECJ developed fundamental rights as part of the Community legal order. The analysis includes the drafting of the EU Charter of Rights, and its application in the post-Lisbon world in which it is legally binding on the EU and on Member States when they act in the scope of EU law. The EU has gradually integrated human rights concerns into a range of its policies. The EU actively promotes its ‘human rights and democratization’ policy in many countries around the world, and uses human rights clauses in its international trade and development policies. It has imposed a human rights-based ‘political conditionality’ on candidate Member States, and claims to integrate human rights concerns throughout its common foreign and security policy. The UK version contains a further section analysing the relevance of EU conceptions of fundamental rights in relation to the UK post-Brexit.

11. Human Rights in the EU

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Craig ◽  
Gráinne de Búrca
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Member States ◽  
Political Conditionality ◽  
Development Policies ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
Community Legal Order ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Academic Debate

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing able students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter discusses EU human rights law, and the way in which the ECJ developed fundamental rights as part of the Community legal order. The analysis includes the drafting of the EU Charter of Rights, and its application in the post-Lisbon world in which it is legally binding on the EU and on Member States when they act in the scope of EU law. The EU has gradually integrated human rights concerns into a range of its policies. The EU actively promotes its ‘human rights and democratization’ policy in many countries around the world, and uses human rights clauses in its international trade and development policies. It has imposed a human rights-based ‘political conditionality’ on candidate Member States, and claims to integrate human rights concerns throughout its common foreign and security policy.

scholarly journals Brexit and the Future of EU Politics

2019 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Security Policy ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Social Rights ◽  
Financial Policies ◽  
The Future ◽  
Differentiated Integration ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

As the end of the Brexit process is still not in sight, the consequences of the UK’s withdrawal from the EU—with or without an agreement—are difficult to assess. This volume aims at an interim assessment of Brexit, from basic questions of sovereignty, which Brexiteers seem to be striving to recover, models of differentiated integration and the protection of fundamental rights, to the principle of democracy, which seems to be being challenged in different ways. How has the internal market been affected by Brexit? How have citizens’ social rights as developed by the ECJ been affected? What impact has Brexit had on the control of immigration in the UK? All this is dealt with in part II of this anthology. Its last part is devoted to monetary and financial policies, as well as to the Common Foreign and Security Policy, a policy that is only subject to supranational discipline in part and in which the UK, nevertheless, plays an important role—and may continue to do so in the future. A great deal looks different today than one may have expected prior to the 2016 referendum.

The Protection of Intellectual Property in International Human Rights Law

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henning Grosse Ruse-Khan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Cultural Rights ◽  
Core Subject ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
The Eu

This chapter examines the human rights system and the way it deals with human creations and innovations that are the traditional core subject matter of intellectual property (IP) rights. It begins by reviewing the scope for protection under Article 27 (2) Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and Article 15 (1) (c) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). The chapter moves on to the protection of property in human rights law, especially on the regional, European level. It examines how IP can be protected as property under the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) and under the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (EU Charter). Finally, the chapter looks at some of the overlaps with international IP rules and the conflict norms in the human rights system to address such overlaps.

The normative framework of the EU’s commitment to human rights

2020 ◽  
pp. 79-116
Author(s):  
Chiara Altafin ◽  
Karin Lukas ◽  
Manfred Nowak
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Double Standards ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Normative Framework ◽  
The Eu

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.

scholarly journals Contradictions in Frontex Operations: the Push-back

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 85-92
Author(s):  
Gábor Kemény ◽  
Michal Vít
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Influencing Factors ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Organisational Structure ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Eu

The aim of the paper is to introduce the legal misfits between the standards of human rights as stated by the European Union and the Council of Europe and practical day to day experience related to EU member states. For this purpose, the article focuses on political and legal assessment of the so-called pushbacks at the Greek-Turkish external border and introduces the influencing factors, such as the various interpretation of the legislation, differences in the organisational structure and values. Authors concluded that these factors are endangering the fulfilment of the fundamental rights and the efficiency of the border protection thus the security of the EU and its member states.

The European Union security policy

2020 ◽  
pp. 80-86
Author(s):  
Ivanna Maryniv
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
The World ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
Institutional Mechanism ◽  
The Eu

Problem setting. In spite of the presence of numerous conventions, treaties and organizations in the world today, the issue of security is still a very acute issue for the world community. There are many reasons for this: the presence of nuclear powers, serious disputes between countries that are justly considered world leaders, the existence of numerous local conflicts and wars of a more global nature across the globe. These and other factors are pushing states around the world to allocate budget funds to ensure effective security policies. Given today’s realities, one can trace the tendency of several countries to pool their own efforts and resources to pursue a common security policy. The European Union is one of the clearest examples of this behavior. This intergovernmental organization is committed to maintaining peace, diplomacy, trade and development around the world. The EU also promotes cooperation with neighboring countries through the European Neighborhood Policy. Target research. The aim of the research is to study the role of the European Union’s institutional mechanism in the exercise of its powers to ensure the defense and foreign policy cooperation of the Member States. Analysis of recent research and publication. Many domestic and foreign scholars, including B. Tonro, T. Christiansen, S. Morsch, G. Mackenstein, and others. The institutional basis of foreign and security policy is analyzed in detail by J. Peterson, questions related to the European Union’s security policy. M. Shackleton. K. Gill, M. Smith and others study the general features of the development of a common EU security policy. Some contribution to the study of various problems related to European and Euro-Atlantic integration has been made by such national scientists as V. Govorukh, I. Gritsyak, G. Nemyrya, L. Prokopenko, O. Rudik, V. Streltsov, O. Tragniuk, I. Shumlyaeva, I. Yakovyuk and others. Article’s main body. The article examines the emergence and development of the European Union’s security policy from the date of the Brussels Covenant to the present. Particular attention is paid to the role of the European Union’s institutional mechanism in the exercise of its powers to ensure the defense and foreign policy cooperation of the Member States. A study of the officially adopted five-year global foreign and security policy of the EU is being done to improve stability in Europe and beyond, analyzing EU conflict resolution and crisis management activities. Conclusions and prospect of development. In view of the above, it can be concluded that the EU’s foreign and security policy institutional framework is an extensive system in which all the constituencies are endowed with a certain range of general and specific powers and are called upon to cooperate with one another to achieve a common goal. It cannot be said that such close cooperation puts pressure on Member States. Yes, a Member State has the right to refrain from voting for any decision that requires unanimity and such abstention will not prevent the above decision being taken. In this case, the mechanism of so-called “constructive retention” is triggered: the abstaining country is not obliged to comply with the decision, however, accepts the fact that it is binding on other Member States and takes this into account when concluding treaties, which should not contradict the said decision.

The Long Walk to Strasbourg: About the Insufficient Judicial Protection in Some Areas of the Common Foreign and Security Policy before the European Union’s Accession to the ECHR

2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 393-414
Author(s):  
José M. Cortés-Martín
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
National Courts ◽  
European Court ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
Judicial Protection ◽  
Judicial Remedies ◽  
The Eu

Abstract It is likely that the European Court of Justice’s (ECJ) objection in Opinion 2/13 regarding the absence of judicial remedies in certain Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) areas can hardly be accommodated in a future revised Accession Project to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). This is basically due to obstacles to proceeding with reform of the EU Treaties or establishing an ECHR reservation clause. However, as a matter of fact, the exact dimension of this problem seems to be quite relative. First of all, this is because recent ECJ case-law is gradually eroding the Court’s lack of competence, in particular, after Rosneft. Next, this is because, in those cases where there is still an absence of effective judicial protection, national courts – as EU ordinary courts – could fill this gap. Finally, this gap could also be filled by creating accountability mechanisms in the area of human rights within the framework of Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) missions.

Policing Maastricht

1997 ◽  
Vol 70 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-53
Author(s):  
N.S.J. Baxter
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Third Party ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Third ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
Free Movement Of Persons ◽  
New Community ◽  
The Eu

In February 1992 the Treaty of European Union was signed at Maastricht. It committed member States to new Community goals which included increasing government cooperation in the fields of foreign and security policy along with justice and home affairs (Steiner, 1994). The following “pillars” to develop the Union were identified. First of all, the protection of the rights and interests of people was strengthened by introducing citizenship of the European Union (EU); secondly a commitment was made to implement a common foreign and security policy indicated a movement towards a common defence of the Union against third party States. The third pillar seeks to facilitate the free movement of persons, while ensuring their safety and security through member States, by working closely in the areas of justice and home affairs (Benyon et al, 1993). It is this latter aspect which has implications for policing within the EU.

scholarly journals Prisoner Transfer Within the Irish-UK Common Travel Area (CTA) After Brexit: Human Rights Between Politics and Penal Reform

2020 ◽  
pp. 002201832097752
Author(s):  
Tim J Wilson
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Penal Reform ◽  
Long Duration ◽  
Domestic Courts ◽  
Uk Government ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

The UK Government proposed in February 2020 that sentenced prisoner transfers with EU member states should continue after Brexit, but using a more ‘effective’ process than the existing CoE convention. The article analyses, with a particular focus on the Irish-UK CTA, the significance of continued UK human rights compliance for the achievement of this objective and the interrelationship of this issue with extradition/surrender (including the surrender of fugitive prisoners). It is concluded that Brexit has most probably raised the level of formal and institutional human rights compliance (including legal aid/assistance and the direct enforcement of prisoners’ rights in domestic courts) required from the UK for criminal justice cooperation with EU member states. Entering into such undertakings would not assist criminal impunity or the evasion of lawfully imposed penalties. Such undertakings, however, cannot help to resolve many problems inherent in prisoner transfer within the EU. The creation of a truly effective and rehabilitative transfer system would require (a) constructive UK Government participation in inter-governmental (including the UK devolved governments)/EU arrangements capable of incrementally resolving or effectively mitigating criminal justice cooperation problems and (b) acceptance at Westminster that this aspect of post-Brexit readjustment is likely to be intermittent and of long-duration.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document