Articles for category: AAA General

CJEU Opinion 2/13 – Three Mitigating Circumstances

The academic response to CJEU Opinion 2/13 on EU accession to the European Convention on Human Rights can be characterised as a combination of shock, disbelief and protest. Indeed, the Opinion looks like total overkill, as the grounds for rejecting the draft accession agreement are so many and so diverse that they unavoidably give the impression of being primarily based on a defensive and territorial attitude of protecting the exclusive and superior nature of the CJEU’s own jurisdiction. That said, the critical discussion on Opinion 2/13 should include a search for rational explanations as to why the CJEU’s opinion is negative, even if in the extreme. What follows is a short reflection on three factors towards that kind of an approach, without any intention to defend the Opinion itself.

Opinion 2/13 on EU accession to the ECHR: a Christmas bombshell from the European Court of Justice

On 18 December 2014, the ECJ delivered its long awaited Opinion 2/13 on the compatibility with EU law of the draft agreement for EU accession to the ECHR. The ECJ concluded, to the great surprise of many, that the accession agreement is not compatible with EU law. Indeed it found so many obstacles with the agreement that it has now rendered accession very difficult, if not impossible.

Let Not Triepel Triumph – How To Make the Best Out of Sentenza No. 238 of the Italian Constitutional Court for a Global Legal Order

The Italian Constiutional Court’s English) already inspired a flurry of comments in the blogosphere (see in EJIL talk! Christian Tams (24 Oct. 2014) and Theodor Schilling (12 Nov. 2014); on the Verfassungsblog amongst others Andrea Pin (19 Nov. 2014); on the Völkerrechtsblog Heidelberg Journal of International Law 2015, issue 1. In that Sentenza, the Corte refused to give effect to the ICJ’s judgment (in) Immunities in the Age of Global Constitutionalism (Leiden: Brill 2015)), but – maybe even more importantly – because it concerns the relationship between international law (in the shape of a judgment by the ICJ) and domestic law, as applied by a domestic (constitutional) court. Just the latest item in ... continue reading

Acceding to the ECHR notwithstanding the Court of Justice Opinion 2/13

The Court’s Opinion on the accession of the EU to the European Convention on Human Rights may have shattered expectations. The revised accession agreement that was renegotiated by the EU and its Member States with the State Parties to the ECHR, after an initial rejection in the Council by the UK and France, has been dodged by the Court. Tobias Lock in his very fast and intelligent comment answered that question by stating that ‘[i]t is clear that the drafters of the DAA will have to return to the negotiating table’. I respectfully disagree.

The UK’s Potential Withdrawal from the European Convention on Human Rights – Just a Flash in the Pan or a Real Threat?

The ruling Conservative party of Prime Minister David Cameron published a paper this year, called »Protecting Human Rights in the UK«. The party suggests to replace the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA), which incorporates the ECHR into UK law, with a »home-grown« bill of rights. The aim is to attribute the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) only an advisory role vis-à-vis the UK parliament and to weaken the quasi precedential effect of ECtHR case-law vis-à-vis the UK Supreme Court. In case this will not be accepted by the Council of Europe (CoE), the Conservatives propose withdrawing from the Convention. ... continue reading

Unter dem Ministerinnen-Hut darf ein politischer Kopf stecken

Darf eine Bundesministerin einer konkurrierenden Partei öffentlich Misserfolg wünschen? Das darf sie nicht, so das Bundesverfassungsgericht in der jüngsten Folge der beliebten Serie "Wie die NPD sich auf ihren letzten Metern noch mal um das Grundgesetz verdient macht". Genauer gesagt: Das darf sie nicht, soweit sie tatsächlich als Bundesministerin spricht. Sonst schon.

The Backlash against International Courts

International courts seem to be living in hard times. The International Court of Justice is openly challenged by the Italian Constitutional Court, the European Court of Human Rights faces political initiatives to curtail its power in the UK and in Switzerland, the International Criminal Court is up against occasional rebellion in a number of African countries, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights has been confronted with challenges by courts and governments in Venezuela and the Dominican Republic, and several (especially Latin American) countries have initiated a backlash against international investment arbitration. This symposium has debated a number of these cases ... continue reading

Is there an Ethics of Nudging?

Is nudging – the act of pushing someone in a certain direction in his or her own interest – not just a matter of "could" but of "should"? Cass Sunstein, one of the protagonists of the nudging debate, spoke last week at a conference held by the Federal Department of Justice. The question of the legitimacy of nudging hardly mattered at that conference, though – a question that will be hopefully addressed more comprehensively at the Verfassungsblog Nudging conference in January.

Damage-assessment on the building of international law after the Italian Constitutional Court’s decision no. 238 of 2014: no structural damage, just wear and tear.

This symposium invites reflections on the intercourse between national courts and international law, in light of the recent judgment of the Constitutional Court of Italy (no. 238 of 2014, of 22 October 2014). I briefly examine this judgment’s impact on international law in two respects. First, whether it can point to a new principle of international law. Second, whether it undermines international law as such. I have elsewhere summarised the main aspects of the ruling, and criticised its inward-looking approach. The Italian judges deliberately avoided engaging with international law and therefore their ruling serves, at most, as cheap-talk for the ... continue reading

Von der Freiheit, sein Kind daheim zur Welt zu bringen

Wer es erlebt hat, wird mir zustimmen: Es gibt kaum einen intimeren, mächtigeren, das Innerste buchstäblich nach außen kehrenderen Moment im Leben als die Geburt des eigenen Kindes. Bis zu welcher Grenze ist es dem Staat erlaubt, diesen Moment unter seine fürsorgliche Kontrolle zu bringen, zu meiner und meines Kindes Sicherheit, notfalls auch gegen meinen Willen? Diese Frage sucht der EGMR heute in zwei tschechischen Fällen zu beantworten. Er plagt sich erkennbar dabei, springt aber im Ergebnis der Mutter und ihrer Freiheit, vor, während und nach der Geburt über sich selbst und über ihr Kind zu bestimmen, zur Seite.