E-Book, Englisch, 315 Seiten, Format (B × H): 153 mm x 227 mm
ISBN: 978-3-8452-6228-4
Verlag: Nomos
Format: PDF
Kopierschutz: Adobe DRM (»Systemvoraussetzungen)
Mit Beiträgen von
Ass.-Prof. Pinar Bacaksiz, Dokuz Eylül Universität Izmir; Ass.-Prof. Vibeke Blaker Strand und Prof. Kjetil Mujezinovic Larsen, Norwegisches Menschenrechtsinstitut Oslo; Ass.-Prof. Rui Guerra de Fonseca, Universität Lissabon; Prof. Roman Petrov, Universität Kiew-Mohyla; Ass.-Prof. Dr. Vasilka Sancin und Prof. Mirjam Skrk, Universität Ljubljana; AkadR Dr. Stefan Lorenzmeier, LL.M. (Lugd.), Universität Augsburg; Dr. Daniel Engel, LL.M. (GWU), Universität Augsburg; Dasa Bajec Korent, Universität Ljubljana; Akad. Rätin Jennifer Hölzlwimmer, Universität Augsburg; Tina Korosec, LL.M. (Groningen), Universität Ljubljana; Masa Kovic Dine, LL.M. (Toronto), Universität Ljubljana; Dorota Miler, LL.M. (McGill), Universität Augsburg; Isabella Risini, LL.M. (Chicago-Kent), Ruhr-Universität Bochum; Désirée Rühle, Universität Augsburg; Marina Zagar, Universität Rijeka/Ljubljana
Autoren/Hrsg.
Fachgebiete
- Sozialwissenschaften Politikwissenschaft Politische Kultur Menschenrechte, Bürgerrechte
- Rechtswissenschaften Internationales Recht und Europarecht Internationales Recht Internationale Menschen- und Minderheitenrechte, Kinderrechte
- Rechtswissenschaften Internationales Recht und Europarecht Europarecht Europäisches Öffentliches Recht (inkl. EMRK)
Weitere Infos & Material
1;Cover;1
2; Introduction to Contemporary Issues of Human Rights in International, European and National Settings;10
2.1; I. The Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;10
2.1.1; 1. The ECHR and National Law;11
2.1.1.1; a. Norway, Poland and Slovenia;11
2.1.1.2; b. Germany;12
2.1.2; 2. The European Union and the ECHR – a never-ending story?;14
2.1.2.1; a. De lege lata status of the ECHR in the EU legal order;14
2.1.2.2; b. De lege ferenda – Accession to the ECHR;14
2.2; III. Protection of Human Rights by the EU – Internally and Externally;16
2.3; IV. International Human Rights in a Broader Context;18
2.3.1; 1. International Sports Organizations and Human Rights;18
2.3.2; 2. Social Human Rights;18
2.3.2.1; a. A Driver for Self-Determination?;20
2.3.2.2; b. Social Rights and Global Constitutionalism;21
2.3.2.3; c. Enforcement of Social Human Rights;21
2.3.3; 3. International Criminal Law;22
2.4; V. Concluding Remarks;23
3; A. Human Rights and National Legal Orders;24
3.1; The Role of the European Convention on Human Rights in the Norwegian Legal Order;26
3.1.1; Abstract;26
3.1.2; 1 Introduction;26
3.1.3; 2 The Formal Protection;27
3.1.3.1; 2.1 The Convention as International Law and as Domestic Law;27
3.1.3.2; 2.2 The Legal Status of the Convention before 1999;28
3.1.3.3; 2.3 The Human Rights Act;29
3.1.3.4; 2.4 The Protection of Human Rights in the Norwegian Constitution;30
3.1.4; 3 Interpreting the ECHR within the Domestic Legal Order;32
3.1.5; 4 The Actual Role Played by the ECHR – An Overview of Case Law Material;34
3.1.5.1; 4.1 Invoking the ECHR before the Domestic Courts;34
3.1.5.2; 4.2 Judgments by the European Court of Human Rights against Norway;35
3.1.6; 5 Interpreting Human Rights after the Constitutional Reforms in 2014;40
3.1.7; 6 Concluding Comments;42
3.2; The Role of the ECtHR in the Polish Legal Order;44
3.2.1; Abstract;44
3.2.2; I. Introduction;44
3.2.3; II. Impact of the ECtHR’s Judgments on Polish Constitutional Law and Judicial Interpretation of Polish Law;46
3.2.4; III. Measures Taken by Poland;47
3.2.4.1; A. Criminal Procedure;48
3.2.4.2; B. Post-Communism Issues;57
3.2.5; IV. Issues Raised by the ECtHR;60
3.2.5.1; A. Right to Marry;61
3.2.5.2; B. Exceptions to the Prohibition of Abortion;63
3.2.6; V. Conclusions;68
3.3; International Human Rights in the Case Law of the Slovenian Constitutional Court;70
3.3.1; Abstract;70
3.3.2; I. Introduction;70
3.3.3; II. The Position of International Human Rights in the Slovenian Constitution;72
3.3.3.1; 1. Civil and Political Rights;72
3.3.3.2; 2. Economic, Social and Cultural Rights;75
3.3.3.3; 3. Special Provisions;80
3.3.4; III. International Human Rights in the Case Law of the Constitutional Court;83
3.3.4.1; 1. The Position of International Law in the Slovenian Constitution;83
3.3.4.2; 2. The Jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court;85
3.3.4.2.1; i. The Jurisdiction to Review Laws and Other Regulations;85
3.3.4.2.2; ii. The Jurisdiction to Decide on Constitutional Complaints;86
3.3.4.2.3; iii. The Jurisdiction to Review Treaties;86
3.3.4.3; 3. Some Relevant Case Law of the Constitutional Court;87
3.3.4.3.1; i. Direct Application of the ECHR;87
3.3.4.3.2; ii. The Right of the Defendant to Use His Language and Script;88
3.3.4.3.3; iii. The Rights of the Blind Plaintiff in Civil Proceedings;89
3.3.4.3.4; iv. The Review of the International Protection Act;90
3.3.5; IV. Conclusion;91
3.4; International Human Rights and their Enforcement in the German Legal Order;92
3.4.1; Abstract;92
3.4.2; I. Introduction;92
3.4.3; II. Status and Adoption of Human Rights in Germany;94
3.4.3.1; 1. Status and Adoption of Human Rights Treaties;95
3.4.3.1.1; a. Transformation Theory;95
3.4.3.1.2; b. Enforcement Theory;96
3.4.3.1.3; c. Art. 59 (2) Under Those Theories;96
3.4.3.1.4; d. Status of Human Rights Treaties;97
3.4.3.2; 2. Status and Adoption of Customary Human Rights;97
3.4.3.3; 3. Interpretation of German Law in Conformity with International Human Rights;98
3.4.4; III. Enforcement of Human Rights Treaties in the German Legal Order;98
3.4.4.1; 1. International Remedies;98
3.4.4.2; 2. Enforcement by German Courts;99
3.4.5; IV. Human Rights Treaties before German Courts;101
3.4.5.1; 1. Universal Human Rights Treaties before German Courts;101
3.4.5.1.1; a. Non-Examination of Human Rights Treaties;101
3.4.5.1.2; b. No Violation of Human Rights Treaties;102
3.4.5.1.3; c. Human Rights Treaties Not Directly Applicable;102
3.4.5.1.4; d. Indirect Application of Human Rights Treaties;104
3.4.5.1.5; e. Direct Application of Human Rights Treaties;105
3.4.5.2; 2. ECHR before German Courts;106
3.4.6; V. Difference between Universal Human Rights Treaties and the ECHR;107
3.4.7; VI. Conclusion;108
4; B. Human Rights and European Law;110
4.1; Federalism of Fundamental Rights Protection in Germany and the EU – Two Are Better Than One?;112
4.1.1; Abstract;112
4.1.2; I. Introduction;112
4.1.3; II. Fundamental Rights Federalism;115
4.1.4; III. German Fundamental Rights Federalism;116
4.1.4.1; 1. Rules for Conflict of Laws;116
4.1.4.2; 2. Consequences for the Relationship between Federal Fundamental Rights Protection and Fundamental Rights Protection by the German Länder;117
4.1.5; IV. EU Fundamental Rights Federalism;122
4.1.5.1; 1. Rules for Conflict of Laws – The status quo;123
4.1.5.2; 2. Consequences of the status quo of Rules for Conflict of Laws for the Relationship between National and EU Fundamental Rights Protection;125
4.1.6; V. The Future of Fundamental Rights Federalism within the EU and its Member States;127
4.2; The Future of the Bosphorus-Presumption after the EU’s Accession to the European Convention on Human Rights;132
4.2.1; Abstract;132
4.2.2; I. Introduction;132
4.2.3; II. The Bosphorus-Presumption;134
4.2.3.1; A. The Development of the Equivalent Protection Formula in Bosphorus;134
4.2.3.2; B. The Formula’s Extension beyond the Bosphorus Scenario;136
4.2.4; III. The Future of the Presumption after the EU’s Accession to the Convention;140
4.2.4.1; A. Extension to the EU;140
4.2.4.1.1; 1. Rationale of the Bosphorus-Presumption;141
4.2.4.1.2; 2. Equality of the High Contracting Parties;142
4.2.4.1.3; 3. Purpose of Accession;145
4.2.4.2; C. Continuance for EU Member States;146
4.2.5; IV. A Better Solution: The Margin of Appreciation Doctrine;149
4.2.6; V. Summary;151
4.3; The Co-Respondent Mechanism before the European Court of Human Rights: An Adequate Procedural Solution or a Flawed Mechanism?;152
4.3.1; Abstract;152
4.3.1.1; 1. Introduction;153
4.3.1.2; 2. Developments in the Accession Process;154
4.3.1.3; 3. The Practice Pre-Accession;156
4.3.1.3.1; 3.1 Procedural Alternatives;157
4.3.1.3.2; 3.2 Third Party Intervention;158
4.3.1.3.3; 3.3 More than One Respondent;160
4.3.1.4; 4. Guiding Principles in Drafting the Co-Respondent Mechanism;160
4.3.1.4.1; 4.1 Gaps in Participation, Accountability, and Enforceability;161
4.3.1.4.2; 4.2 Autonomy of the EU’s Legal Order;162
4.3.1.4.3; 4.3 Other;164
4.3.1.5; 5. The Co-Respondent Mechanism in the Draft Accession Agreement;164
4.3.1.5.1; 5.1 When Should the Mechanism Apply?;166
4.3.1.5.1.1; 5.1.1 EU as a Co-Respondent;166
4.3.1.5.1.2; 5.1.2 EU Member State(s) as a Co-Respondent;167
4.3.1.5.2; 5.2 Triggering the Mechanism;168
4.3.1.5.2.1; 5.2.1 Change of Status;169
4.3.1.5.3; 5.3 Joint Responsibility;170
4.3.1.5.4; 5.4 Internal Rules as a Next Step;171
4.3.1.6; 6. The Co-Respondent’s Mechanism’s Weaknesses;172
4.3.1.6.1; 6.1 Voluntary Nature;172
4.3.1.6.2; 6.2 Preservation of the EU’s Autonomy;174
4.3.1.6.3; 6.3 Effective Protection of Human Rights;176
4.3.1.7; 7. Conclusion;177
4.4; The Accession of the European Union to the ECHR and the Inter-State Application under Article 33 ECHR;178
4.4.1; Abstract;178
4.4.2; I. Introduction;178
4.4.3; II. The Inter-State Application under Article 33 ECHR;179
4.4.4; III. Two Constellations Distinguished;181
4.4.4.1; 1. Constellation 1: The EU as Possible Party in Inter-Party Proceedings under Article 33 ECHR;182
4.4.4.1.1; a. The Charter of Fundamental Rights: a Yardstick, but no Competence for the EU;182
4.4.4.1.2; b. Article 2 TEU: A Value Platform, but no Competence;183
4.4.4.1.3; c. Result: No Room for the EU as Applicant in Proceedings under Article 33 ECHR;184
4.4.4.2; 2. Constellation 2: inter-State Applications between EU Member States;185
4.4.4.2.1; a. The Autonomy of the EU Legal Order threatened by the Inter-State application: Taking Stock;185
4.4.4.2.2; b. The CEJU’s Proposition ‘ratione materiae’: A Chilling Effect for the Inter-State Application;186
4.4.4.2.3; c. Mechanisms in EU Law to Address Human Rights Issues;187
4.4.4.2.3.1; aa) The Treaty Infringement Proceedings of Articles 258 and 259 TFEU;187
4.4.4.2.3.2; Article 7 TEU – Prevention and Sanction Mechanism;189
4.4.4.2.4; d. Result: Inter-State Application’s Functions outweigh Interest in Preservation of Autonomy under Article 344 TFEU;190
4.4.5; IV. Conclusion: More, not less Human Rights Protection after the Accession;190
4.5; The Procedural and Substantial Requirements of the European Union’s Accession to the European Convention of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;192
4.5.1; Abstract;192
4.5.1.1; I. Introduction;192
4.5.1.2; II. The Accession Procedure;194
4.5.1.2.1; 1. Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties between States and International Organizations or between International Organizations;194
4.5.1.2.2; 2. General Accession Requirements, Art. 218 TFEU;195
4.5.1.2.3; 3. Provisions Concerning the Decisions in the EU Council and the European Parliament;197
4.5.1.2.3.1; a. Consent of the European Parliament;197
4.5.1.2.3.2; b. Decision of the EU Council;198
4.5.1.2.4; 4. Approval of the Member States;199
4.5.1.2.5; 5. Treaty Revision?;200
4.5.1.2.5.1; a. Constitutional Shift?;200
4.5.1.2.5.2; b. Systematic Interpretation, Art. 311 (3) TFEU;201
4.5.1.2.5.3; c. View of Advocate General Kokott;203
4.5.1.2.5.4; d. Applicable for later Protocols to the ECHR?;203
4.5.1.2.6; 6. Special Status for the Council Decision?;204
4.5.1.2.7; 7. Interim Conclusion;205
4.5.1.3; III. The Substantive Law Governing Accession;206
4.5.1.3.1; 1. “Shall Accede”, Art. 6 (2) (1) TEU;207
4.5.1.3.2; 2. “Shall not affect the Union’s competences”, Art. 6 (2) 2nd sent. TEU;207
4.5.1.3.3; 3. Competence of the ECJ to challenge envisaged Agreements, Art. 218 (11) TFEU;210
4.5.1.4; IV. Does the accession affect the national legal orders of the Member States?;211
4.5.1.5; V. Concluding Remarks;212
4.6; Human Rights in Association Agreements with Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia;214
4.6.1; Abstract;214
4.6.2; I. Introduction;214
4.6.3; II. Background of the EU’s relations with Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia: From Partnership and Cooperation to Association;216
4.6.4; III. Legal Basis and Objectives;223
4.6.4.1; 1. Enhanced Human Rights Conditionality in the AAs;224
4.6.4.2; 2. Common Values Conditionality;224
4.6.4.3; 3. Mechanisms of Legislative Approximation in Field of Human Rights;225
4.6.4.4; 4. New Generation of Legislative Approximation Clauses;226
4.6.4.5; 5. Procedures to Amend or Update the Incorporated EU acquis;228
4.6.4.6; 6. Scenarios of Potential Legislative Approximation in the Field of Human Rights;229
4.6.5; IV. Concluding Remarks;231
5; C. Human Rights Protection and International Law;234
5.1; Global Constitutionalism and Social Rights : A Few Notes on Human Rights in the Quest for a Substantive Rule of Law;236
5.1.1; Abstract;236
5.1.2; I. The Role of Social Rights in the Context of Human Rights;236
5.1.3; II. Social Rights and Global Constitutionalism;243
5.1.4; III. Substantive Legitimacy and Social Rights;247
5.2; Right to Development: Driver for Extraterritorial Application of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights;252
5.2.1; Abstract;252
5.2.1.1; I. Introduction;252
5.2.1.2; II. Core Norm of the Right to Development;254
5.2.1.3; III. Internal and External Dimension of the Right to Development;257
5.2.1.4; IV. Extraterritorial Obligations of States to Ensure Realization of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights;258
5.2.1.5; V. Conclusion;264
5.3; The Role of the Olympic Movement in the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights;266
5.3.1; Abstract;266
5.3.1.1; 1. Introduction;266
5.3.1.2; 2. The Olympic Movement;268
5.3.1.2.1; 2.1. Subjects of the Olympic Movement;268
5.3.1.2.2; 2.2. The IOC;269
5.3.1.2.3; 2.3. The Olympic Charter;272
5.3.1.3; 3. The Olympic Movement as an Instrument for Promoting Democratisation and Domestic Protection of Human Rights;274
5.3.1.3.1; 3.1. Sanctioning;275
5.3.1.3.2; 3.2. Shaming;282
5.3.1.3.3; 3.3. Cooptation;283
5.3.1.4; 4. Conclusion;285
5.4; A Defendant's Right to a Fair Trial and Improvement of the Victim’s Status in the Proceedings before International Criminal Jurisdictions;288
5.4.1; Abstract;288
5.4.1.1; I. International Criminal Procedure as sui generis Mixed Procedure;288
5.4.1.2; II. Defendant and Human Rights Standards in the International Criminal Proceedings;291
5.4.1.2.1; 1. Presumption of Innocence;292
5.4.1.2.2; 2. Independence and Impartiality of the Court;293
5.4.1.2.3; 3. Fair, Public and Expeditious trial;293
5.4.1.2.3.1; a. Fair Trial;293
5.4.1.2.3.2; b. Public Trial;294
5.4.1.2.3.3; c. Expeditious Trial;294
5.4.1.2.4; 4. Equality of Arms;295
5.4.1.3; III. The Role and Status of Victims;295
5.4.1.4; IV. Balance of the Competing Interests;299
5.4.1.4.1; 1. Rights in Conflict: ad hoc Tribunal's Experience;299
5.4.1.4.1.1; a. The Use of Protective Measures: Anonymity;301
5.4.1.4.1.2; b. The Use of Protective Measures: Exclusion of the Public;302
5.4.1.4.2; 2. Rights in Conflict: Victim's Participation at the ICC and Defendant's Rights;304
5.4.1.4.2.1; a. Victim Participation and the Right to an Expeditious Trial;304
5.4.1.4.2.2; b. Undermining the Presumption of Innocence;305
5.4.1.4.2.3; c. The Right to a Fair Trial and Equality of Arms;305
5.4.1.5; V. Conclusion;306
6; List of Contributors;308
7; Index;312
