EU Law Blog

Reciting the EU’s commitment to human rights protection, the European Parliament has set up a (temporary) committee to investigate whether the CIA has operated detention centres in the EU:

The temporary committee’s mandate will be to collect and analyse information to find out:
- whether the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) or other US agents or intelligence services of other third countries have carried out abductions, “extraordinary rendition”, detentions at secret sites, torture, inhuman or degrading treatment of prisoners on EU territory or in acceding or candidate countries, or have used this territory to these ends, for example by through flights to or from such countries;
- whether such actions, which would have been carried out as part of the fight against terrorism, could be considered a violation of Article 6 of the EU Treaty, of certain provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights, of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and of other international treaties and agreements, including EU-US agreements on extradition;
- whether EU citizens or the candidate countries, or any other person entitled to protection from the EU have been detained;
- whether EU Member States or institutions have been involved or have been complicit in the illegal deprivation of the liberty of individuals.

No Comments

The EU has some complex issues with religion and multiculturalism. Now the Netherlands is considering banning the wearing of the burqa. This seems a bit surprising in light of the Member States’ expressed commitment under the Treaties to human rights and the rule of law. But it’s not the first time this sort of thing has happened. The BBC story refers to a similar ban in Belgium. And a French law banned the wearing of religious symbols in 2004.

The European Court of Human Rights decided in November 2005 in a case brought by Leyla Sahin (which is available at the Court’s web site) that Istanbul University’s ban on wearing headscarves was valid:

In democratic societies, in which several religions coexist within one and the same opulation, it may be necessary to place restrictions on freedom to manifest one’s religion or belief in order to reconcile the interests of the various groups and ensure that everyone’s beliefs are respected… This follows both from paragraph 2 of Article 9 and the State’s positive obligation under Article 1 of the Convention to secure to everyone within its jurisdiction the rights and freedoms defined in the Convention.

There’s more. (more…)

2 Comments

This week MEPs are focusing on a draft report on the reflection period about the constitutional treaty. The draft report comments:

The No votes appear to have been rather more an expression of dissent at the present state of the Union than a specific objection to the constitutional reforms, but, paradoxically, the result of the Noes is to maintain the status quo and block reform

and argues for a “broad public debate on the future of European integration”. The report proposes meetings between the European Parliament and national parliaments (the Parliaments in Austria, Finland and Germany apparently don’t want to co-operate with this plan), but also seeks to engage other groups:

the European dialogue will only overcome the constitutional crisis if it engages not only each EU institution but also national and regional parliaments, local government, political parties, social partners, civil society, the academic community and the media.

No Comments

Ambassador John Bruton will be speaking at the Law school next Tuesday 24 January at lunchtime from 12.30-2pm in the Faculty Meeting Room on the 4th Floor of the Law School on the topic:

The European Union Today: Consequences of the Constitutional Impasse and Relations with the United States

If you plan to attend please contact Rosalia Lliraldi rllirald@law.miami.edu or 305 284 4210. Lunch will be provided.

No Comments

Next week we will finish up talking about the “deepening” of the EU over time (pp 66-67). Then we will go back to p. 9 and move forward. You don’t need to study Art. 95 in detail but I would like you to read the excerpts from the unfair commercial practices directive on pp11-12 carefully - we’ll discuss the terms in bold. Before looking at the institutions we will discuss the material on pp 11-18. This may take some time - the excerpts from the food supplements directive case are our first opportunity to look at a decision of the ECJ. Do ask if you have questions.

For Thursday next week please read pp 19-38.

No Comments

Political leaders in Austria and Denmark have recently criticised the ECJ, suggesting that it has overstepped its bounds (via euobserver):

Danish prime minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen said on Wednesday according to Der Standard “We all easily have the feeling that there [at the ECJ], decisions are being taken of which the basis of the judgements do not fully correspond with what we have agreed as the political basis of the development of the EU.”
Without mentioning concrete examples, Mr Rasmussen indicated “I keep a critical eye on the court.”
The statements from Copenhagen echo remarks made by Mr Schussel last week, who said that “the ECJ…has in the last couple of years systematically expanded European competencies, even in areas, where there is decidedly no [European] community law.”
The Austrian leader called for the debate on the future of the EU to focus not only on the fate of the EU constitution but also on the role of the EU’s top court.

This week, as we listen to and read about the Alito confirmation hearings, questions about the role of Justices of the Supreme Court in interpreting the Constitution are in the air. Similar issues clearly arise in the context of the EU’s treaty-based system. The ECJ has often acted in an “activist” way but political negotiations about amendments to the treaties haven’t tended to focus too much on the role of the ECJ in the past.

No Comments

I have been asked whether I could recommend any background material. If you are looking for some basic descriptions of the EU, there are some resources on the europa website you might want to take a look at in the “easy reading corner”. In particular, there is Europe in 12 Lessons (2003) and How the European Union Works (June 2005).

No Comments

The Austrian Presidency plans to revive the debate about the Constitutional Treaty which fell into limbo after the French and Dutch referenda last year. Meanwhile, Jacques Chirac and Angela Merkel have expressed different views about whether it makes sense to cherry-pick parts of the Constitution for approval leaving other, more controversial, parts for later. But it is very unlikely that there will be any resolution of this issue before the end of this semester (or even much clarity about what is going to happen) - there will be some discussion of the Constitution at a summit meeting in June 2006.

Update: The Dutch foreign minister says the Treaty is dead for the Netherlands.

No Comments

Here is the Council’s decision from last month fixing the order of presidencies until 2018 (Finland follows Austria, then Germany in the first half of 2007) (via eu law blog).

No Comments

The EU Ambassador to the US, John Bruton, former Taoiseach of the Republic of Ireland (Eire), will be visiting the Law School on Tuesday 24 January at lunchtime, in a visit arranged by the UM-FIU EU Center. It should be a fascinating opportunity to hear from someone who has been at the heart of EU and Irish policy development in recent years. I’ll provide details in due course. For now you may want to have a look at the website of the EU’s delegation to the US.

No Comments