Background of EU's protection of Human Rights - Essay Example

?Relationship between the EU's protection of Human Rights and other domestic, regional and international means of protecting human rights Introduction To preempt violation of human lives and thereby safeguard the humans’ right to live, express, etc., constructive actions were taken by countries as well as by individuals throughout the course of history. Entities all over the world has come up with laws and regulations, and when one focuses on the countries constituted under European Union (EU), there are three distinct layers of human rights protections: the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), and each countries’ own human rights law based on their national constitutions. Among these three human rights protection mechanisms, EU charter of Fundamental Rights is the focus of this paper, and so this paper will critically discuss the relationship between this EU charter’s protection of Human Rights and other domestic, regional and international means of protecting human rights, particularly its relationship with national constitutional traditions, ECHR and United Nations (UN) Background of EU's protection of Human Rights European Union (EU) views protection of human rights, uploading of democracy and the rule of law as its core values. Although EU has not embedded human rights in its founding treaties, it spelled out its stance on human rights protection through the adoption of a Charter of Fundamental Rights in the year 2000. It further strengthened their core value of human rights “when the Charter became legally binding with the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty in 2009.”1 In addition, when the European Court of Justice (ECJ) was first developed at Luxembourg, it mainly focused on the “protection for fundamental rights in economic and commercial interests, rights to property and the freedom to pursue a trade or profession”2 However, ECJ also started presiding human rights issues involving its EU member countries, after the adoption of the EU charter. With these human rights framework in place, EU promotes and protects human rights within the countries of EU and also while engaging in trade and other relations with non-EU countries. “Countries seeking to join the EU must respect human rights, as the well as countries which have concluded trade and other agreements with it.”3 Thus, on the whole, EU charter of Fundamental rights is uploading human rights in EU countries, as well as doing its part in non-EU countries, in association with other regional and international entities. As mentioned above, EU charter is one of the three layers of human rights protection in EU member countries, so it have ‘relationship’ with other layers of national constitution traditions and importantly with fellow regional grouping of ECHR, with varying degree of cooperation as well as divergence. Relationship between the EU's protection of Human Rights and domestic entities’ means of protecting human rights For most part of their existence, EU and its ECJ did not try to dominate or usurp the powers of the national governments in relation to human rights. This is because ECJ was not a human rights guardian per se, instead it was established by EU as the highest legal institution, designed “to uphold the process of economic integration among various member states.”4 However, it all changed with EU’s adoption of charter in 2000, and also due to certain actions by national legal bodies, which in a way tried to undermine EU. The threat to the supremacy of EU’s human rights laws over national laws arose when constitutional courts resisted Community action, “insofar as they considered it as violating fundamental rights protected in national constitutions.”5 This can be seen in Stauder v. City of Ulm, Case 29/69, [1969] ECR 419, in which the decision of the ECJ appeared to be contrary to the basic rights that were enshrined in the German constitutional law. To further assert its supremacy only, EU and ECJ decided to include fundamental human rights in the EU legal order, thereby leading to conflicting relationship with its member states. For example, ECJ’s judgment in March 2011, to disband the insurance industry's opt-out from the EU's 2004 gender directive, was viewed as an infringement of British constitutional laws by sections in the British society. Although, this decision appears to be more commercial in nature, as the common people are going to get affected with extra costs, it comes under human rights sphere. Still there is an ambiguity, with Booth (2011) stating “the controversial cases will keep on coming as the concept of human rights is driven into new areas where it does not belong.”6 However, the fact is, this ruling by ECJ was viewed as acting in conflict with UK’s national laws and autonomy. At the same time, there were been instances, when the UK courts have voluntarily asked ECJ to provide their opinion in certain human rights cases. For example, a group of non-EU asylum seekers first appealed to the Court of Appeal of England and Wales to prevent the UK and Irish authorities from deporting them to Greece, on basis of “inhumane” treatment in the Greece’s detention centres. The English court raising apprehension about that possibility requested the ECJ to clarify about the European law regarding the deportation. ECJ for its part said “such transfers must not take place if the British and Irish authorities believe that the applicants' human rights would be jeopardised in Greece.”7 Although, this step of UK court to approach ECJ in a human rights issue, could have happened due to the involvement of more than one nation, it could also imply there is a cooperating relationship between EU and national constitutions. The EC Treaty could succeed because this multilevel judicial human rights protection was accepted by citizens, national courts, and parliaments as legitimate.8 This mixed picture about EU and national constitutions’ relationship can be understood from the fact, that on one hand, ECJ emphasises that fundamental rights are autonomous from the specific principles, which are “protected by the constitutional laws of individual Member States,” however on the other hand, ECJ states these fundamental rights are “rooted and reflect the constitutional traditions of the Member States”9. Relationship between the EU's protection of Human Rights and other regional entities’ means of protecting human rights particularly CoE, ECHR and ECtHR At the end of Second World War, European co-operation and integration took place under two different processes. While one focused on economic integration and resulted in EU, the other dealt with human rights and other rules of law, leading to the formation of Council of Europe (CoE), and its associated human rights forums of European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) and European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Thus, human rights component was incorporated into CoE from its founding itself, while EU did it prominently in 2000 only. Each operates in the context of human rights in a distinct manner, autonomous of each other, with EU and its ECJ not a party to the ECHR and is not bound by them.10 However, steps are being initiated for optimum cooperation between them in the form of EU’s accession to ECHR. Thus, the present relationship between EU’s charter and ECHR is not cooperative, but there are chances of more cooperative relationship in near future. Although, both operate separately without any formal linkage, “there is certain degree of overlap whereby EU members are also members of the Council of Europe.”11 Under this overlapping, although EU cannot be scrutinized by ECtHR, the EU members, being part of ECHR have to respect the Strasbourg system during all the scenarios, including when they apply EU laws. At the same time, there is no clear boundary between these two entities, and that has given rise to divergent interpretations by the EU member countries, as the countries may have trouble in prioritizing both the entities. However, in one of the prominent case involving Bosphorous, a Turkish airline, there was similar interpretation by ECJ and ECtHR. Ireland impounded one of Bosphorous’ aircraft, which was leased from Former Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) and taken to Dublin for maintenance work; under the charge it violated UN sanctions against FRY. After Irish courts and ECJ gave judgment against Bosphorous on the basis of FRY’s human rights violation, Bosphorous took the case to ECtHR. The Strasbourg Court satisfied with the judgment of ECJ concluded that there was no need for it to re-examine the issue of a violation”12 ECJ for its part, after initial reluctance to apply findings of the ECtHR, started to rely “upon the interpretations applied by Strasbourg case law as a "source of inspiration" for its judgment.”13 This showed that both EU charter and ECHR can achieve common ground, and the plans for EU’s accession into ECHR set the ball rolling in that direction. Although, this accession plan is being discussed from late 1970s, concrete steps are being taken, after the signing and ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon in 2009, which made EU’s accession to ECHR a legal obligation. This is considered as a major step in the development of a common and strong human rights framework in Europe. Thus, all the current divergent interpretations because of the entities’ different perspectives (EU focuses human rights from social and economic angle, while CoE and ECHR focuses purely on human rights) could be avoided, as both the entities and importantly their courts of ECJ and ECtHR will have common legal framework, with common practices. It could further strengthen the European human rights framework because if accession actualizes, both must “monitor each other's activities in order to balance the various human rights standards existing in different countries, and avoid any possible conflict of interpretation.”14 Relationship between the EU's protection of Human Rights and other international means of protecting human rights particularly UN When one focuses on EU’s charter and human rights provisions in relation to international organizations like United Nations (UN) and its role in human rights, it gives key perspectives. The relationship between EU and UN appears to complementary and cooperative, with each entity initiating coordinative activities, with UN accepting that it does not have authority over EU’s laws regarding human rights. The key fact for this cooperative relationship is, EU incorporated the charter of fundamental human rights because it was “enshrined in the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights.”15 In addition, as stated by Wiessala (2006) EU's role as human rights advocate became significant through the UN, and because of its association with UN.16 For its part, EU plays a key role in the UN Human Rights Bodies, by initiating activities, which supports and protects human rights throughout the world. That is, it provides the much-needed support to those who cannot support by themselves, giving them the platform or forums to air their grievances. “The EU plays a very active role in the work of the new UN Human Rights Council, It proposes resolutions and makes declarations on the protection and promotion of human rights and fundamental freedoms”17 Importantly, as pointed out above, UN has validated EU’s role and power in managing human rights issue in Europe as a whole, and in EU member countries in particular. This is because “UN human rights guarantees prescribe only minimum standards without hindering states and regional organizations’ role in human rights protection.”18 On those lines, it recognizes EU’s human rights role, and goes to the extent of stating that EU provides for more comprehensive guarantees of human rights and fundamental freedoms than UN human rights law.19 Conclusions From the above analysis, it can be assumed that although EU’s prominent focus on human rights have strengthened the human rights frameworks in Europe, it also gave rise to conflicting relationship with domestic and regional entities. On the other hand, EU’s human rights provisions and UN’s actions are more complimentary in nature, than the EU’s relationship with these two entities of national constitutional traditions and ECHR. However, EU’s proposed accession to ECHR could provide all the entities a common ground, where they can iron out their differences, and importantly strengthen the human rights framework in Europe. In a way, the three different layers can complement each other to provide a broader and at the same time double or even triple human rights safeguard. Although, at the time of writing this report, final negotiations are happening regarding the accession of EU to the ECHR, the eventual accession can lead to a harmonious and optimal human rights framework. Read More