A constitutional court for the EU?

International Journal of Constitutional Law

Volumn 4, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 607-617

  Vesterdorf, Bo ^a  

^a First Instance of the European Communities ^*

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33749858127     PISSN: 14742640     EISSN: 14742659     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/icon/mol026     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, 2004 O.J. (C 310) 1. For recent comments, see George Tridimas, The Relevance of Confederate Structures in the Judicial Architecture of the Draft EU Constitution, in International Conflict Resolution 281 (Stefan Voigt, Max Albert & Dieter Schmidtchen eds., Mohr Siebeck 2006)
2. Richard Bellamy, Which Constitution for What Kind of Europe?: Three Models of European Constitutionalism, in The Federal Trust Constitutional Online Paper Series No. 03/03 (2003), available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=516802
3. Koenraad Lenaerts, The Constitution for Europe: Fiction or Reality?, 11 Columbia J. Eur. L. 465 (2005)
4. Jeremy Lever, The Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe, 28 Fordham Int'l L.J. 1091 (2005)
5. J.H.H. Weiler, The Constitution of Europe. 'Do The New Clothes Have an Emperor?' and other Essays on European Integration (Cambridge Univ. Press 1999).
6. For a recent comparison between the U.S. and European systems, see George Nolte, European and U.S. Constitutionalism: Comparing Essential Elements, in European and U.S Constitutionalism 9 (George Nolte ed., Council of Europe Publishing 2005).
7. See, e.g., Donal Barrington, The Emergence of a Constitutional Court, in Human Rights and Constitutional Law: Essays in Honour of Brian Walsh 251 (James O'Reilly ed., Round Hall Press 1992)
8. Vlad Constantinesco, La Constitutionalisation de l'Union Europeénne, in de la Communauté de Droit À L'Union de Droit 133 (Joël Rideau ed., Librairie Générale de Droit et de Jurisprudence 2000).
9. Ole Due, A Constitutional Court for the European Communities, in Constitutional Adjudication in European Community and National Law: Essays for the Hon. Mr. Justice T. F. O'Higgins 4 (Butterworths 1992).
10. See, as a very first selection, António Goucha Soares, The Division of Competences in the European Constitution, 11 Eur. Pub. L. 603 (2005)
11. Alan Dashwood, The Limits of European Community Powers, 21 Eur. L. Rev. 128 (1996)
12. Stephen Weatherill, Better Competence Monitoring, 30 Eur. L. Rev. 25 (2005)
13. Alan Dashwood, The Relationship Between the Member States and the European Union/European Community, 41 Common Mkt. L. Rev. 365 (2004)
14. and Grainne de Búrca, The Constitutional Challenge of New Governance in the European Union, 28 Eur. L. Rev. 828 (2003).
15. Art. 5 EC, in particular, is the fundamental provision enshrining the principles of "attributed powers" and of subsidiarity.
16. In particular, art. 6 TEU lists the fundamental principles in which the Union is rooted and commits the Union to respecting the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, signed in Rome on Nov. 4, 1950.
17. Case 294/83, Parti Écologiste "Les Verts" v. European Parliament [1986] E.C.R. 1339 (point 23). The Court has made repeated references to the "Community of law."
18. See, e.g., Case 2/88, Imm., J. J. Zwartveld and others [1990] E.C.R. I-3365
19. Opinion 1/91, Opinion on the Draft Agreement Between the Community, on the One Hand, and the Countries of the European Free Trade Association, on the Other, Relating to the Creation of the European Economic Area [1991] E.C.R. I-6079
20. Case C-314/91, Beate Weber v. European Parliament [1993] E.C.R. I-1093, Joined Cases C-181/91 and C-248/91,
21. European Parliament v. Council and Commission [1993] E.C.R. I-3685.
22. Furthermore, already in his Opinion of June 12, 1956, in Case 8/55, Fédéchar [1956] E.C.R. 231, 263, Advocate General Maurice Lagrange affirmed that, although the treaty had been concluded in the form of an international treaty, it should, nevertheless, be regarded as the internal charter of the Community.
23. See also Denys Simon,Le Système Juridique Communautaire 73, paras. 48 and 49 (2001).
24. On the ECJ, see generally Antony Arnull, the EU and its Court of Justice (Oxford Univ. Press 1999).
25. More specifically, for a comparison between the ECJ and the U.S. Supreme Court, see Federico G. Mancini, The United States Supreme Court and the European Court of Justice, in Democracy and Constitutionalism in the European Union 163 (2000)
26. Walter van Gerven, Constitutional Aspects of the European Court's Case-law on Articles 30 and 36 EC as Compared with the U.S. Dormant Commerce Clause, in Mélange en Hommage À Michel Waelbroeck 1628 (Bruylant 1999).
27. For the role of the ECJ as a constitutional court, see Andreas M. Donner, The Constitutional Powers of the Court of Justice of the European Communities, 11 Common Mkt. L. Rev. 127 (1974)
28. Rolv Ryssdal, On the Road to a European Constitutional Court, in Collected Course of the Academy of European Law: The Protection of Human Rights in Europe 7 (Frank Emmert ed., Martinus Nijhoff 1991)
29. Ole Due, A Constitutional Court for the European Communities, in Constitutional Adjudication in European Community and National Law: Essays for the Hon. Mr. Justice T. F. O'Higgins (Butterworths 1992)
30. Francis G. Jacobs, Is the Court of Justice of the European Communities a Constitutional Court?, in Constitutional Adjudication in European Community and National Law: Essays for the Hon. Mr. Justice T. F. O'Higgins (Butterworths 1992)
31. Jens Rinze, The Role of the European Court of Justice as a Federal Constitutional Court, Public L. 426 (1993).
32. In the many member states where a constitutional court exists, it is usually vested only with constitutional functions, whereas the supreme court is the last appellate judicature of the system. That is the case, for example, in Germany (Bundesverfassungsgericht, on the one hand, and Bundesgerichtshof and Bundesverwaltungsgericht, on the other); in France (Conseil Constitutionnel, on the one hand, and Cour de Cassation and Conseil d'État, on the other); in Italy (Corte Costituzionale, on the one hand, and Corte di Cassazione and Consiglio di Stato, on the other); or in Spain (Tribunal Constitucional, on the one hand, and Tribunal Supremo, on the other).
33. See 28 U.S.C. §2071-2073.
34. Federico G. Mancini, The United States Supreme Court and the European Court of Justice, in Democracy and Constitutionalism in the European Union 163, 166 (Valerie Staats ed., European Communities Studies Association 2000).
35. The ECJ does not have the power to decide whether or not to hear a case lodged with its registry. On the contrary, according to SUP. CT. R. 10, "[r]eview on writ of certiorari is not a matter of right, but a judicial discretion. A petition for writ of certiorari will be granted only for compelling reasons."
36. See the Court's Annual Report for 2005, 10-11, available at www.curia.eu.int/en/instit/presentationfr/index.htm (last visited Sept. 1, 2006).
37. Art. 28 EC.
38. I will not analyze other proposals, such as the relaxation of the test under Case 283/81, CILFIT [1982] E.C.R. 3415, point 16,
39. as advocated by Advocate General Francis Jacobs in his opinion of July 10, 1997 in Case C-338/95, Wiener [1997] E.C.R. I-6495, para. 65.
40. See the Court's Annual Report for 2005, supra note 14, at 11.
41. Treaty of Nice amending the Treaty on European Union, the Treaties establishing the European Communities and Certain Related Acts, 2001 O.J. (C 80).
42. See, e.g., the contributions of Koen Lenaerts, Michel Petite, Ingolf Pernice and James Flynn, The Role of the Court of Justice, the Court of First Instance and Specialised Tribunals in the Long Run, in papers from the Colloquium on the Judicial Architecture of the European Union, Nov. 15, 2004, available at www.ccbe.org/doc/colloquium_nov_2004/ (last visited Sept. 1, 2006).
43. Case C-17/00, De Coster [2001] E.C.R. I-9445, para. 74.
44. See, e.g., Antonio Tizzano, La Cour de Justice Après Nice: Le Transfert de Compétences au Tribunal de Première Instance, Revue du Droit de L'Union Européenne 665, 685 (2002), who warns of the risks of "breaking the toy" of preliminary rulings
45. and Angus Johnston, Judicial Reform and the Treaty of Nice, 38 Common Mkt. L. Rev. 499, 509 (2001), who fears that "there is still the danger that such a procedure could undermine the authority of preliminary rulings made by the CFI, having a detrimental effect on the respect paid to them by national judges."
46. Protocol on the Statute of the Court of Justice, signed at Nice on Feb. 26, 2001, 2001 O.J. (C 80)1, as lately amended by Council Decision of Oct. 3, 2005, 2005 O.J. (L 266) 60.
47. By virtue of Council Decision 2004/752/EC, Euratom, O.J. (L 333/7) (establishing the European Union Civil Service Tribunal). The first judgment was rendered on April 26, 2006 (Case F-16/05, Nicola Falcione v. Commission [not yet reported in the E.C.R.]).