Europe and rights: Taking dialogue seriously

European Constitutional Law Review

Volumn 5, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 5-31

  Cartabia, Marta ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MILANO BICOCCA   (Italy)

Author keywords

European Community; European Convention on Human Rights; European Court of Justice; European Court of Justice on Human Rights; European Union; Fundamental Rights; Judicial activism; Judicial colonialism; Treaty of Lisbon

Indexed keywords

EID: 71949090015     PISSN: 15740196     EISSN: 17445515     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S1574019609000054     Document Type: Article

References (84)

1. The European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights was established by Council Regulation (EC) No. 186/2007 of 15 Feb. 2007. On this point see A. von Bogdandy, 'The European Union as Situation, Executive, and Promoter of the International Law of Cultural Diversity - Elements of a Beautiful Friendship', Jean Monnet Working Paper 13/07, in visited 23 Jan. 2009.
2. Most scholars think that the ECJ acts as a constitutional courts at least in some cases, although they not always support the proposal of transforming the ECJ into a special judge deciding only constitutional issues: O. Due, 'A Constitutional court for the European Communities'.
3. and F.G. Jacobs, 'Is the Court of Justice of the European Communities a Constitutional court?', in D. Curtin, D. O'Keeffe (eds.), Constitutional Adjudication in European Community and National Law (Butterworth, Ireland 1992), p. 2 and p. 25.
4. B. Vesterdorf, 'A Constitutional Court for the EU', 4 International Journal of Constitutional Law (2006), p. 607.
5. See however L. Favoreu, 'Les Constitutions nationales face au droit européen', 28 Revue française de droit constitutionnel (1996), p. 699 who affirms that at present the ECJ cannot be considered a constitutional court, because it still lacks of too many important elements, such as a veritable Constitution of the EU, an impartial appointment of judges and many others.
6. A. von Bogdandy, 'The European Union as a Human Right Organization?', 37 Common Market Law Review (2000), p. 1308.
7. Soon after the solemn proclamation of the Charter of Rights by the European Union in Nice on 7th Dec. 2000, Armin von Bogdandy sensed the first symptoms of an evolution destined to change the features of the European integration, from an economic community towards a Grundrechtsgemeinschaft, a community of fundamental rights. As the author had predicted, the Charter of Fundamental Rights actually marked a new era in the European integration, displaying all its seductive power. Later the author changed his thesis, as can be read in the paper above mentioned in n. 1.
8. On pluralism as the contemporary model of relationship in the EU see N. MacCormick, Ques tioning Sovreignty: Law, State and Nation in the European Commonwealth (Oxford, Oxford University Press 1999), p. 120 and the rich debate triggered by this essay.
9. Recalling a famous definition by M. Poiares Maduro, 'Contrapunctual Law: Europe's Consti tutional Pluralism in Action', in N. Walker (ed.), Sovereignty in Transition (Oxford, Hart Publishing 2003), p. 501.
10. The reference is to those authors who emphasise the pluralistic nature of the European Con stitution, such as J.H.H. Weiler, who is the father of the idea of constitutional tolerance. See: The Consti tution of Europe (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press 1999), at p. 238 et seq.
11. I. Pernice, 'Multilevel Constitutionalism in the European Union', 27 European Law Review (2002), p. 511 et seq.
12. Whereas the legal literature on the judicial dialogue is almost boundless, it is worth noting that some scholars criticize the idea of a judicial dialogue in itself, contending that dialogue is a common practice within the political institutions, but is almost impossible among courts and judges. See B. De Witte, 'The Closest Thing to a Constitutional Conversation in Europe: The Semi-permanent Treaty Revision Process', in P. Beaumont, C. Lyons, N. Walker (eds.), Convergence and Divergence in European Public Law (Oxford, Hart Publishing 2002).
13. The first decision where the European Court if Justice quotes the Charter is decision 27 June 2006, Case C-540/03, Parliament v. Council where the Court refers to the directives regarding the reunion of family, which in turn mentions as a premise the Charter of Rights. After that case the ECJ arguments refer to the Charter without hesitation.
14. ECJ 11 Jan. 2000, Case C-285/98, Tanja Kreil.
15. Suffice to recall the well-known decisions of the ECJ concerning the Irish Constitution: ECJ 28 Nov. 1989, Case C-379/87, Groener, on the protection of the Gaelic language and ECJ 4 Oct. 1991, Case C-159/90, Grogan, on the right to life and abortion.
16. J. Coppel - A. O'Neill, 'The European Court of Justice: Taking Rights Seriously?', 29 Common Market Law Review (1992), p. 669.
17. ECJ 12 June 2003, Case C-112/00, Schmidberger.
18. On this issue M. Avbelj, 'European Court of Justice and the Question of Value Choices', visited 25 Jan. 2009.
19. ECJ 14 Oct. 2004, Case C-36/02, Omega.
20. ECJ 7 Jan. 2004, Case C- 117/01, K.B.
21. ECJ 26 April 2006, Case C-423/04, Richards.
22. The first and fundamental essay about incorporation is J.H.H. Weiler, 'The European Court at a Croassroads: Community Human Rights and Member States Action', in F. Capotorti et al. (eds.), Du droit international au droit de l'integration. Liber amicorum Pierre Pescatore (Baden-Baden, Nomos 1987) p. 821.
23. and on the recent evolutions of the incorporation principle see B. De Witte, 'The Past and Future Role of the European Court of Justice in the Protection of Human Rights', in P. Alston (ed.), The EU and Human Rights (Oxford, Oxford University Press 1999) p. 873.
24. ECJ 13 July 1989, Case 5/88, Wachauf.
25. ECJ 18 June 1991, Case 260/89, Elliniki Radiophonia Tielorassi ERT.
26. ECJ 1 April 2008, C-267/06, Tadao Maruko, dealing with same-sex marriage and the right to the survivor's pension.
27. BVerfG, 6 May 2008, decision 2 BvR 1830/06.
28. It has been argued that the Constitutional Courts of the new members of the EU are more reluctant to comply with the creative interpretations of the ECJ. See the interesting analysis W. Sadurski, 'Solange, chapter 3: Constitutional Courts in Central Europe -Democracy - European Union', EUI Working Papers Law, no 2006/40 in visited 15 Jan. 2009.
29. CFI 21 Sept. 2005, Case T-306/01, Yusuf; CFI 21 Sept. 2005, Case T-315/01, Kadi.
30. For a deep analysis and criticism of these decisions see P. Eeckhout, 'Community Terrorism Listing, Fundamental Rights, and UN Security Council resolutions. In Search of the Right Fit', 3 EuConst (2007), p. 183.
31. and C. Eckes, 'Judicial review of European Anti-Terrorism Measures - The Yusuf and Kadi Judgements of the Court of First Instance', 14 European Law Journal (2008), p. 74.
32. See also a criticism to the content of jus cogens shaped by the CFI in C. Tomuschat, 'Note on Kadi', 43 Common Market Law Review (2005), p. 537.
33. CFI 12 June 2006, Case T-253/02, Ayadi.
34. CFI 12 June 2006, Case T-49/04, Hassan.
35. CFI 12 Dec. 2006, Case T-228/02, Organisation des Modjahedines du peuple d'Iran.
36. UN Security Council Resolution of 28 Sept. 2001, 1373 (2001). Council Decision 2 May 2002, 2002/334/CE and Council Decision 17 June 2002, 2002/460/CE both containing the name of the plaintiffs in the list of the suspected terrorists.
37. ECJ (Grand Chamber) 3 Sept. 2008, Case C-402/05P and C-415/05P, Kadi and Al Barakaat.
38. A thorough analysis of this case in the light of the relationship of the EU in the global context can be read in G. De Burca, 'The European Court of Justice and the International Legal Order after Kadi', Jean Monnet Working Paper 01/09, in at p. 21 et seq.
39. For a more complete analysis see M. Cartabia (ed.), I diritti in azione (Bologna, Il Mulino 2007). The problem is raised in L.B. and J.H.R, 'Editorial. The Relative Autonomy of the EU Human Rights Standard', 4 EuConst (2008), p. 199.
40. See for example L. Azoulai, 'Le rôle constitutionnel de la Cour de Justice des Communautés européennes tel qu'il se degage de sa jurisprudence', 44 Revue Trimestrielle de Droit Européen (2008), p. 29, who emphasizes the constitutional role of the ECJ although criticizing its jurisprudence on social rights, in particular after decision 18 Dec. 2007, case C-341/05, Laval and decision 11 Dec. 2007, case C-438/3005, Viking.
41. See supra n. 2.
42. Previously, the role of the Court of Justice as guarantor of rights was undermined by the lack of a text able to reflect, for better or for worse, the constitutional identity shared in the European Community. M. Rosenfeld, 'Comparing constitutional review by the European Court of Justice and the U.S. Supreme Court', 4 International Journal of Constitutional Law (2006), p. 618.
43. The Charter will be provided of legal effects if the Treaty of Lisbon enters into force, be cause it contains an amendment of Art. 6 of the TEU, which reads: 'The Union recognises the rights, freedoms and principles set out in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of 7 December 2000, as adapted on [... 2007], which shall have the same legal value as the Treaties.'
44. For a critical historical overview of this principle, see K.M. Schönfeld, 'Rex, Lex, Judex', 4 European Constitutional Law Review (2008), p. 274.
45. For the Italian experience see E. Lamarque, 'L'attuazione giudiziaria dei diritti costituzionali', Quaderni costituzionali (2008), p. 266, who shows the creation of an impressive number of new fun damental rights by means of judicial decisions stating on requests of compensations for damages.
46. See in particular on this point M. Rosenfeld, 'Constitutional adjudication in Europe and in the United States: paradoxes and contrasts', 2 International Journal of Constitutional Law (2004), p. 633 at p. 646.
47. A. von Bogdandy, 'The European Union as a Human Rights Organization?', supra n. 3, at p. 1316-1318.
48. See also on this point A.C. Pereira-Menaut, 'A Plea for a compound res publica europea: proposal for increasing constitutionalism without increasing statism', in Tulane European and Civil Law Forum (2003), p. 75 at p. 97-98.
49. See supra n. 17.
50. After all, the European Court of Human Rights of Strasbourg in Goodwin v. United Kingdom, 11 July 2002, 28957/1995 had already issued a judgment against the United Kingdom for its legisla tion on the transsexuals.
51. F.G. Jacobs, European Convention of Human Rights, 'The EU Charter on fundamental Rights and the European Court of Justice', http://www.ecln.net/ elements/conferences/book-berlin/ jacobs.pdf in visited 29 Jan. 2009.
52. On the interpretation of these two lines see M.A. Glendon, 'Human Rights at the Dawn of the Third Millennium', in L. Antonini (ed.), Il traffico dei diritti insaziabili (Cosenza, Rubbettino 2007), p. 45.
53. J.H.H. Weiler, Europe - Nous coalisons des Etats, nous n'unissons pas des hommes, forthcoming.
54. See on this point the critique to the multilevel constitutionalism - because of the fact that it hides the conflict between legal systems - by M. Luciani, Costituzionalismo irenico e costituzionalismo polemico, in, visited 29 Jan. 2009, p. 25.
55. See the analysis of J.H.H. Weiler, Un'Europa cristiana (Milano, Rizzoli 2003), showing the dif ferent relationship in Europe between the public power and religion.
56. We can consider the origin of this line of thought to be I. Pernice, 'Multilevel Constitutional ism in the European Union', quoted supra n. 7, p. 511.
57. In Italy see at least G. Silvestri, 'Verso uno ius comune europeo dei diritti fondamentali', Quaderni costituzionali (2006), p. 7
58. A. Pizzorusso, Il patrimonio costituzionale europeo (Bologna, Il Mulino 2002)
59. V. Onida, 'Armonia tra diversi e problemi aperti', Quaderni costituzionali (2002) p. 549.
60. For insight on the American debate about the aristocratic and paternalistic character of judge- made law see A. Gutmann (ed.), A Matter of Interpretation (Princeton, Princeton University Press 1997) in particular the Comment to Justice A. Scalia by M.A. Glendon, p. 95.
61. P.G. Carozza, 'Uses and misuses of comparative law in international human rights', 74 Notre Dame Law Review (1998), p. 1235.
62. This effect is clearly grasped in S. Panunzio, I diritti fondamentali e le Corti in Europa (Napoli, Jovene 2005), p. 58.
63. See supra nn. 4, 5, 6.
64. The idea of legal experience can be read in G. Capograssi, Analisi dell'esperienza commune (Milano, Giuffré 1975).
65. and in the same line of thought P. Grossi, Società, diritto, stato: un recupero per il diritto (Milano, Giuffré 2006), who draws the attention to the historical and cultural character of the law, beyond legal positivism.
66. P.G. Carozza, 'Human Dignity and Judicial Interpretation of Human Rights', 19 The European Journal of International Law (2008), p. 931.
67. V. Onida and B. Randazzo (eds.), Viva vox constitutionis, annual series since 2002 (Milano, Giuffré).
68. All the Italian Constitutional Court's decisions can be found at www.cortecostituzionale.it> and and visited 29 Jan. 2009.
69. This interpretation is endorsed for example by M. Dani, 'Tracking Judicial Dialogue - The Scope for preliminary Rulings from the Italian Constitutional Court', Jean Monnet Working Paper 10/08, in visited 15 Jan. 2009.
70. See the annual reports of the European Court of Justice available at visited 29 Jan. 2009.
71. Polish Constitutional Tribunal 11 May 2005, K 18/04. par. 18.
72. A critique to the informal relations among European courts as a part of a more general critique to the pluralist model of relationship in the European Union comes from J. Baquero Cruz, 'The Legacy of Maastricht Urteil and the Pluralist Movement', 14 European Law Journal (2008), p. 389 at p. 414.
73. M. Rosenfeld, 'Comparing constitutional review by the European Court of Justice and the U.S. Supreme Court', quoted supra at n. 35, p. 628.
74. M. Rosenfeld, 'Comparing constitutional review by the European Court of Justice and the U.S. Supreme Court. Ibid., p. 629-630.
75. Decision 19 Nov. 2004, n. 2004-2505 DC, Traité établissant une Constitution pour l'Europe.
76. Decision 27 July 2006, n. 2006-540 DC, Considérant 19 : « la transposition d'une directive ne saurait aller à l'encontre d'une règle ou d'un principe inhérent à l'identité constitutionnelle de la France, sauf à ce que le constituant y ait consenti ».
77. J.H.H. Weiler, 'The essential (and would-be essential) jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice: lights and shadows too', in I. Pernice, J. Kokott, C. Saunders (eds.), The Future of the European Judicial System in a Comparative Perspektive (Baden-Baden, Nomos 2006), p. 117.
78. J.H.H. Weiler, 'The essential (and would-be essential) jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice: lights and shadows too', quoted supra at n. 6, p. 121.
79. J.H.H. Weiler, 'Epilogue: The Judicial Après Nice', in G. De Burca and J.H.H. Weiler (eds.), The European Court of Justice (Oxford, Oxford University Press 2001), p. 219.
80. J.H.H. Weiler, ' Epilogue: The Judicial Après Nice', quoted supra at n. 63, p. 221.
81. See D. Schefold, 'L'interpretazione conforme a costituzione', in , visited 29 Jan. 2009
82. M. Luciani, 'Le funzioni sistemiche della Corte costitu-zionale oggi e l'interpretazione 'conforme a', Il foro amministrativo T.A.R. (2007), p. 87.
83. The new model of dynamic interpretation is spread in many legal order, in particular in the filed of human rights. In the UK for example it is required by the Human Rights Act of 1998. See on this point for example M. Arden, 'The Changing Judicial Role: Human Rights Community Law and the Intention of Parliament', 67 Cambridge Law Journal (2008), p. 487 at p. 494 et seq.
84. As has been noticed, a pluralist model has taken the place of the old fashioned hierarchical pattern in the relationship between the European and the national legal systems. In this context the judicial dialogue and the use of preliminary rulings at the constitutional level is all the more imperative. See F. Giorgi and N. Triart, 'National Judges, Community Judges: Invitation to a Journey through the Looking-Glass - On the Need for Jurisdictions to Rethink the Inter-systemic Relations beyond the Hierarchical Principle', 14 European Law Journal (2008), p. 693 at p. 714 et seq.