Jim Adams delivered the 2013 Harold Mitchell Development Policy Lecture on November 14, 2013. The Harold Mitchell Development Policy Lecture Series, of which this is the second, has been created to provide a new forum at which the most pressing development issues can be addressed by the best minds and most influential practitioners of our time. The 2012 Harold Mitchell Development Policy Lecture was delivered by Emilia Pires and is available as Dev Policy Discussion Paper 26.Jim Adams retired in 2012 after 37 years at the World Bank. His last assignment was as the Vice President for East Asia and the Pacific from 2007-2012, where he worked on and traveled extensively in the Pacific island region. He spent almost half of his career working on Africa, leading the Bank’s program as the Regional Director in Kenya in the late 1980s and as Country Director in Tanzania and Uganda from 1995-2002. From 2002 to 2007 he served as the head of operational policy in the Bank, overseeing a program directed at making the Bank more responsive to its clients’ needs. In his lecture Jim focuses on how effective economic reform emerged in Africa and related institutional and capacity issues. Drawing on this and his Pacific experience, he puts forward a number of proposals that could be taken up by governments and aid donors in the Pacific to accelerate economic reform and support the emergence of improved government institutions and policy making capacity.
{"title":"2013 Harold Mitchell Development Policy Annual Lecture: The Challenges of Aid Dependency and Economic Reform - Africa and the Pacific","authors":"Jim Adams","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2357288","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2357288","url":null,"abstract":"Jim Adams delivered the 2013 Harold Mitchell Development Policy Lecture on November 14, 2013. The Harold Mitchell Development Policy Lecture Series, of which this is the second, has been created to provide a new forum at which the most pressing development issues can be addressed by the best minds and most influential practitioners of our time. The 2012 Harold Mitchell Development Policy Lecture was delivered by Emilia Pires and is available as Dev Policy Discussion Paper 26.Jim Adams retired in 2012 after 37 years at the World Bank. His last assignment was as the Vice President for East Asia and the Pacific from 2007-2012, where he worked on and traveled extensively in the Pacific island region. He spent almost half of his career working on Africa, leading the Bank’s program as the Regional Director in Kenya in the late 1980s and as Country Director in Tanzania and Uganda from 1995-2002. From 2002 to 2007 he served as the head of operational policy in the Bank, overseeing a program directed at making the Bank more responsive to its clients’ needs. In his lecture Jim focuses on how effective economic reform emerged in Africa and related institutional and capacity issues. Drawing on this and his Pacific experience, he puts forward a number of proposals that could be taken up by governments and aid donors in the Pacific to accelerate economic reform and support the emergence of improved government institutions and policy making capacity.","PeriodicalId":106035,"journal":{"name":"Human Rights & the Global Economy eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128691937","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper examines the correlation between the concepts of sovereignty, human rights, and democracy in Russian legal and political debate, analyzing this correlation in the context of Russian philosophical discourse. It argues that sovereignty is often used as a powerful argument which allows the overruling of international humanitarian standards and the formal constitutional guarantees of human rights. This conflict between sovereignty and human rights also recurs in other countries, and many legal scholars demand the revision or even abandonment of the concept of sovereignty. In Russia this conflict is aggravated by some characteristic features of the traditional mentality which frequently favors statism and collective interests over individual ones, and by the state building a “power vertical” subordinating regional and other particularistic interests to the central power. These features and policies are studied in the context of the Slavophile-Westernizer philosophical divide. This divide reveals the pros and contras put forward by the Russian supporters of the isolationist (conservative) policy throughout contemporary history, and especially in the sovereignty debates in recent years. The Russian Constitution contains many declaratory statements about human rights and democracy, but their formulations are vague and have little concrete effect in court battles where the application of international humanitarian law is counterbalanced by the concerns of the protection of sovereignty. These concerns coincide with isolationist and authoritarian policies, which led in 2006 to their amalgamation into the concept of “sovereign democracy.” This concept is considered in this paper to be a recurrence of the Russian conservative tradition. Even though the concept in its literal meaning has been abandoned by its author and supporters, most of its ideas are still on the cusp of the official political discourse which reproduces the pivotal axes of the Russian political philosophy of the 19th century
{"title":"The Philosophy of Sovereignty, Human Rights, and Democracy in Russia","authors":"M. Antonov","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2309369","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2309369","url":null,"abstract":"This paper examines the correlation between the concepts of sovereignty, human rights, and democracy in Russian legal and political debate, analyzing this correlation in the context of Russian philosophical discourse. It argues that sovereignty is often used as a powerful argument which allows the overruling of international humanitarian standards and the formal constitutional guarantees of human rights. This conflict between sovereignty and human rights also recurs in other countries, and many legal scholars demand the revision or even abandonment of the concept of sovereignty. In Russia this conflict is aggravated by some characteristic features of the traditional mentality which frequently favors statism and collective interests over individual ones, and by the state building a “power vertical” subordinating regional and other particularistic interests to the central power. These features and policies are studied in the context of the Slavophile-Westernizer philosophical divide. This divide reveals the pros and contras put forward by the Russian supporters of the isolationist (conservative) policy throughout contemporary history, and especially in the sovereignty debates in recent years. The Russian Constitution contains many declaratory statements about human rights and democracy, but their formulations are vague and have little concrete effect in court battles where the application of international humanitarian law is counterbalanced by the concerns of the protection of sovereignty. These concerns coincide with isolationist and authoritarian policies, which led in 2006 to their amalgamation into the concept of “sovereign democracy.” This concept is considered in this paper to be a recurrence of the Russian conservative tradition. Even though the concept in its literal meaning has been abandoned by its author and supporters, most of its ideas are still on the cusp of the official political discourse which reproduces the pivotal axes of the Russian political philosophy of the 19th century","PeriodicalId":106035,"journal":{"name":"Human Rights & the Global Economy eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133711720","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This case comment considers the European Court of Human Rights decision of Austin v United Kingdom (2012) 55 EHRR 14. Austin claimed, unsuccessfully, that police kettling at a public protest in London amounted to a violation of her right to liberty under Article 5 of the European Convention of Human Rights. This case comment suggests that the court took an unexpected and unorthodox approach to the issue of ‘deprivation’ within Article 5. This decision may come to undermine the protections afforded by Article 5 and extend the current exceptions to Article 5 to an indefinite range of situations.
{"title":"Case Comment: The Legality of ‘Kettling’ after Austin","authors":"Naomi Oreb","doi":"10.1111/1468-2230.12032","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.12032","url":null,"abstract":"This case comment considers the European Court of Human Rights decision of Austin v United Kingdom (2012) 55 EHRR 14. Austin claimed, unsuccessfully, that police kettling at a public protest in London amounted to a violation of her right to liberty under Article 5 of the European Convention of Human Rights. This case comment suggests that the court took an unexpected and unorthodox approach to the issue of ‘deprivation’ within Article 5. This decision may come to undermine the protections afforded by Article 5 and extend the current exceptions to Article 5 to an indefinite range of situations.","PeriodicalId":106035,"journal":{"name":"Human Rights & the Global Economy eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132635201","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
While international human rights law promulgates that economic, social and cultural rights (economic rights) be supported just as fervently as civil and political rights, the reality is, they are not. The Greek debt crisis and resulting austerity measures demonstrate how a growing world economy is having an increasingly large impact on economic rights. States treat economic rights obligations similar to how businesses treat risk – that is, states seek to reduce their obligations like businesses seek to reduce their exposure. As a result, economic rights remain second fiddle to their civil/political counterpart and a victim of supranational monetary monoliths like the Economic Monetary Union and the International Monetary Fund.
{"title":"IMFing with your Economic Rights: The Greek Tragedy of the Eurozone","authors":"James C. Brady","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2255793","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2255793","url":null,"abstract":"While international human rights law promulgates that economic, social and cultural rights (economic rights) be supported just as fervently as civil and political rights, the reality is, they are not. The Greek debt crisis and resulting austerity measures demonstrate how a growing world economy is having an increasingly large impact on economic rights. States treat economic rights obligations similar to how businesses treat risk – that is, states seek to reduce their obligations like businesses seek to reduce their exposure. As a result, economic rights remain second fiddle to their civil/political counterpart and a victim of supranational monetary monoliths like the Economic Monetary Union and the International Monetary Fund.","PeriodicalId":106035,"journal":{"name":"Human Rights & the Global Economy eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"117195721","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2013-04-11DOI: 10.5235/219174414809354837
Jacob Öberg
This Article reviews how we should define criminal sanctions in EU law. The debate on the proper meaning of ‘criminal sanctions’ has in the first place received strong impetus in EU law, due to the newly gained competences of the Union in criminal law after the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty. The second reason for the fuelling of a debate on the meaning of criminal sanctions is related to the EU’s envisaged accession to the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). It is obvious that the EU would need to adopt such procedural safeguards to conform to Article 6 of the Convention when they impose a sanction that can be properly defined as a criminal charge within the meaning of said provision. The article first analyse and clarify the distinction between the concept of criminal sanctions for the purposes of procedural guarantees and the concept of criminal sanctions for the purposes of EU competence in Article 83(2) TFEU. In the second place, the article develops a proper concept of criminal sanctions that can be applied both to determine the Union’s competence under Article 83(2) TFEU and also a definition that can be employed more generally to determine, for example, whether Member States indeed have complied with their obligations under EU law directives.
{"title":"The Definition of Criminal Sanctions in the EU","authors":"Jacob Öberg","doi":"10.5235/219174414809354837","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5235/219174414809354837","url":null,"abstract":"This Article reviews how we should define criminal sanctions in EU law. The debate on the proper meaning of ‘criminal sanctions’ has in the first place received strong impetus in EU law, due to the newly gained competences of the Union in criminal law after the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty. The second reason for the fuelling of a debate on the meaning of criminal sanctions is related to the EU’s envisaged accession to the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). It is obvious that the EU would need to adopt such procedural safeguards to conform to Article 6 of the Convention when they impose a sanction that can be properly defined as a criminal charge within the meaning of said provision. The article first analyse and clarify the distinction between the concept of criminal sanctions for the purposes of procedural guarantees and the concept of criminal sanctions for the purposes of EU competence in Article 83(2) TFEU. In the second place, the article develops a proper concept of criminal sanctions that can be applied both to determine the Union’s competence under Article 83(2) TFEU and also a definition that can be employed more generally to determine, for example, whether Member States indeed have complied with their obligations under EU law directives.","PeriodicalId":106035,"journal":{"name":"Human Rights & the Global Economy eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133373362","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The Guiding Principles on business and human rights draw heavily on the concept of ‘due diligence’ to define and elaborate the corporate responsibility to respect human rights. In the Introduction to the Guiding Principles, the responsibility to respect is defined in terms of due diligence: [T]he corporate responsibility to respect human rights...means that business enterprises should act with due diligence to avoid infringing on the rights of others. Guiding Principles 17-21, which discuss the practical steps that business enterprises should take to discharge this responsibility, appear under the heading ‘[h]uman rights due diligence’. The term ‘due diligence’ is familiar to both lawyers and business people; its broad rhetorical appeal may explain why Professor Ruggie invoked the term. However, in this paper, we argue that the Guiding Principles confuse two very different meanings of the term ‘due diligence.’
{"title":"Is the Concept of ‘Due Diligence’ in the Guiding Principles Coherent?","authors":"R. Mccorquodale","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2210457","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2210457","url":null,"abstract":"The Guiding Principles on business and human rights draw heavily on the concept of ‘due diligence’ to define and elaborate the corporate responsibility to respect human rights. In the Introduction to the Guiding Principles, the responsibility to respect is defined in terms of due diligence: [T]he corporate responsibility to respect human rights...means that business enterprises should act with due diligence to avoid infringing on the rights of others. Guiding Principles 17-21, which discuss the practical steps that business enterprises should take to discharge this responsibility, appear under the heading ‘[h]uman rights due diligence’. The term ‘due diligence’ is familiar to both lawyers and business people; its broad rhetorical appeal may explain why Professor Ruggie invoked the term. However, in this paper, we argue that the Guiding Principles confuse two very different meanings of the term ‘due diligence.’","PeriodicalId":106035,"journal":{"name":"Human Rights & the Global Economy eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127979884","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The Present paper would explain the most important aspects of the Cham issue. The population mulsims chami was deported from Greece during the period 1912-1945 and the situation is still know unresolved. The cham conflict arose as a result of the delineation of border between Greece and Albania at the end of Balkan Wars. During the period form June 1944 to March 1945 was the last phase of expulsion of the Cham population from northern Greece, during which an estimated 5000 men, women and children were killed. The rest of chami population fled over the border to Albania where they lived in exile ever since. The Cham are demanding the recognition of all disappeared as a result of conflicts and the property right of all the Chami population. In this paper we will give some of the fundamental aspects of the issue such are the recognition of the issue by the Greek government, the question of the lost citizenship and the property rights.
{"title":"The Fundamental Aspects of the Cham Issue","authors":"Sokol Pacukaj","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2176050","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2176050","url":null,"abstract":"The Present paper would explain the most important aspects of the Cham issue. The population mulsims chami was deported from Greece during the period 1912-1945 and the situation is still know unresolved. The cham conflict arose as a result of the delineation of border between Greece and Albania at the end of Balkan Wars. During the period form June 1944 to March 1945 was the last phase of expulsion of the Cham population from northern Greece, during which an estimated 5000 men, women and children were killed. The rest of chami population fled over the border to Albania where they lived in exile ever since. The Cham are demanding the recognition of all disappeared as a result of conflicts and the property right of all the Chami population. In this paper we will give some of the fundamental aspects of the issue such are the recognition of the issue by the Greek government, the question of the lost citizenship and the property rights.","PeriodicalId":106035,"journal":{"name":"Human Rights & the Global Economy eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115472335","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article aims to assess the role played by the rule of law in discourse by critics of the Singapore Government’s policies and in the Government’s responses to such criticisms. It argues that in the past the two narratives clashed over conceptions of the rule of law, but there is now evidence of convergence of thinking as regards the need to protect human rights, though not necessarily as to how the balance between rights and other public interests should be struck. The article also examines why the rule of law must be regarded as a constitutional doctrine in Singapore, the legal implications of this fact, and how useful the doctrine is in fostering greater solicitude for human rights.
{"title":"Shall the Twain Never Meet? Competing Narratives and Discourses of the Rule of Law in Singapore","authors":"Jack Tsen-Ta Lee","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2255269","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2255269","url":null,"abstract":"This article aims to assess the role played by the rule of law in discourse by critics of the Singapore Government’s policies and in the Government’s responses to such criticisms. It argues that in the past the two narratives clashed over conceptions of the rule of law, but there is now evidence of convergence of thinking as regards the need to protect human rights, though not necessarily as to how the balance between rights and other public interests should be struck. The article also examines why the rule of law must be regarded as a constitutional doctrine in Singapore, the legal implications of this fact, and how useful the doctrine is in fostering greater solicitude for human rights.","PeriodicalId":106035,"journal":{"name":"Human Rights & the Global Economy eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125664265","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The principal aim of this article is to highlight the evolving concepts and ideas of Corporate Human Rights Responsibility (CHRR) under international law and how it relates to other concepts of corporate responsibility. The point of departure is the observation that there is the need to close an existing impunity gap of Western and emerging market MNCs’ complicity in Human Rights violations committed in the developing world. Two case studies from India and China highlight the present accountability gap. This article understands that the key issue with CHRR is the absence of a binding regime of binding norms, paired with the observation that implementation and enforcement issues seriously hamper any such development. Based on related initiatives such as CSR and ‘Good Corporate Practice,’ this article calls for an approach which is borne by a multitude of stakeholders, from consumers, employees to executive directors. Thus, the main research objective of this paper is to examine the concept of ‘Corporate Human Rights Responsibility’ in the context of Multinationality in emerging markets such as China and India and thereby to assess this distinctive notion through the prism of the legal dimension.
{"title":"Corporate Human Rights Responsibility and Multinationality in Emerging Markets – From a Developing Notion to the Legal Dimension","authors":"Sascha Dov Bachmann, V. Pereira","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2150058","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2150058","url":null,"abstract":"The principal aim of this article is to highlight the evolving concepts and ideas of Corporate Human Rights Responsibility (CHRR) under international law and how it relates to other concepts of corporate responsibility. The point of departure is the observation that there is the need to close an existing impunity gap of Western and emerging market MNCs’ complicity in Human Rights violations committed in the developing world. Two case studies from India and China highlight the present accountability gap. This article understands that the key issue with CHRR is the absence of a binding regime of binding norms, paired with the observation that implementation and enforcement issues seriously hamper any such development. Based on related initiatives such as CSR and ‘Good Corporate Practice,’ this article calls for an approach which is borne by a multitude of stakeholders, from consumers, employees to executive directors. Thus, the main research objective of this paper is to examine the concept of ‘Corporate Human Rights Responsibility’ in the context of Multinationality in emerging markets such as China and India and thereby to assess this distinctive notion through the prism of the legal dimension.","PeriodicalId":106035,"journal":{"name":"Human Rights & the Global Economy eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133871049","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper explores the current place of Article 47 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (right to an effective remedy) in European private law and assesses whether this provision could form the basis of a judge-made European law on remedies. In order to make this assessment, first, the development of the right to effective judicial protection in EU law is sketched and the relationship of EU fundamental rights to European private law is explained. Subsequently, instances of the application of Article 47 EUCFR in the case law of the Court of Justice of the EU are examined (incl. Alassini, Kadi, Otis and Fus/Stadt Halle). In light of the contemplation of the influence of the right to effective judicial protection in European private law, finally, the thesis is elaborated that, within certain boundaries, Article 47 EUCFR can support the further judicial development of effective remedies in European private law. These boundaries are determined by, inter alia, 1) Article 47 EUCFR’s place between old(er) means of effective judicial protection and new remedies; 2) its relation to the division of tasks between national and EU institutions; 3) the procedure guaranteeing effective protection of Article 47 itself; 4) the relationship between the CJEU and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR); 5) the ‘constitutionalising’ effects of Article 47 on European private law adjudication; and, finally, 6) the relationship between regimes for enforcing individual and collective rights.
{"title":"Rights and Remedies - Article 47 EUCFR and Effective Judicial Protection in European Private Law Matters","authors":"C. Mak","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2126551","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2126551","url":null,"abstract":"This paper explores the current place of Article 47 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (right to an effective remedy) in European private law and assesses whether this provision could form the basis of a judge-made European law on remedies. In order to make this assessment, first, the development of the right to effective judicial protection in EU law is sketched and the relationship of EU fundamental rights to European private law is explained. Subsequently, instances of the application of Article 47 EUCFR in the case law of the Court of Justice of the EU are examined (incl. Alassini, Kadi, Otis and Fus/Stadt Halle). In light of the contemplation of the influence of the right to effective judicial protection in European private law, finally, the thesis is elaborated that, within certain boundaries, Article 47 EUCFR can support the further judicial development of effective remedies in European private law. These boundaries are determined by, inter alia, 1) Article 47 EUCFR’s place between old(er) means of effective judicial protection and new remedies; 2) its relation to the division of tasks between national and EU institutions; 3) the procedure guaranteeing effective protection of Article 47 itself; 4) the relationship between the CJEU and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR); 5) the ‘constitutionalising’ effects of Article 47 on European private law adjudication; and, finally, 6) the relationship between regimes for enforcing individual and collective rights.","PeriodicalId":106035,"journal":{"name":"Human Rights & the Global Economy eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121092861","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：