欧盟宪法草案对欧盟人权保护机制的影响 The Draft Constitution an演讲

合集下载

欧盟竞争法私人执行制度的新发展——基于欧盟竞争违法损害赔偿新指令

欧盟竞争法私人执行制度的新发展——基于欧盟竞争违法损害赔偿新指令

2016年第11期(总第257期)[文献编码]d〇i:10.3969/j.issn.l004-6917.2016.11.023欧盟竞争法私人执行制度的新发展—基于欧盟竞争违法损害赔偿新指令吴兆丰(华东政法大学,上海200042)摘要:欧盟新的《损害赔偿指令2014^04/E U》是欧盟推进竞争法私人执行、保护消费者合法权益的最新 立法,其发展经历了从案例法到制定法的漫长过程。

该指令确立了完全赔偿原则,重点对信息披露、与公共执行的 关系协调、落实间接购买者的损害赔偿权以及损害赔偿数额的计算等竞争法私人执行的难点问题进行了规定。

该指令为解决消费者信息不对称、诉讼能力不足等问题提供了制度保障,但具体到相关制度的执行和落实,如间 接购买者、损害数额、法律一致性等细节问题及能否激发中小企业及消费者维权的意愿,仍须进一步实践检验。

关键词:欧盟竞争法;私人执行制度;损害赔偿指令;宽恕制度;间接购买者中图分类号:DF96文献标识码:A文章编号:1004-6917 (2016) 11-0115-06欧盟新的《损害赔偿指令2014A04/EU》(以下简 称《指令》)将于2016年11月27日纳人欧盟各成员国法 律体系中予以实施。

这是欧洲议会(会同欧盟理事会)第一次就执行欧盟竞争规则而参与到立法之中[1]。

该指令赋予了因违反欧盟及其成员国的竞争法而受到 损害的中小企业和消费者以主张损害赔偿的权利,从 而终结了长期以来在欧盟层面如何通过加强私人执 行来提升竞争规则地位的大讨论[2]。

《指令》的出台,为欧盟竞争法的私人执行提供了新的发展方向。

_、《指令》产生的历史沿革(一)私人损害赔偿之诉的案例法发展。

欧盟竞 争法的私人执行首先是由欧洲法院通过案例法来逐 步发展的。

早在1973年,欧洲法院在BRT v.SABAM 案中对《欧洲共同体条约》能否为私人创造受成员 国法院保护的权利问题的判决中指出:“由于第85 (1)条和第86条(现《欧盟运行条约》第101、102 条)的禁止规定在本质上倾向于在个人之间有直接 效力,因此,这些条款创设了涉及个人利益的直接权利,成员国法院必须保护这种权利。

关于数据保护的国际条约

关于数据保护的国际条约

关于数据保护的国际条约随着信息技术的迅猛发展,数据保护已成为一个全球性的问题。

为了确保个人信息的隐私和安全,国际社会制定了一系列的国际条约和协定,旨在规范数据的收集、处理和传输。

本文将介绍几个重要的国际条约,探讨它们对数据保护的影响。

一、欧洲数据保护条例(GDPR)欧洲数据保护条例(GDPR)是欧盟于2018年5月25日正式生效的一项重要法规。

该法规适用于所有在欧盟境内经营的企业,以及与欧盟居民相关的数据处理活动。

GDPR的主要目标是保护个人数据的隐私和安全,并规定了企业在处理个人数据时应遵守的一系列义务和责任。

该条例规定了个人数据的收集、存储、使用和共享等方面的要求,以及个人数据主体的权利,如访问、更正和删除等。

GDPR 的实施不仅对欧洲国家的企业产生了重要影响,也对全球范围内的数据处理活动产生了一定的影响。

二、欧洲人权公约欧洲人权公约是欧洲理事会于1950年通过的一项重要条约,旨在保护个人的基本权利和自由。

该公约中的第8条规定了个人数据的保护权。

根据该条约,个人有权保护其个人数据的隐私和安全,并对非法或未经授权的个人数据处理行为提出申诉。

欧洲人权公约对成员国的立法和司法实践产生了重要影响,为个人数据的保护提供了法律依据。

三、《个人信息保护指引》《个人信息保护指引》是由亚太经合组织(APEC)成员国于2004年通过的一项重要文件。

该指引旨在为成员国制定个人数据保护的最佳实践提供指导。

指引中包括了个人数据的收集、存储、使用和传输等方面的原则和要求,以及个人数据主体的权利。

虽然《个人信息保护指引》并非法律约束力文件,但它为成员国制定个人数据保护政策和法规提供了重要的参考。

四、《信息安全技术个人信息安全规范》《信息安全技术个人信息安全规范》是中国国家标准化管理委员会于2013年发布的一项重要标准。

该规范旨在保护个人信息的安全,规定了个人信息的收集、存储、使用和传输等方面的技术要求和措施。

该规范对企业和组织在处理个人信息时的安全保障提出了明确要求,并为个人信息的保护提供了技术指导。

欧洲人权公约保障欧洲公民权利

欧洲人权公约保障欧洲公民权利

欧洲人权公约保障欧洲公民权利欧洲人权公约是1950年由欧洲理事会成员国签署的一项重要国际公约。

该公约旨在保障所有欧洲公民的基本人权和自由,并为他们提供法律保障。

本文将探讨欧洲人权公约的背景、重要内容以及对欧洲公民权利的保障。

一、背景二战结束后,欧洲国家为了避免类似的人权惨剧再次发生,决定通过国际公约来确保人权的保障。

欧洲理事会于1949年成立,旨在促进欧洲国家之间的合作和稳定。

在这个背景下,欧洲人权公约应运而生。

二、重要内容欧洲人权公约包含了一系列保护个人权利的条款,以下是其中一些重要内容:1. 生命权:保障人的生命权,禁止任何人故意剥夺他人的生命。

2. 酷刑禁止:禁止任何形式的酷刑、不人道或有辱人格的对待或惩罚。

3. 自由和安全权:保护人的自由和个人安全,禁止任意逮捕和拘留。

4. 言论、思想和宗教自由:确保人们的言论、思想和宗教自由,并禁止对其的不合理限制。

5. 公平审判权:确保人在任何刑事案件中享有公正和公平的审判。

6. 私生活和家庭生活权:保护个人的私生活和家庭生活,对任何干涉作出限制。

7. 教育权:确保每个人享有教育的权利,促进教育的普及和平等。

三、对欧洲公民权利的保障欧洲人权公约是欧洲最为重要和权威的人权保障法律文书之一,它对欧洲公民的权利享有至关重要的作用:1. 法律保障:欧洲人权公约确立了一系列明确的权利,并为欧洲公民提供了法律保障。

当个人的权利受到侵犯时,他们可以通过向欧洲人权法院申诉来维护自己的权益。

2. 促进平等:欧洲人权公约的实施有助于消除歧视和推动平等。

公约明确规定禁止任何形式的歧视,无论是基于种族、性别、宗教或其他因素。

3. 保护少数群体权益:欧洲人权公约尤其注重保护少数群体的权益,包括少数民族、性少数人群和难民等。

它确保这些群体享有平等待遇,并充分尊重他们的权利和尊严。

4. 人权教育:欧洲人权公约还鼓励欧洲国家在教育系统中加强人权教育的推广。

这有助于增强公众对人权的意识和理解,并培养尊重和保护人权的价值观。

欧洲人权法与国际人权法的适用问题研究

欧洲人权法与国际人权法的适用问题研究

欧洲人权法与国际人权法的适用问题研究近年来,人权保障成为国际社会关注的焦点之一。

在这个全球化时代,国家之间的互动日益紧密,国际人权法的适用问题备受关注。

特别是在欧洲,欧洲人权法在保障个人权利方面发挥着重要的作用。

本文旨在探讨欧洲人权法与国际人权法的适用问题,以及这两者之间的关联。

欧洲人权法是指欧洲人权公约(European Convention on Human Rights,简称ECHR)所确立的法律体系。

欧洲人权公约于1950年由欧洲理事会通过,并于1953年生效。

该公约规定了个人基本权利,包括言论自由、宗教自由、私人生活权利等,并设立了欧洲人权法院(European Court of Human Rights)来处理违反公约规定的投诉案件。

欧洲人权法的适用范围主要涵盖成员国的居民以及在该国辖区内的个人。

然而,在国际人权法的框架下,欧洲人权法的适用不仅仅局限于欧洲境内。

根据普遍管辖原则,欧洲人权法也适用于欧洲国家在其领土以外的行为,如在外交活动、保护本国公民等方面。

这一原则使得欧洲人权法在法律适用上更具广泛性和普适性。

然而,欧洲人权法与国际人权法之间也存在一些不同之处。

首先,欧洲人权法的适用范围相对于国际人权法更为狭窄,只限于欧洲地区。

国际人权法则是全球范围内的法律体系,由联合国制定的各种国际公约和文件组成。

其次,虽然欧洲人权法是国际人权法的一部分,但并不是每个国家都是欧洲人权公约的缔约方。

对于那些未签署或未批准欧洲人权公约的国家,其居民在国际人权法框架下享有的权利可能略有不同。

然而,无论在欧洲还是在其他地区,国际人权法都旨在保护人的基本权利。

欧洲人权法与国际人权法之间的关联在于它们共同强调对人权普遍性的坚持。

人的尊严和基本权利应该无论国籍、种族、宗教等因素如何,都应得到公正和平等对待。

因此,欧洲人权法与国际人权法不仅仅是法律文本,更是体现着全球社会对人权价值的共同认同。

在适用和实施欧洲人权法和国际人权法时,还存在一些挑战和困难。

欧洲的社会保障权

欧洲的社会保障权

欧洲的社会保障权赫尔辛基大学马蒂·米可拉教授科尔彻斯特,2004年4月28日一、概况社会保障的概念 (图1)(一)与私人保险的关系1、建立在互助、水平和垂直的基础之上 (不仅涉及风险的摊派)2、强制性 (而不是自愿性)(二)与社会救济的关系1、捐助性 (非以税收为基础)2、法律上的客观标准(不评价收入)3、问题:混合受益的性质 (例如:家庭护理津贴,对单亲或学生的援助以及住房福利):非捐助性但建立在个关标准之上 (图 2)重要的历史性计划,两种方案1、俾斯麦纲要 (1881年宣言1881): 工人的社会风险(4)得到保障2、贝浮利计划 (1942年报告): 国家健康服务,儿童津贴和全民(公民)救济金框架经济和政治背景 (图 3)1、欧共体;罗马条约(第48和49条)以及合作条例1408/71:与工作有关的福利2、欧洲自由贸易区 (联合王国,斯堪第纳维亚国家和葡萄牙);不存在共同规则,合作规则只适用于斯堪第纳维亚国家,但是其他相似的模式:公民的普遍福利和与工作有关的现金福利作为附加的保护3、苏维埃集团;苏联的立法框架: (在全面就业的情形下的与工作有关的模式)对于所有人适用的现金福利和以工作时间长的以及工资水平为基础的附加福利法律渊源1、国际法律文件(人权)2、欧洲联盟宪法条约草案和成员国宪法(基本权利)3、国内法:宪法,其他立法,集体协议,判例4、合作规则Coordination rules(1408/71号条例,欧洲社会宪章第12条第4段)二、人权,基本权利国际法律文件1. 国际劳工组织102号公约(1951):9种风险其中的3种,联合国经济、社会和文化权利公约2. 欧洲理事会- 欧洲社会保障法典(1964):9种风险其中的6种- 该法典的附加议定书(1964):更高水平的保障,更广泛的覆盖面- 经修订的法典(1990):进一步提高的保护标准,灵活性(尚未生效)3. 欧洲的人权法律文件- 欧洲社会宪章(1961年的ESC)及修订后的欧洲社会宪章(1996年的RESC)第12条:援引国际劳工组织第102号公约和欧洲社会保障法典;监督机构:欧洲社会权利委员会- 欧洲人权公约(ECHR)第一号议定书,第一条:对被保留的捐助的保护;受到欧洲人权法院的监督欧洲宪法条约草案1. 第II-34条:社会保障被视为基本权利——在欧盟尼斯峰会上达成一致但并没有被联合王国及斯堪第纳维亚国家所接受。

保护基本权利原则在《欧盟基本权利宪章》生效后的前景分析

保护基本权利原则在《欧盟基本权利宪章》生效后的前景分析

— 127 —保护基本权利原则在《欧盟基本权利宪章》生效后的前景分析[摘 要] 《里斯本条约》生效以后,《欧盟基本权利宪章》也相应的具备法律效力,成为欧盟法体系中的基本法。

一直以来,在基本权利保护领域,欧盟法院都积极运用保护基本权利原则,以之作为法律依据。

毋庸置疑,通过成文法的方式,《欧盟基本权利宪章》将对保护基本权利起到更大的作用,但是《欧盟基本权利宪章》存在一定的局限性,相比之下,保护基本权利原则具有相当的灵活性,因此,在欧盟法体系中,保护基本权利原则并不会因为《欧盟基本权利宪章》的生效而失去适用空间。

[关键词] 欧盟法;一般法律原则;保护权利基本原则;《欧盟基本权利宪章》[中图分类号] DF94 文献标识码:A 文章编号:1001-8182(2019)02-0127-07保护基本权利原则作为欧盟法的一般法律原则,一直以来在欧盟基本权利保护领域起着重大作用。

新近生效的《里斯本条约》中《欧洲联盟条约》第六条规定《欧盟基本权利宪章》(以下简称《宪章》)与《欧洲联盟条约》及《欧洲联盟运行条约》具有同等的法律效力。

《宪章》成为欧盟体系内权利保护领域的成文法,是欧盟法主要法律渊源之一,在欧盟法体系中享有基础法的地位。

欧盟以及成员国都有遵守《宪章》的义务。

在《里斯本条约》生效前,保护基本权利原则已频繁出现在欧盟法院的司法实践中,在《里斯本条约》生效后,《宪章》的法律效力得到成员国的正式承认,保护基本权利原则是否会随着《宪章》的生效而退出历史舞台成为一个值得探讨的问题。

一、保护基本权利原则概述尽管在当前的欧盟法律体系中,保护基本权利原则已经得到欧盟以及成员国的一致认可,然而在共同体成立之初,共同体对保护基本权利持有否定态度。

《罗马条约》中并未涉及到保护基本权利的条款,当时的欧共体法院面对涉及有关人权的案件,所持的态度也是消极的,早期欧盟法院在处理成员国公民以违反基本权利为由而起诉欧盟机构的案件,基本都是以基础条约中缺乏法律依据而不予受理。

《欧洲人权公约》改革——以《第15号议定书》为视角

《欧洲人权公约》改革——以《第15号议定书》为视角

革对 欧洲人 权保 障机制 的完善 作 用 , 接 着详 细介 绍 了欧 洲理 事会的在 2 O I 3 年 的改革 成果 即 第十五 号议 定书及 其解释性报 告, 最后借 鉴 欧洲人 权 的改 革及其发 展 , 反 恩 我 国人 权现 状 。
关键 词 欧 洲人 权 公约 人权 保 障 第 1 5号议 定书 文献 标识 码 : A 文童编 号 : 1 0 0 9 — 0 5 9 2 ( 2 0 1 4 ) 0 4 ・ 1 5 5 - 0 2 发展主 题 。主 要是 司法活 动数 量 的持续 增长 。欧 洲人权 法 院试
作者简介: 韩松博, 郑州大学法学院2 0 1 2级国际法专业硕士研究生, 研究方向: 国际公法。
中图 分类 号 : D 9 2 0 . 4 欧洲 人权公 约改 革的 现实性


2 0 1 3年是 欧洲人 权 公约生 效 6 0周年 , 同时 也是欧 洲人权 公 图再 次达到 高 效率实现 案 件 的公平 公正 的处理 。这 些结 果证 明 约变革 的 一年 。 早在 1 9 5 0 年 l 1 月 4日, 欧洲 理事 会成 员 国在 罗 马签署 了《 人权 和基 本 自由保护 欧洲公 约》 简称 “ 欧洲人 权 公约” , 了第 l 4 号 协议运 作的 四年里 的改革 的价值 , 改革具有 显著成 效 。 也 因 国家愿 意接受 这些 创新 , 这 意 味着具有 类似 性质 的案件 , 可
9以及 1 0号议 定书 , 同 时《 第 l l 号议 定书》 成为 欧洲 人权 公约 改 2 6日欧洲委 员会 议会 大会通 过 2 8 3 号( 2 0 1 3年) 决议 , 并于 2 0 1 3
革的转 折点 , 欧洲人 权保护 机制 开始转 向人权 保护 实施机制 的改 年 6 月2 4日由欧 洲理事 会及 其缔约 方 国家公开 签署《 第l 5 号议 革 。《 第l 1 号议 定书》 废止 了欧 洲人权 委 员会 , 允许 个人可 以直 定书》 。 同时 , 面 对 日益增 多和 案情 复杂 的人权 案件 , 提 高欧 洲人 该项 决议 与 时俱进 修改 公约 的内容 , 具 体规 接 向欧洲人 权法 院提起诉 讼 , 同时赋予 欧洲人权 法 院强制管辖 权 权 法 院的办 案效率 , 并且 改变 了 欧洲人 权法 院 的结 构 ,同时也 废止 了 部长 委员会 。 2 0 1 0年 2月 1 8日, 俄 罗斯批 准本 议 定书之 后 , 欧 洲人 权公约 修

《欧洲人权公约》中的平等与非歧视原则

《欧洲人权公约》中的平等与非歧视原则

《欧洲人权公约》中的平等与非歧视原则朱晓青λ平等与非歧视是为国内法和国际法均予以规定的紧密相连的两项原则,并且,这两项原则可能都有其形式的一面和实质性的一面。

前者即,所有人均依据法律享有一致的待遇;后者即,在一个特定的社会中,权利和利益的平等分配。

在形式和实质两方面,不论是国内法还是国际法都规定了权利享有者,或称权利受益人间的一些差别。

这里,重要的不是差别本身,关键的也可以说所要掌握的“度”是,什么时候这些差别是适当的,而不是被禁止的歧视。

就《欧洲人权公约》而言,在何为被禁止的歧视方面,它给予了缔约国一个广泛的“评价余地”(margin of appreciation),以便各缔约国决定在何种情况下,某些差别是适当的。

1但限于篇幅,本文将不单独论及《欧洲人权公约》缔约国国内法关于平等与非歧视原则的规定,而仅从作为欧洲区域人权保护准则的《欧洲人权公约》的层面,对平等与非歧视原则作一分析。

一、《欧洲人权公约》:第一部具有法律约束力的国际人权文件鉴于第二次世界大战对人类生命的践踏,1945的《联合国宪章》写入了较强的人权条款,同时确定了人权保护的一些原则。

《宪章》序言明确“重申基本人权,人格尊严与价值,以及男女与大小各国平等权利之信念”。

《宪章》第1条第3款关于联合国宗旨之一的规定是:促成国际合作,以解决国际间属于经济、社会、文化、以及人类福利性质之国际问题,且不分种族、性别、语言或宗教,增进并激励对于全体人类之人权及基本自由之尊重。

显然,《宪章》的规定确立了作为人权原则的平等与禁止歧视原则。

1948年12月10日,联合国大会通过并宣布了有联合国人权委员会起草的《世界人权宣言》。

该《宣言》成为第一个被国际社会普遍接受的关于人权问题的国际文件。

它第一次在国际范围内较系统、全面地提出了人权和基本自由的具体内容,同时明确规定了平等和禁止歧视原则,并扩展了平等与禁止歧视的范围。

《世界人权宣言》在其开篇第1条就规定:“人人生而自由,在尊严和权利上一律平等。

欧盟民法典草案之述评(中)

欧盟民法典草案之述评(中)

欧盟民法典草案之述评(中)(三)民法典的构建在对欧盟民法典建立的必要性和可行性讨论过程中,“市场和效率”成为欧盟推动民法典构建的主要动力,近年来欧盟对私法统一所采取的措施和行动表明民法典的构建已是大势所趋。

然而,如何构建这部民法典则成为讨论的议题。

1、重回罗马法以赖因哈德・齐默尔曼(Reinhard Zimmermann)为代表的历史法学家提出了欧盟民法典应当以古罗马法为基础,重新回到中世纪的“共同法”(ius commune)之上。

[1] 历史法学家们发掘,欧洲各国在18世纪以前都享有着一部共同的法律,而现在欧盟各国法律的多样性是从十八世纪以后才开始逐渐区分的。

[2] 在这之前,欧洲各国共享着一部共同的法律,这部法律来源于古罗马法。

自从十一世纪学说汇纂(Digest)从博洛尼亚(Bologna)发掘出以后,欧洲兴起了前所未有的古罗马法研究热潮。

在那段时期,欧洲各国的专家学者纷纷前往博洛尼亚学习法律。

随着亚里士多德《形而上学》和《伦理学》的翻译出版,以及阿奎纳将神学与哲学巧妙结合的阐述后,罗马法的研究逐渐走向理论化。

[3] 历史法学家通常认为罗马法学家只注重法律条文的完善,而不懂得从这些法律条文中寻找出法律的一般规则。

这也使得古罗马法学只具有一套成熟的规则,而缺乏理论的研究。

在文艺复兴精神的引导下,中世纪的法学家更懂得将古罗马法规则与古希腊思想相结合。

[4] 他们认为,古罗马法所有的规则都来源于古希腊哲学思想。

例如,罗马合同法来自于亚里士多德对“交换正义”的划分,而侵权法则来自于对“矫正正义”的阐述。

不仅如此,他们还认为古希腊哲学思想甚至影响到了整个罗马法的发展与构建。

[5] 在这种思想的影响下,中世纪的法学家试图构建出一套非常完美而系统的法学理论。

这套法学理论影响了整个欧洲国家法律的发展,欧洲各国也就是由这套精心建筑起来的法学理论统治着。

因此,历史法学家们认为我们现在所讲的私法统一,并非是将现行私法“欧洲化”(Europeanisation),而是应当重新回到中世纪的“共同法”的时代。

欧洲人权公约

欧洲人权公约

欧洲人权公约一、前言本协议旨在确保欧洲地区的人权得到充分保障和尊重。

欧洲人权公约是欧洲理事会的一个重要法律文件,旨在保护个人的基本权利和自由。

本协议的目的是确保所有欧洲国家都遵守这些权利,并为公民提供有效的法律保护。

二、权利与自由1. 人的尊严和自由是不可侵犯的。

每个人都有享受自由和尊严的权利,无论其种族、性别、宗教、国籍、政治观点、财产状况或其他任何地位。

2. 人权的保护范围包括但不限于言论自由、思想自由、宗教自由、结社自由、结婚和组建家庭的自由、言论和表达的自由、教育的自由、工会的自由、个人隐私的保护等。

3. 人权的行使应受到法律的限制,以维护公共秩序、公共安全和他人的权利。

三、禁止歧视1. 任何形式的歧视都是违反人权的行为。

国家应采取一切必要措施来预防和消除一切形式的歧视,包括种族、性别、宗教、国籍、残疾、性取向等。

2. 国家应确保所有人都享有平等的权利和机会,无论其身份或地位如何。

四、公民权利1. 每个人都有权利享受言论自由和表达自己的意见。

这包括自由表达、接收和传播信息的权利。

2. 每个人都有权利在公正和公开的审判中受到法律的保护。

任何人在面临刑事指控时都有权利被视为无罪,直到被法律机构证明有罪。

3. 每个人都有权利自由选择自己的宗教和信仰,并且不受任何干涉或迫害。

五、人权保护机制1. 欧洲人权法院是负责监督本公约实施情况的主要机构。

任何个人或团体都可以向该法院提出申诉,以寻求对其人权侵犯的救济。

2. 欧洲人权委员会是一个独立机构,负责监督各国在人权方面的进展,并提供建议和指导。

3. 各国应建立有效的国内机制,以确保人权得到全面保护和实施。

这些机制应包括独立的人权机构、法律保护和救济机构等。

六、协议的履行与监督1. 各国应尽一切努力履行本协议,并采取必要的措施确保其国内法律与本协议一致。

2. 欧洲理事会将定期审查各国的人权状况,并提供必要的建议和指导。

3. 各国应定期向欧洲理事会提交有关人权保护和实施的报告。

欧洲区域人权保障机制

欧洲区域人权保障机制
27
二、欧洲理事会人权保障机制
本案争议焦点:隐私权与新闻自由的平衡 新闻自由承载着公众知情权等基本的宪法权利。隐私权 作为一种独处的权利也是人之所以为人的基本权利。同为基 本权利,二者的关系就像是两个重量级选手对垒的拳击赛, 卡洛琳认为出版社侵犯了其隐私权,出版社认为其行为是行 使‚民主的守护者‛的职责。本案中德国各级法院和欧洲人 权法院的论证也一直围绕隐私权与新闻自由的平衡这一核心 问题展开
30
二、欧洲理事会人权保障机制
法院将在此背景下判断,考虑到申请人的身体状况,将 其遣返是否真正存在违反第3条的危险。 申请人的病情已处于晚期,他目前的生活状况将取决于 所接受的治疗的先进程度。突然的撤销这些设备器材将给他 造成最严重的后果。无疑,将他遣返会加速其死亡,因为他 在sk不可能得到足够的救护。考虑到以上情况,将申请人遣 返无异于不人道的对待,这是违反第3条的。
25
二、欧洲理事会人权保障机制
卡洛琳诉德国案 卡洛琳是摩洛哥公主,代表某种文 化象征或代表其家庭参加一些公共 活动但并不代表摩洛哥或摩洛哥政 府。卡洛琳诉德国案涉及因前后三 组照片陆续在德国公开提起的诉讼。 德国 Burda出版公司在德国 Bunte杂志和 Freizeit Revue杂志上,Heinrich Bauer出版公司在德国 Neue post杂 志上分别刊登了三组照片,具体描 述卡洛琳的生活情境。
欧洲社会权
政府委员会
(审议国家 报告)
部长会议
(根据前两 个机构所提 报告,向缔 约国提建议)
利委员会
(审议国家报 告和集体申诉)
33
二、欧洲理事会人权保障机制
(1)国家报告程序。 根据修改后的宪章,新的报告程序规定:宪章规定的权 利划分为四个专题部分,缔约国对每一专题每年提交一份报 告(每年一次),对每一条的实施情况四年提交一次报告 (四年一次)。

从《欧洲宪法条约》看欧盟法的演变及其影响

从《欧洲宪法条约》看欧盟法的演变及其影响

从《欧洲宪法条约》看欧盟法的演变及其影响通过对国际法和国内法理论分析,以及对于《欧洲宪法条约》的具体分析,包括对其形式结构和具体内容的分析,认为欧盟法从国际公法最终会演化为国内法。

欧盟法的演变最终会把欧盟带入联邦制国家的未来。

“欧洲宪法”虽然现在还没有欧盟各国完全通过,但最终肯定会被欧洲和世界所接受。

欧盟法将会是引领国际法向国内法演变的先驱,甚至对世界法的出现是一个佐证。

标签:适应;市场;加强;财务;管理1 《欧洲宪法条约》概述1.1 产生背景德国外长菲舍尔在洪堡大学的演讲率先提出欧盟制定宪法的问题,菲舍尔认为,联邦和民族国家之间进行主权分割的前提条件是签订一项《欧洲宪法条约》,他说,“从合作的加强走向《欧洲宪法条约》——《欧洲宪法条约》正是完全一体化的前提条件——这个步骤需要我们有意识的重新建设欧洲。

”随之,引发了一场“欧盟是否需要一部宪法”的大讨论。

2004年10月29日,欧盟25个成员国的领导人在罗马签署了《欧洲宪法条约》(Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe)。

条约规定欧盟全部成员国根据本国立宪程序批准后方能生效。

如获得所有成员国和欧洲议会的批准,条约将于2006年11月1日正式生效。

1.2 新条约谈判现今欧盟成员国共27国,只有16国批准《欧洲宪法条约》。

2005年《欧洲宪法条约》被法国和荷兰行的全民公决否决,欧盟陷入严重的信任危机。

2007年6月23日,欧洲联盟27国首脑就替代《欧洲宪法条约》的新条约草案达成协议,持续两年的欧盟制宪危机随之宣告结束。

《欧洲宪法条约》部分内容经过谈判会做改动,但核心部分被保留。

主要改动的内容为:(1)涉及欧盟”国歌”、“国旗”等带有国家性质的象征性内容被删除。

(2)“双重多数表决”制的适用得到限制。

首脑会议决定将双重多数表决机制推迟到2014年实施,并有3年过渡期。

(3)英国获得了《基本权利宪章》的“豁免权”,而且有权决定哪些司法和内政事务可以接受欧盟参与。

欧洲的民主化与人权运动

欧洲的民主化与人权运动

欧洲的民主化与人权运动欧洲在历史上一直是人权、民主与法治的重要发源地。

从法国大革命开始,欧洲国家的各种政治运动不断涌现,为欧洲的民主化和人权进步起到了推动作用。

本文将从历史、法律和国际影响力等角度探讨欧洲的民主化与人权运动。

一、历史演变欧洲的民主化与人权运动可以追溯到18世纪的法国大革命。

法国大革命开创了现代民主的先河,提出“自由、平等、博爱”的口号,倡导了人权的普遍性和不可侵犯性。

法国大革命的影响传遍欧洲,激发了各国民众对民主和人权的追求。

随着时间的推移,欧洲各国相继实现了民主化进程。

19世纪和20世纪初,德国、英国、意大利等国家先后颁布宪法,确立了人权保障制度。

尤其是第二次世界大战后,欧洲各国进一步加强了对民主和人权的重视,通过立法和宪法规定,确保公民的基本权利和自由。

二、法律保障欧洲的民主化与人权运动离不开法律的保障。

欧洲各国都制定了一系列法律法规,确保公民的人权得到有效保障。

欧洲人权公约和欧洲社会宪章是欧洲人权保护的两个重要法律文件。

欧洲人权公约确立了欧洲公民的基本权利,如言论自由、集会自由等,成为欧洲人权保护的基石。

欧洲社会宪章则关注社会权利,如教育权、劳动权等,旨在实现社会的公平与正义。

此外,欧洲各国还建立了宪法法院等司法机构,保障公民对违反人权的行为提起诉讼。

这些法律保障机制为欧洲的民主化与人权运动提供了坚实的基础。

三、国际影响力欧洲的民主化与人权运动不仅对欧洲本土产生了重要影响,也对全球产生了深远影响。

首先,欧洲的民主化经验为其他地区提供了借鉴。

欧洲的民主转型过程和民主制度建设为其他国家提供了参考和启示。

许多国家通过学习欧洲的民主经验,在本土推动了民主化进程。

其次,欧洲通过国际组织推动全球的民主和人权发展。

例如,欧盟在欧洲范围内积极推动民主和人权,同时也通过对话、援助等方式帮助其他地区促进民主进步。

最后,欧洲的民主化与人权运动为国际人权标准的制定起到了重要作用。

欧洲国家在人权领域的积极探索和实践,使得欧洲的人权标准得到了国际社会的广泛认可,为全球人权事业作出了积极贡献。

欧盟宪法草案对欧盟人权保护机制的影响TheDraftConstitutionan演讲范文

欧盟宪法草案对欧盟人权保护机制的影响TheDraftConstitutionan演讲范文

欧盟宪法草案对欧盟人权保护机制的影响 (The Draft Constitution an演讲范文1 the general introduction of the draft constitution in aspect of the human rights2 short review of the human rights protection in european union3 the new points in aspect of human rights in the draft constitution3.1 common values3.2 incorporation of the charter of fundamental rights3.3 other changes could affect the human rights4 arisen questions4.1 the protection different from under the convention4.2 the two courts system and its application5 conclusions in a historical view1 general introduction of the draft constitution in aspect of the human rights“conscious that europe is a continent that has brought forth civilization; that its inhabitants,arriving in successive waves from earliest times, have gradually developed the values underlying humanism: equality of persons, freedom, respect for reason” extract from the preamble to the draft constitutionin past 16 years, the european union (eu hereafter) has marked itself through a series of changes. from the single european act, in which the union committed itself to create a single market and at the same time establish on its territory the freedom of movement of people, goods, services as well as capital, to maastricht treaty, which brought the union into reality and led to common foreign policy and cooperation in the area of justice and internal affairs as a higher level cooperation among member states. then the following amsterdam (1997) and nice (XX) treaties, strengthened cooperation in foreign and security policy and placed justice and home affairs matters and established the frame for the union as a legitimate institution, in which people from different nations integrated in a large region would have common historical direction andsplendid future before them. just before the door of enlargement of the union, it was argued that the union has to improve democracy and transparency as well as efficiency, in order to outlines the eu’s purpose and competence clearly and streamline structures so as to prevent paralysis, therefore a new constitution for the union is determined to replace the eu's series of key treaties in passed over the last 50 years as a single document . under leading of former french president and master draftsman valéry giscard d'estaing, the european convention set about its work of drafting the european union's first ever full-fledged constitution. with the convention's work completed, the draft must now be finalized by an intergovernmental conference of european leaders that is expected to complete deliberations by the end of the XX. as far as our topic is concerned, noticeably modifications come out in the constitution contract, first of all, the incorporation of the charter of fundamental rights, which we will discuss later. in the beginning it ismeaningful to consider the statues of the draft constitution in the progress course of the union. the union desires to bring peace and prosperity, to promote economic and social progress through continuously integrating market and expanding freedom under light of united institution and social systems . these goals, however, are the foundation of development and protection of human rights . that means, if we regard human rights as a series right which realized at first in peaceful and law-ruling society, then the union has already kept on entrenching to appreciate these goal from beginning on, and now by means of perusing such goal in a larger region through enlargement, the eu’s influence extent to broader area and more people.the draft constitution then in such context should be viewed as another historical phase in the process. because the promoting of well-being and fortune of people depend not only on the development of economic situation and adding some single freedom clauses into the governmental documents, but also upon the entire politic system and background inwhich we live. without governing based on democratic and effective institutional structure, and especially a ripe legislation and judiciary mechanism, the realization and protection of human rights could only be on the paper. this is also one of the motive caused the declaration on the future of the european union which committed the union to becoming more democratic, more transparent and effective, in order to pave the way for a constitution in response to the expectations of the people of europe . in this perspective, one shall recognize the constitution as a moving forward step of the whole eu institutionalization targeting its goal, so that to discuss the constitution in connection with the human right protection, it is helpful to review the human rights protection in europe and, especially in eu.2 short review of the human rights protection in european unionthe protection of human rights has been internationally come to life in the universal declaration of human rights in 1948 (udhr) withreorganization of disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind and respect for inherent dignity as well as the equal rights of all members of the human. this declaration states explicitly that the rights and freedoms of humans have to be guaranteed without distinction and destruction by any group, state or person. these principles were broadly accepted by european countries, considering the origin of the eu (ec) and the historical separation in europe after wwii, we denote only the contracting countries of european community.for the member states of ec, the council of europe has been up to now the most important instrument, which established in 1949 as a result of the congress of europe in the hague , and took for the basic of the human rights protection. the council accepted the principles of universal declaration of human rights and integrated it into the european convention for the protection of human rights (the convention hereafter), which and its 12 protocolsturned out to be the significant resource for human rights protection in europe. because of the existence of the convention, the other two organizations established in the same age aftermath of the second world war, i.e. oeec and the european communities didn’t include relevant clauses for human rights protection into their founding treaties. since it was agreed at that time, the council of europe would focus on the protection of human rights, fundamental freedoms and democratic values, whereas the oecd and the european communities were to be concerned with the economic restoration of europe. the reason of separate organizations was based on a view to avoiding economic excuses for future inhumanity. another reason came from the thought, which believed that the process of economic integration set forth in the community treaties could not lead to a violation of human rights. furthermore, the original member states in the treaty of rome feared, that the inclusion of a "bill of rights" in the treaty might have brought about an undesirable expansion of community powers, since itcould lead community institutions to interpret their powers as extending to anything not explicitly prohibited by the enumerated guarantees.under the regime of council of europe, a lots of achievement of human rights improvement has been reached , yet along with the development and expansion of eu, another mechanism on protection of human rights which does not totally rely on the council of europe has derived out on one hand, on the other hand being lack of provisions ruling human rights protection in the treaty establishing ec did not prevent the ec and the later european union from providing care for the protection against the violations on human rights. naturally, how could a swelling supranational organization as ec, which has been continually strengthening its power in all social aspects, does not involve in human rights issues especially when the consciousness of human rights nowadays become more significant both in international and national stages? regarding to eu, the protection system has been formed in three aspects.first of all, the legislation in the member states of eu. since there were no member states of eu (ec) which accedes to the community without being a member of the council of europe, and according to the convention, it impose obligations on the member states that they should ensure that the internal laws and practices comply with the human rights standards set out in the instruments. very member states in eu have recognize the principles derived from the convention and incorporated them somehow into national laws, most importantly, provided constitutive protection as the basic legal resource for human rights protection. for example in germany, basic law (grundgesetz) art 1 to 19 deliver explicit provisions even beyond the convention; the same case as part viii (§71-85) in constitution of denmark ; in britain the act of human rights came into force on 2 october XX steers extending a ways, in which the convention can be used before domestic courts. certainly, according to the classic human rights lessons, the basic protection of human rights could only be afforded at the national level throughnational legislation and excise of authoritative power.secondly, the institutions and legislation at the eu level acts also with high respect to the human rights protection. the eu has showed its commitment to human rights and fundamental freedoms and has explicitly confirmed the eu's attachment to fundamental social rights ever since its establishment.the amsterdam treaty established procedures intended to secure their protection. it was ascertained, as a general principle, that the european union should respect human rights and fundamental freedoms, upon which the union is founded. for the first time a procedure is introduced, according to which severe and continuing violations of fundamental rights can lead to suspension of voting and other rights of a member state, if the union determined the existence of a serious and persistent breach of these principles by that member state. as to the candidate countries, they should also respect these principles to join the union.furthermore, it has also given the european court of justice the power to ensure respect of fundamental rights and freedoms by the european institutions. in accordance with the inner requirement for the implementation of development cooperation operations, in order to reach objective of developing and consolidating democracy, eu also need its rule respecting for human rights. such cases we have are for instance the eu council’s regulation on human rights, council regulation (ec) no 975/199 and council regulation (ec) no 976/1999 for example, are aimed at providing technical and financial aid for operations to promote and protect of civil and political rights as well as economic, social and cultural rights etc.likewise, at their meeting in cologne in june 1999, eu leaders declared that in respect to the current stage of progress of the european union, the fundamental rights applicable at union level should be pushed forward, namely be consolidated in a charter and thereby made more evident. they argued, that the legal resources of human rights protectioncome from not only the european convention of human right, but also from various international conventions drawn up by the council of europe as well as the united nations and the international labor organization, they also include eu treaties themselves and from the case law of the european court of justice. as a result, a charter of fundamental rights of the european union (the charter hereinafter) was sketch out, which highlighted the eu’s respect for human rights, for fundamental freedoms and for the principle of democracy through listing more rights a more precise definition of the common values comparing the early documents including the convention. we will continue to concentrate on the charter in point 3 since it has been integrated in the draft constitution as an outstanding achievement.finally, the opinion and case-law of european court of justice (ecj hereafter) also have immense impact on the establishment of the instrument of human rights protection within eu.although the jurisprudence developed by the ecjrecognizes the convention as the standard-setter in cases in which the court has to consider and decide a human rights issue, since there were no relevant legislation existed in the frame of the community, the ecj furnish itself power in this aspect by means of case-law. earlier in 1974, the ecj first made reference to the echr in the nold judgment, in which the ecj emphasized its commitment to fundamental human rights based on the constitutional traditions of the member states’ fundamental rights form an integral part of the general principles of law which the court enforces. in assuring the protection of such rights, the court is required to base itself on the constitutional traditions common to the member states and therefore could not allow measures, which are incompatible with the fundamental rights recognized and guaranteed by the constitutions of such states. the ecj declared, that the international treaties on the protection of human rights in which the member states have cooperated or to which they have adhered could also supply indications which may be taken into account withinthe framework of community law.that implied, even without clear regulations in the treaties, the remedy against violation on human rights could also be provided within the framework of the community in respect for the common traditions applied to the member states, and in connection with we have mentioned about the member states’ above, the principles and resource applied to the member states derived from the council of europe. thus a eu standard could be established by transform a rating comparison of the members’ legal systems to the case-law in ecj in respect for human rights.in this context, the echr serves as only an alternative source of knowledge, because based on the gradually increased legal resource- from the common principles applied to the member states to the legislation of eu institutions and the case-law developed by the ecj itself as well as the synthetically charter of fundamental rights, the ecj has been enabled to deliberate and judge cases relying on sufficient recourses existed in eu body in connection with human rights without referring tothe echr. in a similar case, cinéthèque, the court made a move forward: it expressed the normative statement about respect for human rights as a condition for lawfulness as an institutional duty:it is the duty of this court to ensure the observance of fundamental rights in the field of community law, as stated by the court. in this way, the court of union gradually enables itself to break in the field of excising more power in human rights protection. based upon three aspects above, it is reasonable to be aware of, that before the draft constitution for europe materialized, it already existed two de facto mechanisms supervising and providing legal protection for human rights in the scope of european union. one of them is the council of europe based in strasbourg, which provides basic standard of human rights via the convention and other guideline mechanisms , and oversees its enforcement with the judiciary body: the european court of human rights (ecthr hereafter). the other system, however, was gradually established during the progress of eu, which consists of two legislative bodies in membersstates and union level respectively, and the ecj as the juridical instrument. the two systems, however, are not definitely distinguished with each other, but overlap and work in coordination. because on the one hand, the fifteen european countries made commitment to respect the echr, and agreed to submit themselves to the jurisdiction of ecthr in strasbourg, in spite of that they have transferred some sovereign competence to brussels. on the other hand, the ecthr still plays a role as an effectiveco director of the echr legal regime, which maintainits unofficial partnership with the ecj, whose own doctrine obliges it to honor the ecthr whenever the convention is relevant. moreover, the eu is still lacking in ample legislation with respect to human rights. the main work of ecj is to ensure that eu lawis not interpreted and applied differently in member state. however, the current circumstances might be changed according to the new constitution for europe.3 the draft constitution with the incorporated charterone of the most outstanding accomplishments ofthe draft constitution is incorporation of the charter of fundamental rights into the constitution. the charter, in its three years’ life, has obtained appreciations from all around though it has not yet legal binding force. in order to analyze the effect of the charter on the eu human rights system, we first examine at first the charter itself, then based on the analyze of legal status of the charter, we concentrate on the relationship of the charter in the constitution and echr as well as the possible two courts system could be occur.3.1 the content of the charterthe charter was designed as a political and legal objective of eu while the eu has entered a more resolutely political phase of integration. as the european commission stated in its communication of september XX: “the charter is a major milestone for europe as a political force, which is evolving into an integrated area of freedom, security and justice, simply as a consequence of citizenship. it is an indispensable instrument of political and moral legitimacy, both for the citizens of europe inrelation to politicians, administrations and national powers and for economic and socialoper ators.” besides, it was considered that the list of rights contained in the charter offers a more precise definition of the common values that must be respected in a wider environmental entity by means of establishing a common language on fundamental rights in eu.the charter presents better practical protection for fundamental rights in the eu. most of these rights are indicated in both the case law of the ecj and article 6 of the treaty on european union. however, with the reference of the charter, it is anticipated, the eu citizens need neither to consult the case law of the ecj nor to read the articles of the complex treaties, in which the provisions refer to yet again other sources such as the echr and the constitutional traditions of member states, in order to get a clear consciousness of their rights. indeed, the articles in the charter are grouped explicitly around six fundamental values: dignity, freedoms, equality, solidarity, citizenship and justice.while most of the rights listed are granted to everyone, some certain rights are granted to specific groups of people: i.e. children, workers union citizens , citizens of the union and nationals of non-member countries residing in the union as we have mentioned in point 2, the charter could be regard as a syncretism by means of absorbing rights from broader recourses besides the echr. thus the content of the charter is broader than echr provides, while the echr is restricted only to civil and political rights. for example the article ii 8 in the charter protection of personal data is derived from article 286 ec treaty; directive 95/46/ec of the european parliament and the council; article 8 echr; council of europe convention of 28 january 1981 for the protection of individuals with regard to automatic processing of personal data; article ii 10 2. paragraph 2 right to conscientious objection might be developed from national constitutional traditions ; more typical is article ii-18 right to asylum comes from both the article 63 ec treaty and protocols relating to the united kingdom and irelandannexed to the treaty of amsterdam and to denmark . the same cases we can cite in all places from the charter, which reflects the nature loose relation between the charter and the echr and other documents of council of europe.so according to the content of the charter, it is sensible to summarize it as a self sufficient constitutional legal source providing adequate and complete protection for human rights.3.2 the change of the legal characteristic of the charterthe charter was supposed to function as a symbol that would “counterbalance the euro and become part of the iconography of european integration and contribute both to the identity of and identification with europe” when it was fina lly signed in the igc in nice. since the charter was not integrated into eu treaties, which led tonon-binding force status. however, the charter itself seems to have already paved a way to its incorporation into eu treaty as a constitutional “bill of rights”. because it has created potentialand provided a more solid basis for the commitment of the eu institutions to the protection of fundamental rights. this is the deficiency in eu treaties, which should be complemented sooner or later . it is also unambiguous that the eu institutions, which have proclaimed the charter, would commit themselves to respect the charter. as a result, then on the one hand the charter made eu citizens better to understand the extent of their rights to defend against violations on human rights. so that they should be capable of referring to the charter when they challenge any decision against their deserved fundamental rights taken by eu institutions or by member states implementing eu law. on the other hand, the eu institution should act on the charter whenever they drew policies and settle disputes according to petition. as a logic consequence, the ecj as judiciary part should also regard the charter as a binding inter-institutional agreement. it was yet exactly the reality. short after the proclamation of the charter, the european courts published new case law established referredto the charter. until early XX, the advocates general of ecj had referred to the charter in 14 of the 23 cases they handled in relation to human rights .the court of first instance has also acted on the charter. in a significant judgment of 3 may XX the court even changed the rules governing individual access to the european courts, making reference to article 47 of the charter, which guarantees individuals whose rights are violated the right to an effective remedy before a tribunal.in any case it is obvious from above discuss, though the declaratory character of the charter does not have legal binding as far as the legislative status of the charter is concerned, it has already unchallengeable impact. so the incorporation of the charter is only a question of time and method. now as the charter enshrined in the constitution, it become directly binding if the draft constitution come into force after ratified by member states.3.3 the difference from the conventionthe union had currently no competence to adhere to the echr, while this competence is explicitlyprovided for in the draft constitution, which stipulates that the union will endeavor to adhere to the echr . it was declared, that as for the incorporation of the charter in the constitution, adhesion to the echr does not mean any change to the union's powers as defined in the constitution. the full incorporation of the charter and adhesion are complementary rather than alternative steps, because the charter does not function in competition with the echr. in this context article ii 52 of the draft constitution makes clear, that the charter respects the convention, its protocols, and the case law developed by the european court of human rights. the rule seems simple: the rights and liberties shared by the convention and the charter have the same meaning in both texts, even if the wording of the charter is different, either in an attempt to update the conventions text written in 1950 or to create a shorter and more readily comprehensible version.however, it is all what the charter and the draft constitution seek? most importantly, whathighlights in the charter such as respect for the principle of democracy, for human rights and fundamental freedoms is not a new pledge, but they why the charter reaffirms explicitly and makes them perfectly, then upgrade them to constitutive rights? according to my view, the adhesion to echr seeks the minimum security of human rights, however there is no reason to allege that the interpretation respecting the convention must be accurate for the eu, especially along with the growth of the council of europe that many countries of east europe attended including russia. after all, the status of council of europe becoming more pan-european after a astonish increase of the members after collapse of the socialism block after 1990. the criteria of being a member of council of europe is distinct from those of join the eu. if the council of europe could reach common understanding consistent with the human rights issues through its mechanism such as the committee of ministers, and achieve the convention’s aims as provide remedies suitable for all the members under echr, then, such situation maybe not the case today. since it is likely undue that one can claim fair and working condition easily in large eastern european area where the unemployment rate is high up to almost 15%; it is also impossible to enforce some new set-up democratic countries to become conscious of the right of citizens to good administration as in the charter states, on the contrary, too. so accordingly, the charter avoids imposing limitations on rights that are unlimited in the convention, as this would seriously lower the level of protection afforded by the charter. actually, as it states in the final report of working group of the draft constitution:the second sentence of article 52 § 3 of the charter serves to clarify that this article does not prevent more extensive protection already achieved or which may subsequently be provided for (i) in union legislation and (ii) in some articles of the charter which, although based on the echr, go beyond the echr because union law acquis had already reached a higher level of protection (e.g., article 47 on effective judicial protection, or article 50 on theright not to be punished twice for the same offence). thus, the guaranteed rights in the charter reflect higher levels of protection in existing union law. then the charter further includes a standstill clause: article ii 53. it sets out to preserve the level of protection already afforded by union, national and international law, in their respective spheres of application, as well as member states’ constitutions and international agreements. this clause also makes specific reference to the convention, stresses that the charter cannot undermine rights already guaranteed by that agreement. clearly, that means it is the convention which supplies the minimum protection as the lowest standard but the aim of the charter of eu is to provide fundamental rights protection at a higher level than the convention, which focus depend on the enlargement and the improvement of the democracy institutionalization of eu itself.in this context, as it states in the preamble of the charter in the constitution , the union respects and interpreters the charter in compliancy with theechr, could be only a scheme to recognize the current circumstance, while the principles of human rights protection derived from the council of europe have been general evolutes as constitutional traditions and international obligations common to the member states.3.4 possible consequences: two courts system if the constitution provides different protection of human rights for eu citizens, the question will left to the judicatory of eu: what a possible procedure could be for courts of eu to refer questions relating to the convention if the constitution come into force, in which the accession to the convention was expressed clearly in article i-7. though the accession would ensure a uniform minimum level of protection across europe irrespective of the legal actor, it would bring the conflict of jurisprudence between two courts- ecj and ecthr. it was suggested that the ecthr could give its advisory opinion for the ecj to apply. however, sensitive issues took place, for example: whether judges from countries outside the union would hear。

欧洲发达国家人权保护专题报告 2

欧洲发达国家人权保护专题报告 2

专题报告----欧洲发达国家人权保护----法学1212班42-53号目录一.案例引入二.人权的定义及发展三.欧洲人权保护(一)欧洲超国家层面的两种人权保障机制1.以《欧洲人权公约》为核心的欧洲人权司法保护机制2.欧洲联盟的人权司法保护机制及欧洲法院(二)三套制度1.国家指控制度2.个人申诉制度3.国家报告制度四.欧洲发达国家代表国的人权保护1.英国2.德国3.法国五.欧洲人权保护机制的分析六.欧洲人权保护机制的影响七.参考文献八.小组分工一.案例引入案例介绍(一)诉讼事项2002年11月19日,申诉人Stoica援引《欧洲人权公约》第3条、13条和14条向欧洲人权法院提起诉讼。

声称2001年4月3日在罗马尼亚Dolhasca的一个小村庄Gulia他受到了警察的粗暴虐待,而有关机关随后对该事件的调查不够充分。

他认为,警察对他的虐待和检察院做出的不对当事警察提起公诉的决定都带有种族主义偏见。

而且,对于该决定他不能上诉,从而使他无法从民事法院寻求损害赔偿。

(二)本案的主要事实:本案申诉人康斯坦丁.迪塞巴尔.斯托伊卡,出生于1987年,是一罗马族裔的罗马尼亚国民。

他居住在位于罗马尼亚Dolhasca的一个小村庄----Gulia,那里80%的人口是罗马族裔。

2001年4月3日早上8点,Dolhasca市的副市长、四个警察及其负责人和6个公共警卫一起进入Gulia的一个酒吧要检查店主的营业执照。

随后,这些官员和聚集在酒吧门前的二三十个罗马族人发生了纠纷。

申诉人称:冲突发生的那天,当警察进酒吧时,一个罗马族村民F.L 刚要离开酒吧,D.T警官问他是“吉普赛人还是罗马尼亚人”。

听到他回答说是吉普赛人后,副市长让警察官员和公共警卫“教训”一下他和其他罗马人。

于是,警察和公共警卫开始殴打F.L.村民和其他罗马族人。

本案申诉人曾在1999年动过脑部手术,当时正路过此地,也被D.T.警官摔倒在地进行殴打。

警察不顾申诉人一再说明他的头刚做过脑补手术,还用脚踢和击打他的后脑,直到申诉人被打得混到在地,人事不清。

  1. 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性,平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
  2. 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
  3. 3、如文档侵犯您的权益,请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间:9:00-18:30)。

欧盟宪法草案对欧盟人权保护机制的影响 (The DraftConstitution an演讲ased on the analyze of legal status of the charter, we concentrate on the relationship of the charter in the constitution and echr as well as the possible two courts system could be occur.3.1 the content of the charterthe charter was designed as a political and legal objective of eu while the eu has entered a more resolutely political phase of integration. as the european commission state d in its communication of september XX: “the charter is a major milestone for europe as a political force, which is evolving into an integrated area of freedom, security and justice, simply as a consequence of citizenship. it is an indispensable instrument of political and moral legitimacy, both for the citizens of europe in relation to politicians, administrations and national powers and for economic and social operators.” besides, it was considered that the list of rights contained in the charter offers a more precisedefinition of the common values that must be respected in a wider environmental entity by means of establishing a common language on fundamental rights in eu.the charter presents better practical protection for fundamental rights in the eu. most of these rights are indicated in both the case law of the ecj and article 6 of the treaty on european union. however, with the reference of the charter, it is anticipated, the eu citizens need neither to consult the case law of the ecj nor to read the articles of the complex treaties, in which the provisions refer to yet again other sources such as the echr and the constitutional traditions of member states, in order to get a clear consciousness of their rights. indeed, the articles in the charter are grouped explicitly around six fundamental values: dignity, freedoms, equality, solidarity, citizenship and justice. while most of the rights listed are granted to everyone, some certain rights are granted to specific groups of people: i.e. children, workers union citizens , citizens of the union and nationals of non-member countries residing in the unionas we have mentioned in point 2, the charter could be regard as a syncretism by means of absorbing rights frombroader recourses besides the echr. thus the content of the charter is broader than echr provides, while the echr is restricted only to civil and political rights. for example the article ii 8 in the charter protection of personal data is derived from article 286 ec treaty; directive 95/46/ec of the european parliament and the council; article 8 echr; council of europe convention of 28 january 1981 for the protection of individuals with regard to automatic processing of personal data; article ii 10 2. paragraph 2 right to conscientious objection might be developed from national constitutional traditions ; more typical is article ii-18 right to asylum comes from both the article 63 ec treaty and protocols relating to the united kingdom and ireland annexed to the treaty of amsterdam and to denmark . the same cases we can cite in all places from the charter, which reflects the nature loose relation between the charter and the echr and other documents of council of europe.so according to the content of the charter, it is sensible to summarize it as a self sufficient constitutional legal source providing adequate and complete protection for human rights.3.2 the change of the legal characteristic of the charterthe charter was supposed to function as a symbol that would “counterbalance the euro an d become part of the iconography of european integration and contribute both to the identity of and identification with europe” when it was finally signed in the igc in nice. since the charter was not integrated into eu treaties, which led to non-binding force status. however, the charter itself seems to have already paved a way to its incorporation into eu treaty as a constitutional “bill of rights”. because it has created potential and provided a more solid basis for the commitment of the eu institutions to the protection of fundamental rights. this is the deficiency in eu treaties, which should be complemented sooner or later . it is also unambiguous that the eu institutions, which have proclaimed the charter, would commit themselves to respect the charter.as a result, then on the one hand the charter made eu citizens better to understand the extent of their rights to defend against violations on human rights. so that they should be capable of referring to the charter when they challenge any decision against their deserved fundamental rights taken by eu institutions or by member states implementing eu law. on the other hand, the eu institutionshould act on the charter whenever they drew policies and settle disputes according to petition. as a logic consequence, the ecj as judiciary part should also regard the charter as a binding inter-institutional agreement. it was yet exactly the reality. short after the proclamation of the charter, the european courts published new case law established referred to the charter. until early XX, the advocates general of ecj had referred to the charter in 14 of the 23 cases they handled in relation to human rights .the court of first instance has also acted on the charter. in a significant judgment of 3 may XX the court even changed the rules governing individual access to the european courts, making reference to article 47 of the charter, which guarantees individuals whose rights are violated the right to an effective remedy before a tribunal.in any case it is obvious from above discuss, though the declaratory character of the charter does not have legal binding as far as the legislative status of the charter is concerned, it has already unchallengeable impact. so the incorporation of the charter is only a question of time and method. now as the charter enshrined in the constitution, it become directly binding if the draft constitution come intoforce after ratified by member states.3.3 the difference from the conventionthe union had currently no competence to adhere to the echr, while this competence is explicitly provided for in the draft constitution, which stipulates that the union will endeavor to adhere to the echr . it was declared, that as for the incorporation of the charter in the constitution, adhesion to the echr does not mean any change to the union's powers as defined in the constitution. the full incorporation of the charter and adhesion are complementary rather than alternative steps, because the charter does not function in competition with the echr. in this context article ii 52 of the draft constitution makes clear, that the charter respects the convention, its protocols, and the case law developed by the european court of human rights. the rule seems simple: the rights and liberties shared by the convention and the charter have the same meaning in both texts, even if the wording of the charter is different, either in an attempt to update the conventions text written in 1950 or to create a shorter and more readily comprehensible version.however, it is all what the charter and the draft constitution seek most importantly, what highlights in thecharter such as respect for the principle of democracy, for human rights and fundamental freedoms is not a new pledge, but they why the charter reaffirms explicitly and makes them perfectly, then upgrade them to constitutive rights according to my view, the adhesion to echr seeks the minimum security of human rights, however there is no reason to allege that the interpretation respecting the convention must be accurate for the eu, especially along with the growth of the council of europe that many countries of east europe attended including russia. after all, the status of council of europe becoming more pan-european after a astonish increase of the members after collapse of the socialism block after 1990. the criteria of being a member of council of europe is distinct from those of join the eu. if the council of europe could reach common understanding consistent with the human rights issues through its mechanism such as the committee of ministers, and achieve the convention’s aims as provide remedies suitable for all the members under echr, then, such situation may be not the case today. since it is likely undue that one can claim fair and working condition easily in large eastern european area where the unemployment rate is high up to almost 15%; it is also impossible to enforce some new set-up democraticcountries to become conscious of the right of citizens to good administration as in the charter states, on the contrary, too. so accordingly, the charter avoids imposing limitations on rights that are unlimited in the convention, as this would seriously lower the level of protection afforded by the charter. actually, as it states in the final report of working group of the draft constitution:the second sentence of article 52 § 3 of the charter serves to clarify that this article does not prevent more extensive protection already achieved or which may subsequently be provided for (i) in union legislation and (ii) in some articles of the charter which, although based on the echr, go beyond the echr because union law acquis had already reached a higher level of protection (e.g., article 47 on effective judicial protection, or article 50 on the right not to be punished twice for the same offence). thus, the guaranteed rights in the charter reflect higher levels of protection in existing union law.then the charter further includes a standstill clause: article ii 53. it sets out to preserve the level of protection already afforded by union, national and international law, in their respective spheres of application, as well as memberstates’ constitutions and international agreements. this clause also makes specific reference to the convention, stresses that the charter cannot undermine rights already guaranteed by that agreement. clearly, that means it is the convention which supplies the minimum protection as the lowest standard but the aim of the charter of eu is to provide fundamental rights protection at a higher level than the convention, which focus depend on the enlargement and the improvement of the democracy institutionalization of eu itself.in this context, as it states in the preamble of the charter in the constitution , the union respects and interpreters the charter in compliancy with the echr, could be only a scheme to recognize the current circumstance, while the principles of human rights protection derived from the council of europe have been general evolutes as constitutional traditions and international obligations common to the member states.3.4 possible consequences: two courts systemif the constitution provides different protection of human rights for eu citizens, the question will left to the judicatory of eu: what a possible procedure could be forcourts of eu to refer questions relating to the convention if the constitution come into force, in which the accession to the convention was expressed clearly in article i-7. though the accession would ensure a uniform minimum level of protection across europe irrespective of the legal actor, it would bring the conflict of jurisprudence between two courts- ecj and ecthr. it was suggested that the ecthr could give its advisory opinion for the ecj to apply. however, sensitive issues took place, for example: whether judges from countries outside the union would hear cases relating to eu law. especially as we mentioned, it is suspectable whether with the rapid expansion of council of europe membership in the east, there will be possibility that the standards of protection applied by ecthr could be weakened. and what could deal with the appeal according to the rights provided by the charter but not fall in scope of echr it is now hard to give satisfactory answers to these questions, however, one thing is sure, that the courts of eu should acquire more competence in this part.theoretically, the ecj has played the same role as ecthr in some cases. the ecthr provides the ultimate remedy against relevant authority in case the applicant regards he ispersonally and directly the victim of a breach of one or more f these fundamental rights by one of the states when all domestic remedies has been exhausted. alike, for several decades, the ecj has also played an important role in ensuring the protection of fundamental rights inside the union legal order, by developing a method for the review of performances of the union institutions for human rights violations, despite lacking of sufficient relevant provisions in treaties. though the court's fundamental rights jurisprudence was limited to guarantee that individuals are protected from violations of their fundamental rights resulting from acts of union institutions, reviewing the case of individual against public institutions in member states was also inevitable in order to carry out the union law. such asserting would be more legitimate when two steps of judicial practice were carried out. namely the ratification of a union "bill of rights" and application of this "bill of rights" to the member states. the two conditions however are expected to realize if the constitution comes into force. then, as the commissioner antónio vitorino believes, based upon a complementarily relation, the charter will introduce a degree of healthy competition between the two main systemsfor protecting human rights on our continent, without introducing a schism between the european systems,” he argues. “the results of such competition can only be beneficial to stronger and better protection.” as i think, this is the ideal possibility. nevertheless, even though, it will be a long-term, gradually progress, and the concrete view, lies still beyond our sight.4 short conclusionsaccording to our discuss in this article, the draft constitution contains a bill of rights for european union through incorporation the charter of fundamental rights, which provides a boarder and advanced fundamental rights for eu citizens. the charter will obtain accordingly legal binding force if all member states could ratify the constitution, then it shall strengthen the competence of the eu institutions on protecting human rights. a mechanism of human rights protection within eu scope will materialize with legal sources from member states and eu levels under the light of the charter in the constitution. corresponding, a compatible judiciary system could outline progressively while the courts of union are capable of playing the major role in protection of human rights within eu region in a longrun and as a counterpart of ecthr based on the gradually complete mechanism in eu.just before i finish the essay, news came that the eu constitution summit failed in eu leaders meeting in brussels, because poland and spain reluctant to accept newly weighted voting rights in the draft text, which would greatly weaken the influence of the two countries. although the irish government, which will takes over the eu presidency in january XX, has expressed concern over having the constitution debate spill over into its term, but since no major eu project has been pushed through within a single presidency’s six-month term before, a new round deal over the proposal of eu constitution could be restart at least in the second half of XX. it is a bad news but not certainly a dreadful thing as far as our topic is concerned, as we mentioned in this article, the form of a eu human rights protection system human rights protection will be only a question of time.literature:1, ralph beddard, human rights and europe, cambridge university press, 19932, j.p. gardner, aspects of incorporation of the europeanconvention of human rights into domestic law, the british institute of international and comparative law, 1993 3, fritz fabricius, human rights and european politics, berg publishers ltd, 19924, lammy betten & nicholas grief, eu law and human rights, addison wesley longman ltd.,19985, elspeth guild & guillaume lesieur, the european court of justice on the european convention on human rights, kluwer law international,19986, michele de salvia/mark e.villiger, the birth of european human rights law, baden-baden:nomos verlag, 1998 7, nigel g.foster, ec legislation handbook, blackstone press ltd., 19988, liz heffernan, human rights-a european perspective, colour books ltd, dublin, 19949, j.g.merrills, human rights in europe, manchester university press, XX10, darcy s. binder, the european court of justice and the protection of fundamental rights in the european community,11, j.h.h. weiler & sybilla c. fries, a human rights policy for the european community and union: the question ofcompetences12, leslie friedman goldstein & cornel ban, the rule of law and the european human rights regime13, j weiler does the european union truly need a charter of rights at 1-2, 6 elj, editorial, XX14, www.europa.eu.int15, www.coe.int16, the new draft named “draft treaty establishing a constitution for europe”; it will be still a treaty.see/1/hi/world/europe/3252628.stm see preamble of tue, also of the draft constitutionaccordingly, the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of the human is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world, however, the irrationality of the public organs bring the most danger to the human right, wwii for instance. and in this article, i do not distinguish the definition between human rights and fundamental rights, in a broad sense they have no definitely differences.the european council adopted in laeken december XX, see http://ue.eu.int/cig/future/futureen.asplang=ensee also the forum on draft constitution in internet: /documents/guidecitoyen_enrelated international agreement includes: the international covenant on civil and politic rights of 19 december 1966, the international covenant on economic, convention on social and cultural rights of 19 december 1966 etc.at the 1948 congress of europe in the hague, representatives of european states came together with the aim of establishing an organization in which all of them would cooperate to construct a region where democracy and human rights would be safeguarded.now oecdsee lammy betten & nicholas grief, eu law and human rights, p53see darcy s. binder, the european court of justice and the protection of fundamental rights in the european community, see also relevant materials stay in the website of council of europe www.coe.int, here i do not want to discuss in details.article 1 of the echr: “the high contracting partiesshall secure to everyone within their jurisdiction the rights and freedoms defined in section i of this convention.”from die bundesregierung, seehttp://eng.bundesregierung.de/top/dokument/the_federal_governmentsee pare the constitution unit, school of public policy, ucl, 1997-XX constitutional update: human rights, see see art 6 teusee art 7 teusee art 49 teusee art 46 teueuro-lex, the content of regulations see pare the report of eu committee of justice and home affairs, seehttp://europa.eu.intnold, [1974] ecr491, decision of 14 may 1974, compare dinah shelton the boundaries of human rights jurisdiction in europe, duke j. of comp. & int'l l. 95nold, [1974] ecr491, para 13currently, the ecj still almost refers to ecthr in case that the tribunal relate to human rights issuejoined cases 60 and 61/84, cinéthèque s a v. fédérationnationale des cinémas français [1985] ecr 2605, para 26. compare j.h.h. weiler & sybilla c. fries, a human rights policy for the european community and union: the question of competences, see/pdf/0-19-829806-4.pdfincluding the european social charter, the european committee for the prevention of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (cpt), the framework convention for the protection of national minorities etc. details see pare leslie friedman goldstein & cornel ban, the rule of law and the european human rights regime, p4, see ission of the european communities brussels, 13.9.XX com (XX) 559 finalsee title v in part ii of the constitution, which including right to take part in elections to the european parliament and municipal elections, right to move and reside freely within the territory of the member states and diplomatic and consular protection etc;see above, including right of access to institution documents, right to refer cases to the ombudsman and right to petition the european parliament.compare /justice_home/unit/charte/see pare j weiler does the european union truly need a charter of rights at 1-2, 6 elj, editorial, XXindeed, the issue of the charter's legal status - i.e. whether to make it legally binding by incorporating it into the treaty on eu has been raised even by the cologne european council, which originally launched the charter initiative. the convention drew up the draft charter with a view to its possible incorporation, and the european parliament voted in favor of incorporation. the nice european council also considers the question of the charter's legal status during the general debate on the future of the european union.see commission communication, com (XX) 644, 11 october XXsee art i-7 draft constitutionthe council of europe has already 44 member states in september XX and remains open to new members, on the condition of being democratic states.conv 354/02, wg ii 16 p.7, brussels, 22 october XXthe union regards the power of instruments of council of europe, but interpret them in eu context by the court of union.compare the charter in the european context--two systems working together for human rights, par 3. see rding to theappointment of judge in ecthr, they come from each member states, see the introduction of council of europe, pare darcy s. binder, the european court of justice and the protection of fundamental rights in the european community, the jean monnet center working paper, 1995, seethe same as footnote abovesee /justice_home/unit/charte/ en/systems-context-2-systems欧盟宪法草案对欧盟人权保护机制的影响 (the draft constitution an。

相关文档
最新文档