Scholarly record
THE EFFICIENCY OF THE EUROPEAN MECHANISMS FOR PROTECTING THE RULE OF LAW
Abstract
The principle of the rule of law is constantly evoked by the jurisdictions that have thecompetence to control the implementation and observance of the limitation of thepowers of the state, as well as the guarantee of human rights. The internationalization ofthe principles of the rule of law and the protection of human rights occurred in Europethrough the European Union and the Council of Europe, which did not limit themselvesto listing common values, but established a series of sanctions for their violation. TheCommission's efforts are not singular, but have been strengthened by a series ofinstruments developed by other European institutions, such as the Annual rule of lawdialogue created by the EU Council or the Resolutions of the European Parliament. Noless relevant are the principles developed by the Strasbourg Court through its ownmethods of interpretation of the Convention, but also the preliminary referenceprocedure available for the courts. The existence of multiple European mechanisms formonitoring and preventing violations of the rule of law can lead us to the conclusionthat there is no room for slippages or, on the contrary, that they are not sufficient toannihilate attempts to destabilize the common values and standards of the rule of law.
Publication Impact Profile
Publication details
References15
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN COUNCIL, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS - Strengthening the rule of law within the Union A blueprint for action, p 12, available on https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/ALL/?uri=COM%3A2019%3A343%3AFIN
The last Report was published at 10.12.2021 - REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS - Protecting Fundamental Rights in the Digital Age - 2021 Annual Report on the Application of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights; available on https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/a1599b9f-599b-11ec-91ac-01aa75ed71a1/language-ro/format-PDF/source-search
For details, see: https://romania.representation.ec.europa.eu/news/comisia-isireinnoieste-angajamentul-de-consolida-drepturile-fundamentale-ue-2020-12-02_ro
Conclusions of the Council of the EU and the Member States meeting within the Council on ensuring respect for the rule of law, Brussels, 16 December 2014, available on https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-17014-2014-INIT/en/pdf
RESOLUTION adopting the Declaration of fundamental rights and freedoms, 12 April 1989, available on https://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/docs/pdf/a2_0003_89_en_en.pdf
LIBE Democracy, Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights Monitoring Group (DRFMG), European Parliament, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/committees/ro/libedemocracy-rule-of-law-and-fundament/product-details/20190103CDT02662
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL, A new EU Framework to strengthen the Rule of Law, COM/2014/0158, available on https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/ALL/?uri=celex%3A52014DC0158
COUNCIL DECISION on the determination of a clear risk of a serious breach by the Republic of Poland of the rule of law, Bruxelles, 20.12.2017, COM(2017) 835 final, available on https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2017/0835/COM_COM(2017)0835_EN.pdf
European Parliament resolution of 24 June 2021 on the Commission’s 2020 Rule of Law Report (2021/2025(INI)), 24 June 2021 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2021-0313_EN.html
inter alia, Case of Golder v. The United Kingdom, 21February 1975, paragraph 29; Case of Johnston and Others v. Ireland, Strasbourg, 18 December 1986, paragraph 51; Case of Loizidou v. Turkey, Strasbourg, 18 December 1996, paragraph 43.
Case of Silver and others v. The United Kingdom, Case of Malone v. The United Kingdom, Case of the Sunday Times v. the United Kingdom.
CASE OF ASSANIDZE v. GEORGIA, judgment of 08 August 2004, § 171; CASE OF WINTERWERP v. THE NETHERLANDS, Judgement of 24 October 1979, §§39 si 45; CASE OF MERABISHVILI v. GEORGIA, Judgement of 28 November 2017, §186; Case of C.R. v. the United Kingdom, Judgment of 22 Novembre 1995, §34; CASE OF STRELETZ, KESSLER AND KRENZ v. GERMANY, Judgement of din 22 March 2001, §87.
Judgement of 24 October 2018, XC and Others, C-234/17, EU:C:2018:853, available on https://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf;jsessionid=2E3A0D05F4894D3B5B0BBEA7765DB33Ftext=&docid=206981&pageIndex=0&doclang=RO&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=4185170
Judgement of 9 March 1978, Simmenthal, 106/77, EU:C:1978:49, paragraphs 21 ?i24, and Judgement of 6 March 2018, SEGRO and Horvath, C-52/16 ?i C-113/16,EU:C:2018:157, paragraph 46
Snejana Sulima, Principiul statului de drept si protectia drepturilor omului.Instrumente juridice europene versus interese politice conjuncturale, ANALELE STIINTIFICE ALE UNIVERSITATII „ALEXANDRU IOAN CUZA” DIN IASI, TOMUL LXVI/I, STIINTE JURIDICE, 2020, pg. 384.
View or Download full articleAccess options
SWS access login
Login as SWS Scientific CommitteeLogin as SWS Scientific PartnerLogin as SWS AuthorAuthors and approved SWS contributors will read and export their own linked papers after identity matching by SWS profile, email and SGEM GlobalID.
For librarian assistance: [email protected]
Purchase Instant Access
- Article can be downloaded after successful payment.
- Article may be used according to SWS library access terms.
- Article cannot be redistributed.