Foreign policy of States and of the European Union undoubtedly leaves little space to human rights protection. This is due mainly to the fact that States tend to preserve their sovereignty, namely the domestic jurisdiction over their citizens. As far as the European Union is concerned, on 18th December 2014, with Opinion 2/13 the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) rejected the draft agreement of the EU access to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), by providing two main objections: procedural and substantive. The major problem, from a substantive point of view, are the Court’s objections related to CSFP. As highlighted by some doctrine, human rights breaches unfortunately occur in foreign policy operations, ranging from violations of the right to life, to arbitrary detention to human trafficking by foreign forces. The CJEU has no jurisdiction to protect, as regards most CFSP matters; but it rules that if it can’t have jurisdiction over CFSP, then no other international court can either. The article aims at analysing juridical instruments at European Union’s disposal to effectively protect human rights in relation to CSFP matters, by focusing on gaps which need to be filled. A final remark is then left to the practical example of human rights at stake in the context of the military EUNAVFOR MED Operation Sophia.

The EU sovereignty on CSFP Matters in the light of Human Rights Protection Obligations: What balance? / B. Gornati. - In: SUDEUROPA. - ISSN 2532-0297. - 2018:1-2(2018 Aug), pp. 23-44.

The EU sovereignty on CSFP Matters in the light of Human Rights Protection Obligations: What balance?

B. Gornati
2018-08

Abstract

Foreign policy of States and of the European Union undoubtedly leaves little space to human rights protection. This is due mainly to the fact that States tend to preserve their sovereignty, namely the domestic jurisdiction over their citizens. As far as the European Union is concerned, on 18th December 2014, with Opinion 2/13 the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) rejected the draft agreement of the EU access to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), by providing two main objections: procedural and substantive. The major problem, from a substantive point of view, are the Court’s objections related to CSFP. As highlighted by some doctrine, human rights breaches unfortunately occur in foreign policy operations, ranging from violations of the right to life, to arbitrary detention to human trafficking by foreign forces. The CJEU has no jurisdiction to protect, as regards most CFSP matters; but it rules that if it can’t have jurisdiction over CFSP, then no other international court can either. The article aims at analysing juridical instruments at European Union’s disposal to effectively protect human rights in relation to CSFP matters, by focusing on gaps which need to be filled. A final remark is then left to the practical example of human rights at stake in the context of the military EUNAVFOR MED Operation Sophia.
human rights; foreign policy; European Union; ECHR; Opinion 2/13
Settore IUS/13 - Diritto Internazionale
http://isesp.eu/Sudeuropa_1_2_2018_WEB.pdf
Article (author)
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Sudeuropa_1_2_2018_Gornati.pdf

accesso riservato

Tipologia: Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione 822.39 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
822.39 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia
Pubblicazioni consigliate

Caricamento pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/2434/605336
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact