Pristupanje Evropske unije Konvenciji za zaštitu ljudskih prava i osnovnih sloboda Saveta Evrope - stagniranje procesa kao rezultat Mišljenja 2/13 Suda pravde Evropske unije
The European Union accession to the European Convention on Human Rights - opinion 2/13 of the Court of Justice of the European Union as the crucial reason of the accession process stagnation

Summary/Abstract: This paper deals with the issue of the European Union (EU) accession to the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) which has become one of the most discussed issues since obligatory Opinion 2/13 of the European Court of Justice (CJEU). Besides, this Opinion 2/13 concluded that the Draft Agreement on the EU Accession to the ECHR is not in accordance with article 2, paragraph 2 of the Treaty on the European Union (TEU) and therefore is unlawful judging by EU law. The paper firstly outlines the characteristics of existing mechanisms for the protection of human rights established by the EU and the Council of Europe (CoE). Secondly, it briefly explains the evolution of the idea of the EU accession to the EU in order to help to understand the complexity of this process. Thirdly, the paper provides a comprehensive assessment of the Opinion 2/13 of the Court of Justice and together with the opposite views on Opinion created by Advocate General Kokott and certain academics, ensures the apprehension of failure of the EU in human rights protection. Finally, concluding remarks will explain two possibilities of potential EU and CoE actions regarding the ECHR accession based on article 218 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU. One is to amend the TEU in a way that the accession of the EU is not anymore an obligation stemming from the article 6 TEU. The other solution should require a joint decision of 47 member states of the CoE, unanimously approved by the European Council, ratification within the European Parliament and agreement on every point stated in the negative Opinion 2/13 of the CoJ. Both possibilities represent a set of political decisions that currently seems impossible due to the political situation in Europe and the EU. The author additionally suggests that the member states of the EU should sustain from the CoJ decision on accession and take individual actions concerning the protection of human rights even though this may lead to the infringement procedures within the EU. In the end, the conclusion will answer to inquiries such as what the EU accession to the ECHR would bring to the individuals in the human rights protection order and why this is not compatible with the CoJ preferences. Furthermore, negative opinions towards the CoJ decision stated by the academic community and EU citizens, support a critical opinion of this paper and brace common conclusion stating that Opinion 2/13 is the evidence that the CoJ primarily shows concerns regarding EU supremacy and not the protection of human rights.

• Details
• Contents