ADVISORY OPINION AND PRELIMINARY RULING PROCEDURE – A COMPARATIVE AND CONTEXTUAL NOTE
ADVISORY OPINION AND PRELIMINARY RULING PROCEDURE – A COMPARATIVE AND CONTEXTUAL NOTE

Summary/Abstract: The apropos of this article is Additional Protocol No. 16 complementing to the European Convention on Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms that recently came into force. This paper presents the main common and differing elements of two non-contentious procedures before supranational courts. The advisory opinion procedure of European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the preliminary ruling procedure marked by unprecedented success before the Court of Justice of the European Union, -as at least prima facie- similar types of proceedings. The paper also analyses cross-cutting issues arising from the application of both procedures in the same case arising before designated national court or tribunal. Although the purpose of the advisory opinion is to achieve and maintain efficiency bearing in mind that the ECtHR is victim of its own success the paper outlines some of serious doubts and assumptions whether in current format and in foreseeable future this purpose will be achieved. Furthermore, the paper also takes a closer look at the procedural aspects of the first advisory opinion delivered by ECtHR given its importance as we can draw at least some conclusions on the functioning of this type of procedure. Lastly, the paper -in comparative spirit- also refers to the relationship of the ECHR and the European Union Law as the two main trustees within the European multilevel system of rights protection.

• Details
• Contents