Accession of the european union to the europeanconvention on human rights: Where are we now?

Lizbon Anlaşması’nın yürürlüğe girmesiyle Avrupa Birliği’nin Avrupa İnsanHakları Sözleşmesi’ne taraf olması artık sadece bir zaman meselesi olarak karşımıza çıkmakta ve bu katılımından beklenen etkinin de genel olarak olumlu olacağı görüşü yaygın bulunmaktadır. Fakat katılımın gerçekleşmesinden önce Avrupa Adalet Divanı’nın ve Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi’nin yetkilerinin aralarında nasıl bölüneceği, Avrupa Birliği Hukuku’nun üstünlüğü prensibi ve Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi’nde yer alacak hakimlerin atanmaları ve görevleri gibi pek çok sorun ele alınmalıdır. İşbu makalede Avrupa Birliği’nin Avrupa İnsan Hakları Sözleşmesi’ne katılımın arkasında yatan sebepler ve planlanan katılımdan kaynaklanan bir takım sorular ele alınacaktır.

Avrupa birliği’nin avrupa insan hakları sözleşmesine katılımı: Hangi aşamadayız?

The EU’s accession to the ECHR is, after the coming into force of the Treaty ofLisbon, only a question of time. The effects expected of such an accession are generally positive. However, questions regarding the division of competences between the ECJ and the ECtHR, the supremacy of EU law and the appointment and role of judges at the ECtHR, to name just a few, must be addressed before the accession becomes reality. This article discusses the reasons for accession and some of the questions raised by the planned accession of the EU to the ECHR.

___

Ahmed and Butler, The European Union and Human Rights: An International Law Perspective, European Journal of International Law, Vol. 17, no. 4.
Chalmers, Davies and Monti, European Union Law, 2nd Ed, Cambridge University Press, 2010.
Konstadinidis, Division of powers in European Union law: the delimitation of internal competence between the EU and the member states, Wolters Kluwer, 2009
Lock and Tobias, Walking on a Tightrope: The Draft Accession Agreement and the Autonomy of the EU Legal Order, Common Market Law Review, Vol. 48, 2011.
Stone Sweet, The Judicial Construction of Europe, Oxford University Press, 2004.
Case 1/58, Stork v. High Authority [1959] ECR 17.
Case 26/62, Van Gend en Loos v. Nederlanse Administratie der Belastingen [1963] ECR 1.
Case 6/64, Costa v. ENEL [1964] ECR 585.
Case 11/70, Internationale Handelsgesellschaft v. Einfuhr-und Vorratstelle fuer Getreide und Futtermittel [1970] ECR 1125.
Case 36/75, Rutili v. Ministre de l’Intérieur [1975] ECR 1219.
Case C–249/96, Grant v. South West Trains Ltd [1998] ECR I–621.
Case C–60/92, Otto BV v. Postbank NV [1993] ECR I–5683.
Case 374/87, Orkem v. Commission [1989] ECR 3283.
Case C-84/95, Bosphorus [1996] ECR I-3953.
Commission Recommendation for a Council Decision Authorizing the Com mission to Negotiate the Agreement on the Accession of the European Union to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, SEC(2010)305.
Discussion document of the Court of Justice of the European Union on certain aspects of the accession of the European Union to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, 5 May 2010,
ECtHR, application no. 45036/98, Case of Bosphorus Hava Yollari Turizm ve Ticaret Anonim Şirketi v. Ireland, 30 June 2005, para 155.
European Parliament Committee on Constitutional Affairs, Draft Report on the institutional aspects of the accession of the European Union to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, 2.2.2010, PR803011EN.doc
German Federal Constitutional Court, Solange I, [1974] 2 CMLR 540.
German Federal Constitutional Court, Solange II, [1987] 3 CMLR 225.
German Constitutional Court, 2 BvE 2/80, Gauweiler v. Treaty of Lisbon, under 331.
Joined Cases C-402/05 P and 415/05 P, Kadi and Al Barakaat International Foundation v Council and Commission [2008] ECR I-6351.
Opinion 2/94, Accession by the Community to the ECHR [1996] ECR I-1759.
UN S.C. Resolution 820, U.N. Doc S/RES/820, 17 April 1993.