After having outlined some of the legal implications, as well as of the main issues raised by the accession of the EU to the ECHR, the paper focuses on the prior involvement mechanism as to situations when the alleged violation involves national judicial proceedings. It seeks to demonstrate that that mechanism does match both the ECHR’s features, and the precise conditions imposed by EU primary law on the accession process. It further argues that the prior involvement rule does not require a revision of the EU Treaties. Finally, it is argued that the ECJ’s prior involvement mechanism encourages the positive intervention of the ECJ, while recognizing the subsidiary external control of the Strasbourg Court. It seeks to preserve the primary role of both Courts in their respective domains, on the assumption that the protection of human rights requires the two Courts to be not rivals for primacy, but rather complementary partners for progressive evolution in the interest of improving individual protection. This is, in the author’s view, the intimate rationale for the prior involvement mechanism.

Accession of the EU to the ECHR: The rationale for the ECJ's prior involvement mechanism

BARATTA, Roberto
2013-01-01

Abstract

After having outlined some of the legal implications, as well as of the main issues raised by the accession of the EU to the ECHR, the paper focuses on the prior involvement mechanism as to situations when the alleged violation involves national judicial proceedings. It seeks to demonstrate that that mechanism does match both the ECHR’s features, and the precise conditions imposed by EU primary law on the accession process. It further argues that the prior involvement rule does not require a revision of the EU Treaties. Finally, it is argued that the ECJ’s prior involvement mechanism encourages the positive intervention of the ECJ, while recognizing the subsidiary external control of the Strasbourg Court. It seeks to preserve the primary role of both Courts in their respective domains, on the assumption that the protection of human rights requires the two Courts to be not rivals for primacy, but rather complementary partners for progressive evolution in the interest of improving individual protection. This is, in the author’s view, the intimate rationale for the prior involvement mechanism.
2013
--Netherlands: Springer Netherlands -Dordrecht Netherlands:Kluwer Academic Publishers
Internazionale
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
CMLR 2013 BARATTA.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Documento in post-print (versione successiva alla peer review e accettata per la pubblicazione)
Licenza: DRM non definito
Dimensione 1.98 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.98 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

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: https://hdl.handle.net/11393/192730
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 10
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 14
social impact