Activities of Marietta GIANNAKOU related to 2009/2241(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Institutional aspects of accession by the European Union to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms - Review Conference of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court in Kampala, Uganda (debate)
Shadow reports (1)
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 PDF (212 KB) DOC (125 KB)
Amendments (7)
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the prospect of the European Union’s accession to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR), which offers an historic opportunity to create a common framework for human rights across the Continent and an additional external control system and to ensure the harmonious development of the case- law of the Court of Justice of the European Communities and the European Court of Human Rights;·
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the limits set by the Lisbon Treaty and the Protocols thereto are upheld at the time of accession and more specifically, whereas Article 6(2) of the Treaty on European Union provides that the European Union shall accede to the ECHR and whereas Protocol No 8 to the Lisbon Treaty lists a series of points concerning which provision must be made at the time of that accession; whereas these provisions do not merely constitute an option allowing the Union to accede but require the Union institutions to act accordingly,
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses the main arguments in favour of accession of the Union to the ECHR, which may be summarised as follows: – while the Union's system for the protection of fundamental rights will be supplemented and enhanced by the incorporation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights into its primary law, its accession to the ECHR will send a strong signal concerning the coherence between the Union and 'wider Europe', constituted by the Council of Europe and its pan-European human rights system; this accession will also enhance the credibility of the Union in the eyes of third countries which it regularly calls upon in its bilateral reports to respect the ECHR, – accession to the ECHR will afford citizens protection against the action of the Union similar to that which they already enjoy against action by all the Member States; this is all the more worthwhile because the Member States have transferred substantial powers to the Union, - legislative and case law harmonisation in the field of human rights of the rule of law of the EU and the ECHR and the corresponding case law of the European courts is so advanced as to require attainment of commensurate progress in procedural harmonisation of the two European courts, the European Court of Human Rights and the European Court in Luxembourg, and the reshaping of the institutional bodies of the ECHR. – accession will contribute to the harmonious development of the case law of the two European courts in the field of human rights, particularly because of the increased need for dialogue, and cooperation – accession will not in any way call into question the principle of the autonomy of the Union's law, as the Court of Justice will remain the sole supreme court adjudicating on issues relating to EU law and the validity of the Union's acts, as the Court of Human Rights must be regarded not as a superior authority but rather as a specialised court exercising external supervision over the Union's compliance with obligations under international law arising from its accession to the ECHR; the relationship of the two European courts shall not be hierarchical but rather a relationship of specialisation; thus the Court of Justice will have a status analogous to that currently enjoyed by the supreme courts of the Member States in relation to the Court of Human Rights; - the Court of Justice has as its purpose the interpretation and application of EU law, the competence of which is restricted to the measure that by accession of the EU to the ECHR control of implementation of the ECHR on the part of the EU or Member States, in the case of individual recourse, is devolved to the Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. This does not imply alienation of the Court of Justice from the field of human rights since it may also be involved in this field within the context of other cases, in particular, when it is considered that social and economic rights protected by the Charter of Fundamental Rights are not covered by the ECHR. - notwithstanding the excellent cooperation seen so far between the two European Courts, the accession of the EU to the ECHR necessarily involves direct communication which should not exclude possible suspension of proceedings if a case is pending in one or other of the courts.
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Takes the view that, for the benefit of citizens, cooperation between the institutions of the European Union and the specialised bodies of the Council of Europe should be strengthened in order to help bring about greater consistency and greater complementarity in the sphere of human rights at pan-European level.
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7a (new)
Paragraph 7a (new)
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7b (new)
Paragraph 7b (new)
7b. it should be determined by internal rules in those cases in which the EU becomes a co-defendant.
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7c (new)
Paragraph 7c (new)
7c. The adoption of the institution of co- defendant should not impede other indirect options provided by the ECHR (Article 36, I) such as the right of the EU to intervene as a third party in cases of recourse by EU citizens against a state that is not a member of the EU.