Abstract
This Chapter addresses two delicate questions. On the one side, whether and to what extent the binding nature of the Charter affects the accession procedure to the EU; on the other, whether this legal force is capable of raising the threshold of human rights conditionality with respect to the enlargement policy. According to the author, a binding Charter can be quite influential on enlargement dynamics as it should progressively become the main parameter in assessing the progress of candidates countries. Moreover, it could help overcome the “double standard issue” by contrasting the far too severe scrutiny applied to candidate countries with a more fair procedure against Member States. As a result, the EU’s overall legitimacy and credibility of the EU on the international scene would be enhanced.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
M. Cremona, ‘EU enlargement: Solidarity and conditionality’, (2005) 30 European Law Review 3. See also G. De Búrca, ‘On enlargement of the European Union: Beyond the Charter: How enlargement has enlarged the human rights policy of the European Union’, (2004) 27 Fordham International Law Journal 696.
- 2.
L.S. Rossi, ‘Verso la Costituzione europea?’ in L.S. Rossi (ed.), Carta dei Diritti Fondamentali e Costituzione europea (Giuffré, 2002) 249; J.H.H. Weiler, The Constitution of Europe: “Do the new clothes have an emperor?” And other essays on European integration (Cambridge University Press, 1999).
- 3.
And further specified in Protocol No 8 annexed to the Treaty. [2008] OJ C 115/273.
- 4.
Cf. Preamble of the Charter [2007] OJ C 303/1.
- 5.
This was the view of the European Council when deciding to draft the Charter. ‘There appears to be a need, at the present stage of the Union’s development, to establish a Charter of Fundamental Rights in order to make their overriding importance and relevance more visible to the Union’s citizens.” Cf. Conclusions of the Presidency, Cologne European Council, 3 and 4 June 1999, accessible at http://www.consilium.europa.eu/.
- 6.
According to the Presidency Conclusions: ‘Protection of fundamental rights is a founding principle of the Union and an indispensable prerequisite for her legitimacy”.
- 7.
Opinion 2/94 [1996] ECR I-1759. The Court of Justice did recall, however, that ‘fundamental rights form an integral part of the general principles of law whose observance the Court ensures” (para 33). See further, P. Allott, ‘Fundamental rights in the EU’, (1996) 3 The Cambridge Law Journal 409; G. Gaja, ‘Opinion 2/94, Accession by the Community to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, given on 28 March 1996, not yet reported’, (1996) 4 Common Market Law Review 973; L.S. Rossi, ‘Il parere 2/94 sull’adesione della Comunità europea alla Convenzione europea dei diritti dell’uomo’, (1996) 3 Il Diritto dell'Unione Europea 839; P. Wachsmann, ‘L’avis 2/94 de la Cour de justice relatif à l’adhésion de la Communauté européenne à la Convention de sauvegarde des droits de l’homme et des libertés fondamentales’, (1996) 3 Revue trimestrielle de droit européen 467; N. Burrows, ‘Question of Community accession to the European Conventiondetermined’, (1997) 1 European Law Review 58.
- 8.
[2004] OJ C 310/1.
- 9.
[2008] OJ C 115/1.
- 10.
K. E. Smith, ‘The evolution and application of EU Membership conditionality’, in M. Cremona (ed.), The enlargement of the European Union (Oxford University Press, 2003) at 106.
- 11.
W. Sadursky, ‘Charter and enlargement’, (2002) 3 European Law Journal 340. See also W. Sadursky, ‘The Role of the EU Charter of Rights in the process of enlargement’ in G. Bermann and K. Pistor (eds.), Law and governance in an enlarged European Union (Hart, 2004), at 61and C. Pinfell, ‘Conditionality and enlargement in the light of EU constitutional development’, (2004) 10 European Law Journal 354.
- 12.
Commission Communication on the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. COM (2000) 559 final, para 12 states that: ‘[w]ith the Union now developing a real common foreign and security policy, in which respect for fundamental rights will play a key role, the adoption of a catalogue of rights will make it possible to give a clear response to those who accuse the Union of employing one set of standards at external level and another internally. The Charter will provide the Union with a clear catalogue of rights that it will have to respect when implementing both internal and external policies.”
- 13.
W. Sadursky, ‘Charter and enlargement’, n. 10 above, at 345.
- 14.
[2007] OJ C 303/1.
- 15.
Neighbouring countries must be understood in a geo-political sense. No reference is made to those countries which, although involved in the Neighbourhood policy of the European Union, have no chance of becoming new members or, rather, are a priori excluded from any admission procedure. The latter statement does not apply to the Balkan countries and Turkey that are formally candidate or potential candidate states. Cf. Conclusions of the Presidency, Santa Maria Da Feira European Council, 19 and 20 June 2000, para 67.
- 16.
They are not included amongst the observers (two representatives of the Court of Justice of the European Communities to be designated by the Court and two representatives of the Council of Europe, including one from the European Court of Human Rights), but in a separate group labelled ‘Exchange of views with the applicant States’. Cf. Annex to the Presidency Conclusions, Tampere European Council, 15 and 16 October 1999.
- 17.
P. Alston and J.H.H. Weiler, ‘An European Union human rights policy’ in P. Alston (ed.), The European Union and human rights (Oxford University Press, 1999).
- 18.
A. Williams, EU human rights policies. A study in irony (Oxford University Press, 2004).
- 19.
A. Williams, ‘Enlargement of the Union and human rights conditionality: A policy of distinction?’, (2000) 25 European Law Review 601 and A. Williams, EU Human Rights Policies. A Study in Irony (Oxford University Press, 2004).
- 20.
The European Community has entered into association agreements with a number of countries (for example, with the Mediterranean countries – within the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership – and with countries involved in the European Neighbourhood Policy of South Caucasus and Turkey). These agreements were not conceived as pre-accession instruments, but some of them were progressively re-oriented so to fall within the accession strategy. See E. Lannon, K. Inglis and T. Haenebalke, ‘The many faces of EU conditionality in Pan-Euro-Mediterranean relations’ in M. Marescau and E. Lennon (eds.), The EU’s enlargement and Mediterranean strategies. A comparative analysis (Basingstoke, 2001) at 110. In line with this new trend, the 90s association agreements concluded with the countries of Central and Eastern Europe (namely, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia and Poland) were named Europe Agreements and the relations with the Western Balkan countries (namely, Macedonia and Croatia) Stabilisation and Association Agreements. This process has not directly concerned the Association Agreement with Turkey (see Council Decision 64/732/EEC of 23 December 1963 on the conclusion of the Agreement establishing an Association between the European Economic Community and Turkey [1964] OJ L 217/1) that has not been amended despite the strategic importance of fundamental rights protection.
- 21.
Namely, Arts. 60–62 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969).
- 22.
H. Schmitt von Sydow, ‘Liberté, démocratie, droits fondamentaux et etat de droit. analyse de l’art. 7 du Traité UE’, (2001) 2 Revue du Droit de l’Union Européenne 285; A. Verhoeven, ‘How democratic need European Union members be? Some thoughts after Amsterdam’, (1998) 1 European Law Review 217; A. von Bogdandy, ‘The European Union as a human rights organisation? Human rights and the core of the European Union’, (2007) 4 Common Market Law Review 1307.
- 23.
B. De Witte and G. Toggenburg, ‘Human rights and membership of the European Union’, in S. Peers and A. Ward (eds), The European Union Charter of Fundamental Rights (Oxford University Press, 2004) at 73.
- 24.
Unfortunately, this does not mean that the right for individuals to access the Court will be enhanced. The Treaty of Lisbon, in fact, has only brought minor changes to the wording of Art. 230 TEU. Cf. Art. 263 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. On this particular issue see in this volume the contribution by G. Sanna, “Chapter 9”.
- 25.
On conditionality, see E. Fierro, The EU’s approach to human rights conditionality in practice (New York, 2003).
- 26.
M. Cremona, ‘Enlargement: A successful instrument of EU foreign policy?’, in T. Tridimas and P. Nebbia (eds.), European Union law for the twenty-first century: Rethinking the new legal order, vol. I (Oxford University Press, 2003) 268.
- 27.
K. E. Smith, ‘The evolution and application of EU membership conditionality’, in M. Cremona (ed.), The enlargement of the European Union (Oxford University Press, 2003) at 109–110. See also M. Nowak, ‘human rights ‘conditionality’ in relation to entry to, and full participation in, the EU’, in P. ALSTON (ed.), The EU and human rights (Oxford University Press, 1999) 687; and M. Maresceau and E. Lannon (eds.) The EU’s enlargement and Mediterranean strategies: A comparative analysis (London, 2001).
- 28.
Conclusions of the Presidency, Copenhagen European Council, 21–22 June 1993, SN 180/1/93.
- 29.
On the Copenaghen criteria see also: D. Katz, ‘Les ‘critères de Copenhague’, (2000) 40 Revue du Marché Commun et de l’Union Européenne 483 and D. Kochenov, ‘Behind the Copenhagen Facade. The Meaning and Structure of the Copenhagen Political Criteria of Democracy and the Rule of Law’, (2004) 8 European Integration On-Line Papers 10.
- 30.
To be sure, Art. O of the Maastricht Treaty stated that any European State could apply to become a member of the European Union.
- 31.
See Annex, European Council Conclusions ‘on the principle of conditionality governing the development of the European Union’s relations with certain countries of Southern Europe’, EU Bull. 4-1997.
- 32.
M. Maresceau, ‘Pre-accession’, in M. Cremona (ed.), The enlargement of the European Union (Oxford University Press, 2003) 9; and M. Maresceau and E. Montaguti, ‘The relations between the European Union and Central and Eastern Europe: A legal appraisal’, (1995) 6 Common Market Law Review 1328.
- 33.
Explanations Relating to the Charter of Fundamental Rights [2007] OJ C 303/17.
- 34.
Furthermore, this kind of analysis has been carried out by several scholars: see, for example, S. Koukoulis-Spiliotopoulos, ‘Towards a European Constitution: Does the Charter of Fundamental Rights ‘maintain in full” the acquis communautaire?’, (2002) 1 Revue européenne de droit public 57; C. Tomushat, ‘Common values and the place of the Charter in Europe’, (2002) 1 Revue européenne de droit public, 159; J. Dutheil de la Rochère, ‘Les droits fondamentaux reconnus par la Charte et leurs applications’, (2002) 1 Revue européenne de droit public 227; P. Craig, ‘The Community Rights and the Charter’, (2002) 1 Revue européenne de droit public 196.
- 35.
By contrast, rights are listed under the following titles: Dignity, Freedoms, Equality, Solidarity, Citizens’ Rights and Justice.
- 36.
The participation of acceding countries to the ECHR is, generally speaking, the main criterion EU institutions take into account when assessing the commitment of potential Member States to the protection of human rights.
- 37.
Other problematic examples are to be found in Art. 14 (Right to education), which is only mentioned in an additional Protocol to the ECHR), in Art. 37 (Environmental protection) and in Art. 38 (Consumer protection), that are not an integral part of the acquis communautaire.
- 38.
J. Czuczai, ‘The EU Charter of fundamental rights: Is it a new accession condition for the candidate countries especially in light of the post-Nice IGC?’, in T. Tridimas and P. Nebbia (eds.), European Union law for the twenty-first century: Rethinking the new legal order (Hart Publishing, 2004, vol. 1); S. Koukoulis-Spiliotopoulos, ‘Which Charter of Fundamental Rights was incorporated in the draft European Constitution?’, (2005) 1 Revue Européenne de Droit Public 295–304; J. Wouters, ‘The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights: Some reflections on its external dimension’, (2001) 1 Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law 3; A. J. Menéndez, ‘Chartering Europe: Legal status and policy implications of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union’, (2002) 3 Journal of Common Market Studies 471.
- 39.
K. Lenaerts ‘Fundamental rights in the European Union’, (2000) 25 European Law Review at 599.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ficchi, L. (2011). Candidate Countries Facing a Binding Charter of Fundamental Rights: What’s New?. In: Giacomo, D. (eds) The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice, vol 8. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0156-4_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0156-4_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-0155-7
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-0156-4
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLaw and Criminology (R0)