Abstract
The current crisis era in Europe has revealed symptoms of lack of respect for international socio-economic rights and challenges vis-à-vis their effectiveness at the national level. One such symptom relates to the (lack of) responsiveness of domestic judges concerning the justiciability, direct applicability and enforceability of such rights. Against this background, the European Social Charter—a rather neglected legal instrument, albeit the most important one with regard to socio-economic rights in Europe—has emerged in the jurisprudence of domestic courts in recent years, providing a unique perspective to address these challenges. In reality, even though the Charter initially seemed to exclude the possibility of being invoked before national courts, the situation has changed today. This is especially the case since the adoption of the Collective Complaints Procedure, as can be seen in the practice of lower and apex courts of several contracting parties. Specifically, various domestic courts—e.g. in Greece and Spain—have in many cases ruled in favour of the direct effect of various Charter provisions, and have given considerable weight to the ‘quasi-case law’ of the Charter’s monitoring body: the European Committee of Social Rights. Domestic courts are thus providing a valuable perspective on the normative debates in legal doctrine, specifically regarding the (democratic) legitimacy of judicially reviewing the legislator’s choices, and the issue of effectively protecting and enforcing international socio-economic rights at the domestic level in times of crisis.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
De Schutter 2015, p. 126.
- 2.
Menéndez 2017, p. 73.
- 3.
Christodoulidis 2017, p. 124.
- 4.
The terms ‘socio-economic rights’, ‘economic and social rights’, and ‘social rights’ are used interchangeably in this chapter. Cultural rights are beyond the scope of this analysis.
- 5.
Gearty and Mantouvalou 2010.
- 6.
See e.g. MacNaughton and Frey 2018.
- 7.
See e.g. De Schutter 2013.
- 8.
Contiades and Fotiadou 2012, p. 661.
- 9.
O’Connell 2013, p. 60.
- 10.
- 11.
See e.g. Rosenberg 2008.
- 12.
- 13.
Millard 2008, p. 349.
- 14.
- 15.
De Schutter 2017, p. 11.
- 16.
Brillat 2010, p. 45.
- 17.
See ECSR, FIDH v. France, Complaint No 14/2003, decision on the merits of 8 September 2004, para 27.
- 18.
- 19.
See Article 24(2) of the 1991 Additional Protocol to the Charter.
- 20.
Akandji-Kombé 2009, p. 13.
- 21.
See e.g. Harris 2009.
- 22.
- 23.
The word ‘system’ points to a set of coordinated normative and institutional elements, including the substantive and procedural provisions laid down in the Charter and its Protocols, as well as the ECSR’s monitoring work.
- 24.
De Schutter 2017, p. 12.
- 25.
See e.g. Akandji-Kombé 2013, p. 488.
- 26.
For French courts’ relevant case law, see e.g. Mouly 2019.
- 27.
Notably, in strictly dualist states, giving direct effect to treaties is not an option in principle, since treaties are not part of domestic law unless the legislature enacts a statute to incorporate a treaty. Once a treaty has been incorporated, courts in such states apply that statute—not the treaty, at least as a formal matter, and use other techniques to harmonize domestic law with international law, such as the method of consistent interpretation (indirect effect). See Sloss and Van Alstine 2017, p. 110.
- 28.
The terms ‘direct-effect’, ‘self-executingness’ and ‘direct applicability’ are used interchangeably in this chapter.
- 29.
- 30.
Bétaille 2012, pp. 23–24.
- 31.
ECSR, ICJ v. Portugal, Complaint No 1/1998, decision on the merits of 9 September 1999, para 32; FEANTSA v. Slovenia, Complaint No 53/2008, decision on the merits of 8 September 2009, para 28.
- 32.
See e.g. the Committee’s reasoning in FEANTSA v. France, Complaint No 39/2006, decision on the merits of 5 December 2007, paras 52–56.
- 33.
See McCrudden 2018.
- 34.
The research is grounded on a document-based desk(top) analysis of already existing legal and extra-legal data. Greek courts’ decisions, as published in law journals, have been collected through the ‘NOMOS’ (https://lawdb.intrasoftnet.com) and the ‘ISOKRATIS’ (https://www.dsanet.gr) databases, and Spanish courts’ decisions through the General Council of the Judiciary database (https://www.poderjudicial.es) and the Constitutional Court’s database (https://hj.tribunalconstitucional.es).
- 35.
See Supreme Civil and Criminal Court No 1603/1991 EllDni 1993, 332; Council of State No 2281/2001 EllDni 2001, 959. See generally Yokaris 2011, p. 253.
- 36.
See Council of State No 867/1988 Arm 1988, 265.
- 37.
Yokaris 2012, p. 167.
- 38.
See Article 25(1)c of the Constitution; Supreme Civil and Criminal Court No 2159/2007 NOMOS.
- 39.
See Article 93(4) of the Constitution.
- 40.
Due to the lack of an express constitutional provision, treaty-based review is carried out on the basis of Article 28(1) of the Constitution.
- 41.
Law 1428/1984.
- 42.
Law 2422/1996 and Law 2595/1998.
- 43.
Law 4359/2016.
- 44.
See e.g. with respect to Article 1(2) of the ESC, Council of State No 1571/2010 NoB, 1269.
- 45.
Apart from giving direct effect to the Charter, courts must interpret national law consistently with the Charter (in particular where national legislation exists, and its provisions are capable of such interpretation), on the basis of Article 25(1) and/or Article 2(2) of the Constitution.
- 46.
See generally Kilpatrick and de Witte 2014.
- 47.
See e.g. Papadopoulos 2020.
- 48.
In Greece there are no labour courts, therefore labour law-related disputes are resolved by civil courts, which may refuse, like all other Greek courts, to apply legislation if they find it contrary to the Constitution or to European/international law.
- 49.
The employees were under private law contracts of indefinite duration in the public sector.
- 50.
See Article 1, subparagraph Z.4-Z.2 of Law 4093/2012.
- 51.
Single-Member First Instance Court of Messolonghi No 63/2013 EErgD 2013, 353; Single-Member First Instance Court of Patras No 202/2014 NOMOS; Single-Member First Instance Court of Piraeus No 2700/2013 NOMOS; Single-Member First Instance Court of Thessaloniki No 4916/2013 NOMOS; Single-Member First Instance Court of Athens Nos 1759/2013 NOMOS, 13915/2013 EErgD 2014, 547, 13917/2013 NOMOS, and 7809/2014 NOMOS.
- 52.
Single-Member First Instance Court of Chios No 37/2013 EErgD 2013, 338; Single-Member First Instance Court of Xanthi No 90/2013 EErgD 2013, 347 and Single-Member First Instance Court of Patras No 494/2013 EErgD 2014, 567.
- 53.
ECSR, GENOP-DEI/ADEDY v. Greece, Complaint No 66/2011, decision on the merits of 23 May 2012.
- 54.
- 55.
Law 4325/2015.
- 56.
- 57.
See Article 1(5) of the Spanish Civil Code.
- 58.
Iglesias Velasco 2013, p. 185.
- 59.
Remiro Brotóns 1997, p. 359.
- 60.
Torres Pérez 2013.
- 61.
See Article 31 of Law 25/2014 (‘Treaties and other International Agreements’). See also Article 95(1) of the Constitution.
- 62.
See Spanish Constitutional Court, 20 December 2018, STC 140/2018-ECLI:ES:TC:2018:140. This is based inter alia on Article 96 combined with Article 10(2) of the Constitution. See generally Jimena Quesada 2018.
- 63.
Saiz Arnaiz 1999.
- 64.
Article 10(2): “Provisions relating to the fundamental rights and liberties recognised by the Constitution shall be construed in conformity with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and international treaties and agreements thereon ratified by Spain”.
- 65.
Unofficial translation.
- 66.
See e.g. Constitutional Court, 23 November 1981, STC 38/1981-ECLI:ES:TC:1981:38; Supreme Court (Contentious-Administrative Chamber-6th), 22 April 2010, STS 2223/2010-ECLI:ES:TS:2010:2223.
- 67.
Supreme Court (Contentious-Administrative Chamber-4th), 17 July 2018, STS 2747/2018-ECLI:ES:TS:2018:2747.
- 68.
Gutiérrez Espada 2018.
- 69.
CEDAW Committee, Angela González Carreño v. Spain, Communication No 47/2012, decision of 16 July 2014.
- 70.
Notably, the ESC also contains in para 1 of Part 1 a very similar provision, albeit with a less assertive wording.
- 71.
See generally Kanetake 2019.
- 72.
See Article 1(1) of the Constitution.
- 73.
“Instrumento de Ratificación de 29 de abril de 1980, de la Carta Social Europea, hecha en Turín de 18 de octubre de 1961”.
- 74.
“Instrumento de Ratificación por parte de España del Protocolo Adicional a la Carta Social Europea, hecho en Estrasburgo el 5 de mayo de 1988”.
- 75.
See e.g. Brillat 2009, p. 231.
- 76.
On 10 November 2020, the Spanish government approved an agreement providing for the referral of the RevESC to the Parliament for ratification and also authorising the expression of Spain’s consent to be bound by that Charter as well as the Collective Complaints Protocol.
- 77.
Social Court of Barcelona-2nd [‘Juzgado de lo Social’], No 412/2013, 19 November 2013, SJSO 63/2013-ECLI:ES:JSO:2013:63.
- 78.
This contract is a full/part time open-ended one establishing a probationary period of 12 months during which a worker can be dismissed without any notice or compensation. See generally Salcedo Beltran 2013.
- 79.
See Article 17(5) of Law 3899/2010 and Section 1, subsection IA of Law 4093/2012.
- 80.
See also Articles 29, 30 and 31 of Law 25/2014 supra note 61.
- 81.
ECSR, GENOP-DEI and ADEDY v. Greece, Complaint No 65/2011, decision on the merits of 23 May 2012.
- 82.
See ECSR, General Introduction to Conclusions XIX-2 (2009).
- 83.
Social Court of Toledo-1st, No 667/2014, 27 November 2014, SJSO 183/2014-ECLI:ES:JSO:2014:183; more recently Social Court of Barcelona-23rd, 12 March 2018, SJSO 1483/2018-ECLI:ES:JSO:2018:1483 and Social Court of Talavera de la Reina-3rd, No 152/2018, 29 June 2018, SJSO 4856/2018-ECLI:ES:JSO:2018:4856. See also the following decisions, not available at https://www.poderjudicial.es, cited in the ECSR’s 2015 Activity Report, https://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?documentId=09000016805ab9c7, p. 120, accessed 10 February 2020: “Employment tribunal-no. 1 of Tarragona no. 179, 2 April 2014—Employment tribunal-no. 1 of Mataró no. 144, 29 April 2014—Employment tribunal-no. 3 of Barcelona no. 352, 5 November 2014—Employment tribunal-no. 19 of Barcelona no. 491, 17 November 2014—Employment tribunal-no. 9 of Gran Canaria no. 705, 31 March 2015—Employment tribunal-no. 2 of Fuerteventura no. 58, 31 March 2015—Employment tribunal-no. 1 of Toledo no. 202, 9 April 2015—Employment tribunal-no. 1 of Las Palmas no. 74, 11 May 2015—Employment tribunal-no. 1 of Las Palmas no. 896, 3 June 2015”.
- 84.
High Court of Justice [‘Tribunal Superior de Justicia’] of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria (Social Chamber-1st), Decisions No 30/2016, 28 January 2016, STSJ ICAN 1420/2016-ECLI:ES:TSJICAN:2016:1420, No 252/2016, 30 March 2016, STSJ ICAN 829/2016-ECLI:ES:TSJICAN:2016:829, No 342/2016, 18 April 2016, STSJ ICAN 1598/2016-ECLI:ES:TSJICAN:2016:1598 and No 73/2017, 31 January 2017, STSJ ICAN 547/2017-ECLI:ES:TSJICAN:2017:547; High Court of Justice of Valladolid (Social Chamber-1st), Decisions No 01497/2016, 26 June 2016, STSJ CL 3026/2016-ECLI:ES:TSJCL:2016:3026 and No 02077/2016, 19 December 2016, STSJ CL 4707/2016-ECLI:ES:TSJCL:2016:4707.
- 85.
See e.g. Social Court of Barcelona-23rd, 12 March 2018, SJSO 1483/2018-ECLI:ES:JSO:2018:1483.
- 86.
Constitutional Court, 16 July 2014, STC 119/2014-ECLI:ES:TC:2014:119, 22 January 2015, STC 8/2015-ECLI:ES:TC:2015:8, 22 June 2015, STC 140/2015-ECLI:ES:TC:2015:140.
- 87.
See e.g. Social Court of Badajoz-1st, No 62/2018, 2 February 2018, SJSO 374/2018-ECLI: ES:JSO:2018:374; High Court of Justice of Barcelona (Social Chamber-1st), No 4090/2015, 22 June 2015, STSJ CAT 6721/2015-ECLI:ES:TSJCAT:2015:6721.
- 88.
See e.g. High Court of Justice of Coruña (Social Chamber-1st), No 625/2017, 30 January 2017, STSJ GAL 662/2017-ECLI:ES:TSJGAL:2017:662.
- 89.
That is a procedure established under Articles 218-228 of Law 36/2011 (‘Regulating Social Jurisdiction’), which may be applicable when there is a diversity of judicial responses dealing with substantially equal facts, grounds, and claims of the same or other litigants.
- 90.
See e.g. Supreme Court (Social Chamber-1st), 7 February 2017, ATS 1120/2017-ECLI:ES:TS:2017:1120A.
- 91.
Royal Decree-Law 28/2018.
- 92.
Sloss 2012, p. 375.
- 93.
Verdier and Versteeg 2017, p. 174.
- 94.
Brewster 2017, p. 66.
- 95.
Remarkably, the ECSR’s power to guide the interpretation of the Charter’s provisions is not only founded explicitly in the text of the Treaty and its Protocols but is also articulated in a very clear way, as opposed to other international human rights monitoring bodies. In addition, according to a view, this affirmation results in a procedural obligation for domestic courts to acknowledge that power and give serious consideration to the ECSR’s collective complaints decisions, or else provide compelling reasons and counterarguments in case of disagreement. See Articles 10 and 12 of the 1995 Additional Protocol to the Charter in conjunction with Article 24(2) of the 1961 ESC, as amended by Article 2 of the 1991 Additional Protocol.
- 96.
See e.g. ECSR, World Organisation against Torture (OMCT) v. Italy, Complaint No 19/2003, decision on the merits of 7 December 2004, para 41.
- 97.
See on this International Court of Justice, Ahmadou Sadio Diallo (Republic of Guinea v. Democratic Republic of the Congo), Merits, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2010, p. 639, para 66.
- 98.
Either as an interpretation accepted by parties through “subsequent practice in the application of the treaty” (Article 31(3)b VCLT) or as supplementary interpretive means (Article 32 VCLT).
- 99.
Kanetake and Nollkaemper 2014, p. 774.
- 100.
- 101.
See Flanders 2009.
- 102.
Borlini and Crema 2020.
- 103.
Van Alebeek and Nollkaemper 2012, p. 356.
- 104.
- 105.
See also e.g. Social Court of Barcelona-12th, No 287/2015, 4 September 2015, SJSO 60/2015-ECLI:ES:JSO:2015:60, relying on the ECSR’s decisions on the merits of collective complaints Nos 76-80/2012, which concerned social security and pension reforms in Greece.
- 106.
Pavlidou 2018, p. 299.
- 107.
- 108.
Rosenberg 2008.
- 109.
Tushnet 2008.
- 110.
Cavallaro and Brewer 2008, p. 770.
References
Aftodioikisi (2013) Chios: A definite return of the IDAX-DE; a fine to the municipality if they do not accept them, https://www.aftodioikisi.gr/ota/dimoi/xios-epistrofi-oristika-ton-idax-de-prostimo-sto-dimo-ean-den-tous-dexthei/ (in Greek), accessed 10 February 2020
Aftodioikisi (2015) With the Parliament’s seal the re-employment of employees in the public sector-157 ‘YES’ from SYRIZA-ANEL to the Katrougalos bill, https://www.aftodioikisi.gr/ipourgeia/kai-me-ti-voula-tis-voulis-oi-epanaproslipseis-sto-dimosio-157-nai-apo-siriza-anel-sto-nomosxedio-katrougkalou/
Akandji-Kombé J-F (2005) The material impact of the jurisprudence of the European Committee of Social Rights. In: de Búrca G, de Witte B, Ogertschnig L (eds) Social Rights in Europe. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 89–108
Akandji-Kombé J-F (2009) Les réclamations collectives dans le cadre de la Charte sociale européenne: bilan et perspectives. Europe des droits et libertés 28, available at: https://www.europedeslibertes.eu/ accessed 18 November 2020
Akandji-Kombé J-F (2013) La justiciabilité des droits sociaux et de la Charte Sociale Européenne n'est pas une utopie. In: Akandji-Kombé J-F (ed) L'homme dans la société internationale: Mélanges en hommage au Professeur Paul Tavernier. Bruylant, Brussels, pp 475–503
Alston P (2005) Assessing the strengths and weaknesses of the European Social Charter's supervisory system. In: de Búrca G, de Witte B, Ogertschnig L (eds) Social rights in Europe. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 45–67
Bétaille J (2012) Les conditions juridiques de l’effectivité de la norme en droit public interne, illustrations en droit de l’urbanisme et en droit de l’environnement. Université de Limoges, Limoges
Bilchitz D (2008) Poverty and Fundamental Rights: The Justification and Enforcement of Socio-Economic Rights. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Borlini L, Crema L (2020) The legal status of decisions by human rights treaty bodies: Authoritative interpretations or mission éducatrice? In: Ziccardi Capaldo G (ed) The Global Community Yearbook of International Law and Jurisprudence 2019. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 129–158
Brewster R (2017) The effectiveness of international law and stages of governance. In: Sandholtz W, Whytock C (eds) Research Handbook on the Politics of International Law. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, pp 55–78
Brillat R (2009) La Charte sociale et son acceptation progressive par les États. RevEurDerFund 13:227–243
Brillat R (2010) The European Social Charter and Monitoring its Implementation. In: Aliprantis N, Papageorgiou I (eds) Social rights: Challenges at European, Regional and International Level. Bruylant, Brussels, pp 43–59
Cavallaro J, Brewer S (2008) Reevaluating Regional Human Rights Litigation in the Twenty-First Century: The Case of the Inter-American Court. AJIL 102:768–827
Christodoulidis E (2017) Social Rights Constitutionalism: An Antagonistic Endorsement. JLawSoc 44:123–149
Contiades X, Fotiadou A (2012) Social rights in the age of proportionality: Global economic crisis and constitutional litigation. IJConstL 10:660–686
Cullen H (2009) The collective complaints system of the European Social Charter: Interpretative methods of the European Committee of Social Rights. HRLRev 9:61–93
De Schutter O (ed) (2013) Economic, Social and Cultural Rights as Human Rights. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham
De Schutter O (2015) Welfare State Reform and Social Rights. NQHR 33:123–162
De Schutter O (2017) The European Social Charter as the Social Constitution of Europe. In: Bruun N, Lörcher K, Schömann I, Clauwaert S (eds) The European Social Charter and the Employment Relation. Hart Publishing, Oxford, pp 11–51
Flanders C (2009) Toward a Theory of Persuasive Authority. OklLawRev 62:55–88
Gearty C, Mantouvalou V (2010) Debating Social Rights. Hart Publishing, London
Gutiérrez Espada C (2018) La aplicación en España de los dictámenes de comités internacionales: la STS 1263/2018, un importante punto de inflexión. CDT 10:836–851
Hafner-Burton EM, Tsutsui K (2007) Justice Lost! The Failure of International Human Rights Law to Matter Where Needed Most. JPeaceRes 44:407–425
Harris D (2009) Collective Complaints under the European Social Charter: Encouraging Progress? In: Warbrick C, Kaikobad K, Bohlander M (eds) International Law and Power: Perspectives on Legal Order and Justice: Essays in Honour of Colin Warbrick. Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden, pp 3–24
Hawkins D, Jacoby W (2010) Partial Compliance: A Comparison of the European and Inter-American Courts of Human Rights. JILIR 6:35–86
Hellenic Parliament-Scientific Department (2015) Report on Draft Bill "Democratization of Administration-Fighting Bureaucracy and E-Government-Restitution of Injustices and other Provisions". https://www.hellenicparliament.gr/UserFiles/7b24652e-78eb-4807-9d68-e9a5d4576eff/e-dioikisi-epi.pdf accessed 10 February 2020 [Βουλή των Ελλήνων-Επιστημονική Υπηρεσία (2015) Έκθεση επί του νομοσχεδίου «Εκδηµοκρατισµός της Διοίκησης-Καταπολέµηση Γραφειοκρατίας και Ηλεκτρονική Διακυβέρνηση-Αποκατάσταση αδικιών και άλλες διατάξεις»]
Iglesias Velasco AJ (2013) Reflexiones sobre la implementación de los tratados internacionales por los tribunales domésticos: especial referencia a España. AnuEspDerInt 29:165–216
Jimena Quesada L (2018) El control de convencionalidad y los derechos sociales: nuevos desafíos en España y en el ámbito comparito europeo (Francia, Italia y Portugal). AnuIberoamdeJusticiaConst 22:31–58
Kanetake M (2019) María de los Ángeles González Carreño v. Ministry of Justice. AJIL 113:586–592
Kanetake M, Nollkaemper A (2014) The Application of Informal International Instruments Before Domestic Courts. GeoWashInt'lLRev 46:765–807
Kilpatrick C, de Witte B (2014) A Comparative Framing of Fundamental Rights Challenges to Social Crisis Measures in the Eurozone. EJSL 2014:2–11
Krommendijk J (2015) The domestic effectiveness of international human rights monitoring in established democracies. The case of the UN human rights treaty bodies. RevIntOrgan 10:489–512
Landau D (2012) The reality of social rights enforcement. HarvIntlLJ 5:190–247
MacNaughton G, Frey F-F (eds) (2018) Economic and social rights in a neoliberal world. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
McCrudden C (2018) Comparative international human rights law: A justification and an agenda for the future. In: Roberts A, Stephan PB, Verdier PH, Versteeg M (eds) Comparative international law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 439–458
Mechlem K (2009) Bodies and the interpretation of human rights. VJTL 42:905–947
Menéndez A (2017) The Crisis of Law and the European Crises: From the Social and Democratic Rechtsstaat to the Consolidating State of (Pseudo-)technocratic Governance. JLawSoc 44:56–78
Millard E (2008) L'effectivité des droits de l'homme. In: Andriantsimbazovina J, Gaudin H, Marguenaud J-P, Rials S, Sudre F (eds) Dictionnaire des droits de l'homme. PUF, Paris, pp 349–352
Mouly J (2019) La barémisation des indemnités prud'homales: un premier pas vers l'inconventionnalité? DrSoc 2:122–129
Moyn S (2018) Not Enough: Human Rights in an Unequal World. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA
Neumayer E (2005) Do International Human Rights Treaties Improve Respect for Human Rights? JCR 49:925–953
Nivard C (2012) La justiciabilité des droits sociaux: étude de droit conventionnel européen. Bruylant, Brussels
Nollkaemper A (2014) The Duality of Direct Effect of International Law. EJIL 25:105–125
O’Connell P (2013) Let them eat cake: Socio-economic rights in an age of austerity. In: Nolan A, O’Connell R, Harvey C (eds) Human Rights and Public Finance: Budgets and the Promotion of Economic and Social Rights. Hart Publishing, Oxford, pp 59–76
Papadopoulos NA (2020) Austerity-Based Labour Market Reforms in Greece v. Fundamental Rights in the Aftermath of the European Debt Crisis: An Analysis of Supranational and National Bodies’ Jurisprudence. EurPubLaw 26:421–450
Pavlidou K (2018) Social rights in the Greek austerity crisis: Reframing constitutional pluralism. IJPL 10:287–321
Peters A (2016) Beyond Human Rights: The Legal Status of the Individual in International Law. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
Petersen N (2012) Determining the Domestic Effect of International Law through the Prism of Legitimacy. ZaöRV 72:223–259
Posner E (2014) The Twilight of Human Rights Law. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Raustiala K (2005) Form and substance in international agreements. AJIL 99:581–614
Remiro Brotóns A (1997) Derecho internacional. McGraw-Hill, Madrid
Rosenberg G (2008) The Hollow Hope. Can Courts Bring About Social Change? University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Saiz Arnaiz A (1999) La apertura constitucional al derecho internacional y europeo de los derechos humanos. El artículo 10.2 de la Constitución española. Consejo General del Poder Judicial, Madrid
Salcedo Beltran C (2013) El contrato de apoyo a emprendedores su difícil encaje en la normativa internacional, europea y nacional. RevDerSoc 62:93–122
Shelton D (2012) The legal status of normative pronouncements of human rights treaty bodies. In: Hestermeyer H, Wolfrum R (eds) Coexistence, Cooperation and Solidarity: Liber Amicorum Rüdiger Wolfrum. Martinus Nijhoff, Boston, pp 553–575
Sloss D (2012) Domestic application of treaties. In: Hollis D (ed) The Oxford Guide to Treaties. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 367–395
Sloss D, Van Alstine M (2017) International law in domestic courts. In: Sandholtz W, Whytock CA (eds) Research Handbook on the Politics of International Law. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, pp 79–115
Torres Pérez A (2013) El impacto del derecho internacional de los derechos humanos en España. In: Bandeira Galindo GR, Urueña R, Torres Pérez A (eds) Protección multinivel de derechos humanos. dhes. Red de Derechos Humanos y Educación Superior, Barcelona, pp 417–434
Tushnet M (2008) Weak Courts, Strong Rights: Judicial Review and Social Welfare Rights in Comparative Constitutional Law. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Tushnet M (2012) A response to David Landau. HarvIntlLJOnline 53:155–164
Van Alebeek R, Nollkaemper A (2012) The legal status of decisions by human rights treaty bodies. In: Cheltenham Keller H, Ulfstein G (eds) UN human rights treaty bodies: Law and legitimacy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp 356–413
Verdier P, Versteeg M (2017) Modes of domestic incorporation of international law. In: Sandholtz W, Whytock C (eds) Research Handbook on the Politics of International Law. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, pp 149–175
Yokaris A (2011) Greece. In: Shelton D (ed) International Law and Domestic Legal Systems: Incorporation, Transformation, and Persuasion. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 249–258
Yokaris A (2012) The practice of jurisdictional bodies in the application of international law. Nomiki Vivliothiki, Athens [Γιόκαρης Α (2012) Η πρακτική των δικαιοδοτικών οργάνων στην εφαρμογή του διεθνούς δικαίου]
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 T.M.C. Asser Press and the authors
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Papadopoulos, N.A. (2021). Paving the Way for Effective Socio-economic Rights? The Domestic Enforcement of the European Social Charter System in Light of Recent Judicial Practice. In: Boost, C., Broderick, A., Coomans, F., Moerland, R. (eds) Myth or Lived Reality. T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-447-1_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-447-1_5
Published:
Publisher Name: T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague
Print ISBN: 978-94-6265-446-4
Online ISBN: 978-94-6265-447-1
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)