Legal Basis and Scope of the Human Rights Clauses in EC Bilateral Agreements: Any Room for Positive Interpretation?

It is well known nowadays that the European Community includes a so-called human rights clause into the framework agreements that it concludes with third countries. It is also widely recognised that, in virtue of the relevant provisions of the Vienna Convention on the Law of the Treaties, such a clause grants the Community a right to suspend the agreement should human rights and/or democratic principles be breached. The question to be explored in the present paper is whether, in the light of its legal basis, the clause fulfils a mere 'negative' or 'sanctioning' function or, by contrast, there is room for the pursuit of positive measures of active promotion of human rights—that is the granting of technical and financial aid. It is argued here that the clauses present an ideal starting point for the pursuit of a comprehensive human rights policy at the EU level. Such a policy should encompass positive measures in the first place, systematic dialogue in the second, and suspension or negative measures of less extent only as ultima ratio in particularly grave cases which cannot be addressed through ordinary (dialogue and aid) routes.     

克制和应对“碎片化”:WTO协定与多边环境和人权协定规范整合的司法路径

WTO协定在应对环境贸易争端和人权贸易争端时的贸易价值优先取向加剧了国际法的"碎片化"和"不成体系"问题。为克制和应对国际法的"碎片化",促进WTO协定与多边环境和人权协定的规范整合,《维也纳条约法公约》第31(3)(c)条可作为整体解释方法的条约依据运用于WTO协定的司法解释中,但这需要专家组和上诉机构对条约"解释"和条约"适用"做出革新的认识,将整体解释方法作为自治的条约解释方法在人权和环境贸易争端中适用,而不是陷于第31(3)(c)条所述之当事国为"条约当事国"还是"争端当事国"之争。     

The Evolving and Multilayered EU–India Investment Relations—Regulatory Issues and Policy Conjectures

India and several EU member countries share a rich history of investment collaborations. The collaboration has been cemented with several formal agreements with individual EU members, and the recent negotiations with the trade bloc since June 2007 on a broad‐based Bilateral Trade and Investment Agreement (BTIA) can be considered as a culmination of this process while ongoing WTO negotiations on Mode 3 commitments remain essential in terms of market opening. The present article analyzes the multi‐layered regulation of foreign investment against the backdrop of the evolving EU‐India economic relations. The 2009 Treaty of Lisbon gave a new competence to the EU which will impact ongoing negotiations with India whose global standing has been significantly changing in recent years. The economic vibrancy, coupled with large market size, has earned India greater relevance in several international forums, thereby making the future EU—India investment treaty one of the most promising investment agreements.     

欧洲一体化进程中人权法律地位的演变

欧洲共同体最初将经济一体化作为首要目标 ,人权不构成其主要活动领域。随着欧洲一体化的进程 ,人权成为共同体对外关系的基石以及其域内关注的事项。通过修改基础条约和制定有关的人权法律 ,欧盟在《欧洲联盟条约》框架下确定了人权的法律地位 ,同时创造了独有的人权类型。     

EU Relations with European Micro‐States. Happily Ever After?

Abstract:  The last decade has seen the EU striving to bring uniformity into its relations with its immediate neighbours. Such endeavor has led the EU to adopt the European Neighbourhood Policy towards countries with no immediate prospects of accession and to follow more or less similar pre-accession strategies towards candidate and to-be candidate countries. However, European micro-states (Andorra, Liechtenstein, San Marino and Monaco—the Vatican not being the subject of this article) have always occupied an exceptional position in the EU's web of external relations. This article provides a brief but concise overview of the international legal framework governing the bilateral relations of the EU with these small countries. Through the examination of their peculiar historical, social, geographic and economic attributes, it is argued that the advantages that micro-states have been able to reap so far from the unique position they enjoy in the EU and the global economy may not be easily reconcilable in the future with the EU's ever-increasing appetite to unify, standardise and harmonise.     

Of Austerity,Human Rights and International Institutions

Austerity measures have led to the denial of social rights and widespread socio‐economic malaise across Europe. In the case of countries subjected to conditionality imposed by international institutions, the resultant harms have highlighted a range of responsibility gaps. Two legal developments come together to expose these gaps: Greece's argument in a series of cases under the European Social Charter that it was not responsible for the impact on rights brought about by austerity measures as it was only giving effect to its other international obligations as agreed with the Troika; and the concern to emerge from the Pringle case before the European Court of Justice that European Union (EU) institutions could do outside of the EU what they could not do within the EU ‐‐disregard the Charter of Fundamental Rights. That the Commission and the European Central Bank were in time answerable to international organisations set up to provide financial support adds an additional layer of responsibility to consider. Taking Greece as a case study, this article addresses the imperative of having international institutions respect human rights.     

Between Human Rights and Sovereignty*—An Examination of EU–China Political Relations

This paper will study the differences between the EU and China on the understanding of human rights and national sovereignty and their impact on EU‐China political relations. The paper will be divided into the following parts. The first part will give a review of the concepts of both sovereignty and human rights and the rising concern of human rights in the contemporary world. The second part will study the EU's policy of human rights to see why the EU adheres to its values. The third part will look at China's policy on sovereignty and human rights. The fourth part will examine EU‐China political relations and analyse the difficulties in bilateral relations, due to differences in values between the EU and China. The fifth part will draw some tentative conclusion.     

后“SchremsⅡ案”时期欧盟数据跨境流动法律监管的演进及我国的因应

“SchremsⅡ案”对以隐私权和数据保护为核心构建的欧盟数据跨境流动规则体系产生重大影响,它要求无论使用何种数据跨境流动工具,都必须确保第三国能够提供与欧盟同等的保护水平。在该案的影响下,《欧盟基本权利宪章》在数据保护领域的地位进一步提高,保障措施的适用愈发严苛,欧洲数据保护委员会在数据保护领域将扮演更重要的角色,数据跨境流动欧盟法规则与国际贸易法的不兼容问题日益凸显。欧盟虽然结合SchremsⅡ案的判决完善了对数据跨境的法律监管,但依然没有减少外界对其监管合理性的质疑。我国对数据跨境流动的监管存在着配套立法不健全、规则可操作性差、多元价值失衡、缺乏内外联动的“中国方案”等问题。对此,应完善我国相关立法,加强中欧国际合作,共同引领构建数据跨境流动的国际规则。     

从西方人权话语拓展看中国人权话语的国际化

西方人权话语拓展的主要方式是软渗透和硬介入。软渗透表现为通过西方人权"区域理念--区域规则--国际规则--国内规则"的规范扩散,推动非西方国家接受由西方主导建构起来的国际人权规范体系,形成对西方人权话语的法律确信,最终实现"西方人权国际化"和"国际人权国内化"。硬介入表现为通过政治、军事、经济、外交等方式强行推动非西方国家接受西方人权话语并将之纳入国内法律秩序,加速了西方人权国际化。西方人权话语拓展引起"它变"和"自变"效果。一方面,面对软渗透和硬介入,非西方国家或者被动接受,或者借助条约批准、保留等国际法手段予以选择性认同或变通,甚至提出竞争性替代话语加以对冲。另一方面,西方人权话语也在内外因素下不断自我调适,逐步提升可接受性。中国对外拓展人权话语,应充分利用"百年未有之大变局"带来的战略机遇期,借助政治、经济、文化等多种途径,加速国际人权话语格局的变革;尽快形成以发展主义权利观为核心的人权话语体系,并通过对话来增进中国人权话语的价值共识;坚持发挥规范性力量的作用,学会利用国际法律机制,着力提升在国际人权体系内将中国理念和话语转化为国际规则以及保障国际规则被遵守的制度能力。     

Russian PNR system: Data protection issues and global prospects

The usage of Passenger Name Record (PNR) for security purposes is growing worldwide. At least six countries have PNR systems; over thirty are planning to introduce them. On 1 December 2013, a Russian PNR system will be implemented. But enhanced collection of personal data leads to increased surveillance and privacy concerns. Russian authorities state that passengers' rights will be respected, but a closer look at the Russian regime reveals a number of critical points. From a global perspective, the Russian regime is only one of many PNR systems, including new ones to come in the future. Apparently, for the majority of them, similar challenges and problems will apply. At the same time, for the EU, with its strict data protection requirements, PNR requests by third countries (i.e. non-EU countries) create conflicts of laws. In order to resolve them, the EU concludes bilateral PNR agreements. However, the current deals, especially the one between the EU and the USA, involve a number of weaknesses. Accepting the latter, and having a pending proposal on the EU PNR system, the EU has weakened its position in negotiations with third countries. How will the EU deal with the Russian as well as with all the future requests for PNR? This paper provides legal analysis of the Russian PNR regime, pointing out common problems and giving prognosis on the global situation.     

宪法“人格尊严”条款的规范地位之辨

规范地位是指某一条款在基本权利内部乃至宪法规范体系中的效力,取决于该条款在特定宪法秩序中的法律属性。尊严条款因其法理基础、宪法文本表述及宪法解释实践的差异在各国宪法上享有不同的地位,归纳起来可分为宪法原则、基础价值、规定功能的宪法概念。我国宪法第38条人格尊严的哲学基础不同于其他国家的人是目的、人格发展、交往理论,而是着重于个人的名誉与荣誉保护;宪法文本表述并非人的尊严、人性尊严,而是人格尊严,且该条既未规定在总纲中,亦未置于"公民的基本权利和义务"一章之首,即使与"国家尊重与保护人权"一款结合起来阅读,亦无法取得与其它国家宪法上的规范地位。人格尊严在我国宪法上属于独立条款,也是公民的一项基本权利,具有具体的法律内容,在宪法解释过程中可作为规范与特定宪法事实相涵摄,证明公民的人格尊严受到了侵犯。     

Government(ality) by Experts: Human Rights as Governance

The suggestion that the general economy of power in our societies is becoming a domain of security was made by Michel Foucault in the late 1970s. This paper takes inspiration from Foucault’s work to interpret human rights as technologies of governmentality, which make possible the safe and secure society. I examine, by way of illustration, the site of the European Union and its use of new modes of governance to regulate rights discourse—in particular via the emergence of a new Fundamental Rights Agency. ‘Governance’ in the EU is constructed in an apolitical way, as a departure from traditional legal and juridical methods of governing. I argue, however, that the features of governance represent technologies of government(ality), a new form of both being governed through rights and of governing rights. The governance feature that this article is most interested in is experts. The article aims to show, first and foremost, how rights operate as technologies of governmentality via a new relation to expertise. Second, it considers the significant implications that this reading of rights has for rights as a regulatory and normalising discourse. Finally, it highlights how the overlap between rights and governance discourses can be problematic because (as the EU model illustrates) governance conceals the power relations of governmentality, allowing, for instance, the unproblematic representation of the EU as an international human rights actor.     

REFLECTIONS ON EU INTERNATIONAL TRADE LAW: AN INTROSPECTIVE VIEW

This article presents three main arguments: First, shared competence exists between the national and supranational levels within the European Union (EU) because EU Member States do not trust the European Commission in the external relations law of the EU. Second, the EU will have greater bargaining power in international negotiations if it speaks in a single voice. Within the EU-27, we have compatible values, overlapping interests, shared goals, as well as economic, social and political ties. Therefore, there is a presumption of collective action in the EU’s external relations. However, EU Member States disagree on many issues before they start negotiations, while trying to define a mission together as partners of the European project. Third, Member States confer specific negotiating powers on the EU only when it is in their own national interest to have a common European position on international negotiations.     

MEDICALLY ASSISTED HUMAN REPRODUCTIVE TECHNOLOGIES (ART) AND HUMAN RIGHTS — THE EUROPEAN PERSPECTIVE

The present article examines how the progress of science, and in particular, medically assisted human reproductive technologies (ART) have provoked a revolution in the sphere of family relations, generating a series of ethical and legal conflicts. The article focuses on the European perspective, without ignoring the international sphere, given the globalization of the phenomenon. The emerging legal issues are analyzed through the filter of international human rights, not only an important aspect to take into consideration in the context of bioethics in general, but a “passage obligé” given that certain concepts find their explanation and coordinates in international human rights law. It is from this perspective that the relationship between ART and human rights is presented. The applicable international and European legal instruments and principles shall be mentioned, as well as a brief comparison of national legal frameworks in Europe. The emerging bioethical and legal issues are examined in correlation with the response of the European Court of Human Rights through its case law aimed at balancing conflicting rights when faced with issues pertaining to ART. Lastly, the article presents in more detail the particular legal issues under debate in France and Italy, two European countries with specific legislation in the field.     

Regional integration and free-trade agreements in the Balkans: opportunities, obstacles and policy issues

The Balkan states are engaged in a complex and contradictory process of simultaneous regional integration and disintegration. The main instrument of regional integration has been a network of bilateral Free Trade Agreements which the Balkan countries have adopted under the guidance of the Stability Pact for South East Europe, and more recently the extension of the CEFTA free trade area to the region. The bilateral FTAs have been criticised for creating a ‘spaghetti bowl’ of differentiated trade relations, and creating risks of trade deflection and trade diversion. At the same time other arrangements, including the contractual relations of individual countries with the EU, cut across the region and fragment their mutual trade relations. Moreover, Croatia is likely to become an EU member within the next few years, at which point it will suspend its trade agreements with the non-member Balkan states. Therefore, soon after having established a new mechanism of integration, the region will once again be split apart, leaving a rump association of five or six poverty-stricken and politically unstable countries to pursue the vision of regional cooperation. This paper focuses on the prospects for regional integration among these remaining countries: Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Macedonia, Montenegro, and Serbia. It explores the patterns of their mutual trade, and the opportunities and obstacles to increasing trade between them.     

The Current Status and Prospects of the 'Strategic Partnership' between the EU and China: Towards the Conclusion of a Partnership and Cooperation Agreement

Abstract: This article aims to evaluate legal aspects of the content and implementation of the ‘strategic partnership’ between the EU and the People's Republic of China. In the absence of a category of ‘emerging countries’ in international economic law, the Union must adapt its foreign policy with regard to this major economic and commercial power. Relations between the European Community and China are currently governed by a second‐generation agreement from 1985. However, a new dynamic has been set in motion since 2003, by the drawing up of preparatory documents by both parties and joint declarations at annual summits bearing on the ‘strategic partnership’. Seen in a long‐term perspective, this partnership helps provide a measure of predictability in relations between the two partners, through combining elements of ‘soft law’ and ‘hard law’. If the insertion of political dialogue into the strategic partnership seems to alter the coherence of the Union, notably with regard to the difficulties of implementing the dialogue on human rights, the added value of the partnership lies essentially in its economic and commercial aspects, through not only the putting into place of non‐binding ‘economic dialogues’ which cover a large spectrum of the relationship, but also by the multiplication of sector‐based accords in numerous areas (maritime transport, customs cooperation, etc.). This constant development has thus allowed parties, at the last annual summit, to envisage the conclusion of a new framework agreement: this is the origin of the mandate given to the Commission in December 2005 to conclude a partnership and cooperation agreement. This article will sketch out a forecast of the legal framework, measured against the yardsticks of Asiatic regional reconfigurations and the law of the World Trade Organisation (WTO). The commercial risks of the relationship could imply the integration of the domains known as ‘WTO plus’ into the future agreement, notably in the field of investments and intellectual property rights, which would introduce a greater variety into the agreement. That being the case, the negotiations risk being equally fragile at the political level, in particular concerning the insertion of a clause of democratic conditionality in the future agreement. Also, any clash between the values and the interests of the EU would be uncomfortably highlighted during negotiations.     

CLOUD act agreements from an EU perspective

For many years, transatlantic cooperation between the EU and the US in the area of personal data exchange has been a subject of special interest on the part of lawmakers, courts – including supranational ones – NGOs and the public. When implementing recent reform of data protection law, the European Union decided to further strengthen guarantees of the protection of privacy in cyberspace. At the same time, however, it faced the practical problem of how to ensure compliance with these principles in relation to third countries. The approach proposed in the GDPR, which is based on a newly-defined territorial scope of application, clearly indicates an attempt to apply EU rules extraterritorially in relation to data processors in third countries.Irrespective of EU activity, the United States has also introduced its own regulations addressing the same problem. An example is the federal law adopted in 2018, specifying how to execute national court orders for the transfer of electronic data. The CLOUD Act was established in response to legal doubts raised in the Microsoft v United States case regarding the transfer of electronic data stored in the cloud by US obliged entities to law enforcement authorities, as well as in cases where this data is physically located in another country and its transfer could result in violating the legal norms of a foreign jurisdiction. The CLOUD Act also facilitates bilateral international agreements that enable the cross-border transfer of e-evidence for the purposes of ongoing criminal proceedings. Both the content of the new regulations and the model proposed by the US legislature for future agreements concluded on the basis of the CLOUD Act can be seen as an alternative to regulations arising from EU law.The purpose of this paper is to analyse the CLOUD Act and CLOUD Act Agreements from the perspective of EU law and, in particular, attempt to answer the question as to whether this new legal mechanism brings the EU and the USA closer to finding common ground with regard to a coherent model of exchange and protection of personal data.     

Disability,right to culture and copyright: which regulatory option?

Access to knowledge and participation in cultural life for persons with disabilities has always constituted a tough challenge. Recent studies show that only 5% of published works are available in accessible format, and the number plummets to 1% in developing countries. Coupled with the high costs of production and distribution, and the full reliance on public funds and intervention of public or non-profit organizations, copyright has traditionally represented an additional obstacle on the path for a broader availability of accessible works. Recently, the situation has worsened with the tilting in the balance between rights and exceptions caused by the legislative response to digital threats, when the unprecedented opportunities offered by new technologies to foster accessibility have been largely trumped by copyright law. Still, the last decades have witnessed the beginning of a paradigm shift, originating from the human rights arena, and moving towards a new definition of the interplay between authors’ rights and the right to take part in cultural life, both at a general level and with particular regards to persons with disabilities. This article offers a diachronic overview of the path that, from the rediscovery of Article 15 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights through its General Comments to Article 30 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, has led to the adoption of the Marrakesh Treaty. It then analyses, with a focus on the European Union and its Member States, the national and regional responses to the new human rights obligations, looking at the relations between legislative exceptions and model or collective license agreements. The assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of the two main regulatory options lays the groundwork for proposals of further areas of intervention, necessary to fully comply with the international human rights obligations and to achieve the fullest access to and participation in culture possible for persons with disabilities, by using the tools offered by international and national copyright law.     

International human rights and the collegiation of journalists: The case of Costa Rica

This article examines the controversial Latin American practice of requiring colegio membership for journalists. The focus is a ruling by the Costa Rica Supreme Court that declared the obligatory‐membership requirement of the Costa Rica College of Journalists—one of Latin America's strongest colegios—to be unconstitutional because it violated the free expression clause of the American Convention on Human Rights. The courts incorporation of the American Convention's standard of press freedom is considered for its reliance on a provision of the Costa Rica Constitution that requires human rights protections of international treaties be held superior to national laws. The rationale's significance for the entire region—where 13 countries have colegio laws—is weighed by analyzing comparable clauses in the constitutions of other Latin American countries.     

The Log in Your Eye: Is Europe's External Promotion of Religious Freedom Consistent With its Internal Practice?

The commitment of the EU to the external promotion of the respect for human rights allegedly distinguishes its foreign policy from that of traditional powers. Yet there is the perception that EU's statements are not always consistent with internal practices. This article analyses one set of EU's inconsistencies that has not been sufficiently studied: the discrepancy between internal and external human rights standards. The article focuses on the promotion and protection of freedom of religion or belief, which has become a priority of the EU's foreign policy. It is submitted that the EU's external position generally reflects values common to the Member States, but is sometimes contradicted by the practice of domestic authorities. The human rights standards identified in the EU's foreign policy may arguably serve as a reference for legal reform and the interpretation of fundamental rights in Europe.