Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
Human rights 3 - New level of protection: Civis europeus sum!
Pavel Molek

Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
europestereo

>

Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
Resume
nWhat are the levels of protection?
nNew Kid on the Block
nWhy should we have HRs protection in EU?
nECSC 1951 was not about HRs….
nSo why do we need them? What was EC about?
nThe more competences, the more limits on competences by MSs
nThe more competences, the more possibility of interference with HRs
nThousands of facets of non-discrimination….

>

Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
50s: The original EC Treaty
nArticle 119 EEC Treaty
n„Each Member State shall in the course of the first stage ensure and subsequently maintain the
application of the principle of equal remuneration for equal work as between men and women workers.
nFor the purposes of this Article, remuneration shall mean the ordinary basic or minimum wage or
salary and any additional emoluments whatsoever payable directly or indirectly, whether in cash or
in kind, by the employer to the worker and arising out of the workers’ employment.
nEqual remuneration without discrimination based on sex means:
n(a) that remuneration for the same work at piece-rates shall be calculated on the basis of the
same unit of measurement; and
n(b) that remuneration for work at time-rates shall be the same for the same job.“
n
n

>

Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
60s: founding case law principles
nDirect effect - Case 26/62 Van Gend & Loos [1963] ECR 1: „…ACCORDING TO THE SPIRIT, THE GENERAL
SCHEME AND THE WORDING OF THE TREATY, ARTICLE 12 MUST BE INTERPRETED AS PRODUCING DIRECT EFFECTS
AND CREATING INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS WHICH NATIONAL COURTS MUST PROTECT…“
nPrimacy - Case 6/64 Costa v. ENEL [1964] ECR 614: „THE TRANSFER BY THE STATES FROM THEIR DOMESTIC
LEGAL SYSTEM TO THE COMMUNITY LEGAL SYSTEM OF THE RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS ARISING UNDER THE TREATY
CARRIES WITH IT A PERMANENT LIMITATION OF THEIR SOVEREIGN RIGHTS, AGAINST WHICH A SUBSEQUENT
UNILATERAL ACT INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE CONCEPT OF THE COMMUNITY CANNOT PREVAIL.“

>

Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
70s: First HR cases – who is the defendor fidei?
nCase 11/70 Internationale Handesgeselschaft [1970] ECR 1125: The applicant, a German import-export
company, obtained an export licence in respect of 20,000 metric tonnes of maize meal, the validity
of which expired on 31 December 1967. Council regulation 120/67 had set up a system for the common
organization of the cereal market, whereby a licence could be obtained by lodging a deposit, and
that deposit would be forfeited if the goods were not exported within the period of time set. A
part of the applicant’s company’s deposit was forfeited when the licence expired without the maize
having been exported, and the company brought proceedings before the administrative court claiming
the return of this sum and questioning the validity of the deposit system. The national court
referred the case to the ECJ.

>

Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
70s: First HR cases - who is the defendor fidei?
n„3. IN FACT, THE LAW STEMMING FROM THE TREATY, AN INDEPENDENT SOURCE OF LAW, CANNOT BECAUSE OF ITS
VERY NATURE BE OVERRIDDEN BY RULES OF NATIONAL LAW, HOWEVER FRAMED, WITHOUT BEING DEPRIVED OF ITS
CHARACTER AS COMMUNITY LAW AND WITHOUT THE LEGAL BASIS OF THE COMMUNITY ITSELF BEING CALLED IN
QUESTION. THEREFORE THE VALIDITY OF A COMMUNITY MEASURE OR ITS EFFECT WITHIN A MEMBER STATE CANNOT
BE AFFECTED BY ALLEGATIONS THAT IT RUNS COUNTER TO EITHER FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AS FORMULATED BY THE
CONSTITUTION OF THAT STATE OR THE PRINCIPLES OF A NATIONAL CONSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE. HOWEVER, AN
EXAMINATION SHOULD BE MADE AS TO WHETHER OR NOT ANY ANALOGOUS GUARANTEE INHERENT IN COMMUNITY LAW
HAS BEEN DISREGARDED . IN FACT, RESPECT FOR FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS FORMS AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE
GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF LAW PROTECTED BY THE COURT OF JUSTICE . THE PROTECTION OF SUCH RIGHTS, WHILST
INSPIRED BY THE CONSTITUTIONAL TRADITIONS COMMON TO THE MEMBER STATES, MUST BE ENSURED WITHIN THE
FRAMEWORK OF THE STRUCTURE AND OBJECTIVES OF THE COMMUNITY . IT MUST THEREFORE BE ASCERTAINED, IN
THE LIGHT OF THE DOUBTS EXPRESSED BY THE VERWALTUNGSGERICHT, WHETHER THE SYSTEM OF DEPOSITS HAS
INFRINGED RIGHTS OF A FUNDAMENTAL NATURE, RESPECT FOR WHICH MUST BE ENSURED IN THE COMMUNITY LEGAL
SYSTEM.“

>

Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
70s: First HR cases - discrimination
nECJ judgment Gabrielle Defrenne v Société anonyme belge de navigation aérienne Sabena (1978) Case
149/77:
n„FUNDAMENTAL PERSONAL HUMAN RIGHTS FORM PART OF THE GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF COMMUNITY LAW , THE
OBSERVANCE OF WHICH THE COURT HAS A DUTY TO ENSURE . THE ELIMINATION OF DISCRIMINATION BASED ON SEX
FORMS PART OF THOSE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS . HOWEVER , IT IS NOT FOR THE COURT TO ENFORCE THE
OBSERVANCE OF THAT RULE OF NON- DISCRIMINATION IN RESPECT OF RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN EMPLOYER AND
EMPLOYEE WHICH ARE A MATTER EXCLUSIVELY FOR NATIONAL LAW.“
n
n

>

Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
80s: First HR cases – where are they?
nCase 5/88 Wachauf [1989] ECR 2609
n„17. The Court has consistently held, … that fundamental rights form an integral part of the
general principles of the law, the observance of which is ensured by the Court . In safeguarding
those rights, the Court has to look to the constitutional traditions common to the Member States,
so that measures which are incompatible with the fundamental rights recognized by the constitutions
of those States may not find acceptance in the Community . International treaties concerning the
protection of human rights on which the Member States have collaborated or to which they have
acceded can also supply guidelines to which regard should be had in the context of Community law .
n22. The Community regulations in question accordingly leave the competent national authorities a
sufficiently wide margin of appreciation to enable them to apply those rules in a manner consistent
with the requirements of the protection of fundamental rights, either by giving the lessee the
opportunity of keeping all or part of the reference quantity if he intends to continue milk
production, or by compensating him if he undertakes to abandon such production definitively .

>

Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
80s: First HR cases: what do we have in common?
nCase C-260/89 ERT [1991] ECR I-2925:
nERT, a Greek radio station and television company, enjoyed exclusive broadcasting rights under a
Greek statute. It sought an injunction against an information company and Mr. Kouvelas, the Mayor
of Thessaloniki, who had set up a rival television station. The respondent argued that ERT’s
exclusive rights infringed the free movement and competition provisions of EC law. The Greek
government invoked Articles 45 and 55 EC which allowed it to impose restrictions for reasons of
public policy. ERT counter-argued that these could not be invoked as the conduct violated Article
10 ECHR relating to freedom of expression.

>

Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
80s: First HR cases: what do we have in common?
n„41. With regard to Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, … it must first be
pointed out that, as the Court has consistently held, fundamental rights form an integral part of
the general principles of law, the observance of which it ensures. For that purpose the Court draws
inspiration from the constitutional traditions common to the Member States and from the guidelines
supplied by international treaties for the protection of human rights on which the Member States
have collaborated or of which they are signatories … The European Convention on Human Rights has
special significance in that respect (…).
n42. As the Court has held (…), it has no power to examine the compatibility with the European
Convention on Human Rights of national rules which do not fall within the scope of Community law.
On the other hand, where such rules do fall within the scope of Community law, and reference is
made to the Court for a preliminary ruling, it must provide all the criteria of interpretation
needed by the national court to determine whether those rules are compatible with the fundamental
rights the observance of which the Court ensures and which derive in particular from the European
Convention on Human Rights.
n43. In particular, where a Member State relies on the combined provisions of Articles 56 and 66 in
order to justify rules which are likely to obstruct the exercise of the freedom to provide
services, such  justification, provided for by Community law, must be interpreted in the light of
the general principles of law and in particular of fundamental rights. Thus the national rules in
question can fall under the exceptions provided for by the combined provisions of Articles 56 and
66 only if they are compatible with the fundamental rights the observance of which is ensured by
the Court. 44. It follows that in such a case it is for the national court, and if necessary, the
Court of Justice to appraise the application of those provisions having regard to all the rules of
Community law, including freedom of expression, as embodied in Article 10 of the European
Convention on Human Rights, as a general principle of law the observance of which is ensured by the
Court.“

>

Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
90s: let us be European citizens!
nOpinion of Advocate general Jacobs in Case C-168/91 Konstantinidis [1993] ECR I-1191 – what was it
about?
n„46. In my opinion, a Community national who goes to another Member State as a worker or
selfemployed person under Articles 48, 52 or 59 of the Treaty is entitled not just to pursue his
trade or profession and to enjoy the same living and working conditions as nationals of the host
State; he is in addition entitled to assume that, wherever he goes to earn his living in the
European Community, he will be treated in accordance with a common code of fundamental values, in
particular those laid down in the European Convention on Human Rights. In other words, he is
entitled to say "civis europeus sum" and to invoke that status in order to oppose any violation of
his fundamental rights.”

>

Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
90s: let us be European citizens!
nJudgment in Case C-168/91 Konstantinidis [1993] ECR I-1191
nWhat remained of AG opinion?
n„15 Rules of that kind are to be regarded as incompatible with Article 52 of the Treaty only in so
far as their application causes a Greek national such a degree of inconvenience as in fact to
interfere with his freedom to exercise the right of establishment enshrined in that article.
n16 Such interference occurs if a Greek national is obliged by the legislation of the State in
which he is established to use, in the pursuit of his occupation, a spelling of his name derived
from the transliteration used in the registers of civil status if that spelling is such as to
modify its pronunciation and if the resulting distortion exposes him to the risk that potential
clients may confuse him with other persons.“
n

>

Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
90s: let us be European citizens!
nMaastricht Treaty 1992:
n„F2 TEU:
nThe Union shall respect fundamental rights, as guaranteed by the European Convention for the
Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms signed in Rome on 4 November 1950 and as they
result from the constitutional traditions common to the Member States, as general principles of
Community law.“
n
n„Article 8 TEC
n1. Citizenship of the Union is hereby established.
nEvery person holding the nationality of a Member State shall be a citizen of the Union.
n2. Citizens of the Union shall enjoy the rights conferred by this Treaty and shall be subject to
the duties imposed thereby.
nArticle 8a
n1. Every citizen of the Union shall have the right to move and reside freely within the territory
of the Member States, subject to the limitations and conditions laid down in this Treaty and by the
measures adopted to give it effect.
n2. The Council may adopt provisions with a view to facilitating the exercise of the rights
referred to in paragraph 1; save as otherwise provided in this Treaty, the Council shall act
unanimously on a proposal from the Commission and after obtaining the assent of the European
Parliament.“
n

>

Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
90s: let us be European citizens!
nTEU after Amsterodam Treaty:
n„Article 6
n1. The Union is founded on the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and
fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law, principles which are common to the Member States.
n2. The Union shall respect fundamental rights, as guaranteed by the European Convention for the
Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms signed in Rome on 4 November 1950 and as they
result from the constitutional traditions common to the Member States, as general principles of
Community law.“
n

>

Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
2000: How to cooperate?
nCase C 402/05 P - Yassin Abdullah Kadi v Council of the European Union and Commission of the
European Communities:
nMr Kadi is resident in Saudi Arabia. On 19 October 2001, he was included in the list in Annex I to
Regulation No 467/2001 (later (EC) No 881/2002) as a person suspected of supporting terrorism. As a
consequence, all his funds and other financial resources in the Community were to be frozen.  The
contested regulation was adopted on the basis of Articles 60 EC, 301 EC and 308 EC in order to give
effect, within the Community, to Council Common Position 2002/402/CFSP. That Common Position, in
turn, reflected Resolutions 1267(1999), (5) 1333(2000) (6) and 1390(2002) of the United Nations
Security Council. Considering that the suppression of international terrorism is essential for the
maintenance of international peace and security, the Security Council adopted those resolutions
under Chapter VII of the UN Charter. The resolutions provide, inter alia, that all States are to
take measures to freeze the funds and other financial assets of individuals and entities associated
with Usama bin Laden, the Al Qaida network and the Taliban, as designated by the Sanctions
Committee. On 8 March 2001, the Sanctions Committee published a first consolidated list of the
persons and entities that were to be subjected to the freezing of funds. The name of the appellant
was added to the list by the Sanctions Committee on 19 October 2001.
n
n
n

>

Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
2000: How to cooperate?
nKadi: AG question: „When the Security Council has spoken, the Court must remain silent?!“ „Or, to
put it differently: does the Community legal order accord supra-constitutional status to measures
that are necessary for the implementation of resolutions adopted by the Security Council?“
n22-23: „the Community’s municipal legal order and the international legal order do not pass by
each other like ships in the night. On the contrary, the Community has traditionally played an
active and constructive part on the international stage. The application and interpretation of
Community law is accordingly guided by the presumption that the Community wants to honour its
international commitments. The Community Courts therefore carefully examine the obligations by
which the Community is bound on the international stage and take judicial notice of those
obligations. Yet, in the final analysis, the Community Courts determine the effect of international
obligations within the Community legal order by reference to conditions set by Community law….“
Ships_that_pass_in_the_night,_Atlantic_City,_New_Jersey

>

Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
2000: How to cooperate?
nKadi AG opinion answer: „54. Had there been a genuine and effective mechanism of judicial control
by an independent tribunal at the level of the United Nations, then this might have released the
Community from the obligation to provide for judicial control of implementing measures that apply
within the Community legal order. However, no such mechanism currently exists. As the Commission
and the Council themselves have stressed in their pleadings, the decision whether or not to remove
a person from the United Nations sanctions list remains within the full discretion of the Sanctions
Committee – a diplomatic organ. In those circumstances, it must be held that the right to judicial
review by an independent tribunal has not been secured at the level of the United Nations. As a
consequence, the Community institutions cannot dispense with proper judicial review proceedings
when implementing the Security Council resolutions in question within the Community legal order.
n55. It follows that the appellant’s claim that the contested regulation infringes the right to be
heard, the right to judicial review, and the right to property is well founded. The Court should
annul the contested regulation in so far as it concerns the appellant.“
n

>

Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
2000: How to cooperate?
nKadi JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Grand Chamber) 3 September 2008 :
n„Fundamental rights form an integral part of the general principles of law whose observance the
Court ensures. For that purpose, the Court draws inspiration from the constitutional traditions
common to the Member States and from the guidelines supplied by international instruments for the
protection of human rights on which the Member States have collaborated or to which they are
signatories. In that regard, the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms has special significance. Respect for human rights is therefore a condition of
the lawfulness of Community acts, and measures incompatible with respect for human rights are not
acceptable in the Community. The obligations imposed by an international agreement cannot have the
effect of prejudicing the constitutional principles of the EC Treaty, which include the principle
that all Community acts must respect fundamental rights, that respect constituting a condition of
their lawfulness which it is for the Court to review in the framework of the complete system of
legal remedies established by the Treaty.“

>

Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
2000: How to cooperate?
nKadi JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Grand Chamber) 3 September 2008 – Who has the last word?:
n„Article 307 EC may in no circumstances permit any challenge to the principles that form part of
the very foundations of the Community legal order, which include the principles of liberty,
democracy and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms enshrined in Article 6(1) EU as a
foundation of the Union. If Article 300(7) EC, providing that agreements concluded under the
conditions set out therein are to be binding on the institutions of the Community and on Member
States, were applicable to the Charter of the United Nations, it would confer on the latter primacy
over acts of secondary Community law. That primacy at the level of Community law would not,
however, extend to primary law, in particular to the general principles of which fundamental rights
form part. The Community judicature must, therefore, in accordance with the powers conferred on it
by the EC Treaty, ensure the review, in principle the full review, of the lawfulness of all
Community acts in the light of the fundamental rights forming an integral part of the general
principles of Community law, including review of Community measures which, like the regulation at
issue, are designed to give effect to the resolutions adopted by the Security Council under Chapter
VII of the Charter of the United Nations.“
n

>

Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
2000: How to cooperate?
nKadi JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Grand Chamber) 3 September 2008 :
n„The principle of effective judicial protection is a general principle of Community law stemming
from the constitutional traditions common to the Member States, which has been enshrined in
Articles 6 and 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights, this principle having furthermore
been reaffirmed by Article 47 of the Charter of fundamental rights of the European Union.
nObservance of the obligation to communicate the grounds on which the name of a person or entity is
included in the list forming Annex I to Regulation No 881/2002 imposing certain specific
restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden,
the Al-Qaeda network and the Taliban is necessary both to enable the persons to whom restrictive
measures are addressed to defend their rights in the best possible conditions and to decide, with
full knowledge of the relevant facts, whether there is any point in their applying to the Community
judicature and also to put the latter fully in a position in which it may carry out the review of
the lawfulness of the Community measure in question which is its duty under the EC Treaty.
nGiven that those persons or entities were not informed of the evidence adduced against them and
having regard to the relationship between the rights of the defence and the right to an effective
legal remedy, they have also been unable to defend their rights with regard to that evidence in
satisfactory conditions before the Community judicature and the latter is not able to undertake the
review of the lawfulness of that regulation in so far as it concerns those persons or entities,
with the result that it must be held that their right to an effective legal remedy has also been
infringed.“
n

>

Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
2000: The Charter and her story
nDrafted by a body called the “Convention” on the basis of a decision of the Cologne summit adopted
in June 1999.
nAnswer to whether the EU should accede to European Convention on Human Rights  or should have its
own Bill of Rights  and how to solve the problem of ever more intensive interference of the
ever-closer Union into human rights  problemacy.
nSolemnly proclaimed by the Presidents of the European Parliament, the Council of the European
Union and the European Commission in Nice European Council on the 7 December 2000. But it was not
annexed to the fundamental Treaties (although it had been “drafted as if it were to have full legal
effect” ) and its legal force remained undetermined (or left to the later political process) due
especially to the UK reluctance to accept a binding fundamental rights catalogue on EU level
nThe first attempt to make the Charter legally binding done in the draft EU Constitution Treaty.
nAfter the Lisbon Treaty, replacing EU Constitution Treaty, came into force on 1 December 2009, was
the Charter made legally binding as proclaimed by Art. 6 para. 1 of the Treaty on European Union.
n

>

Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
2000: The Charter and her story
nArt. 6 para. 1 of the Treaty on European Union – recent version:
n„Article 6
n1. The Union recognises the rights, freedoms and principles set out in the Charter of Fundamental
Rights of the European Union of 7 December 2000, as adapted at Strasbourg, on 12 December 2007,
which shall have the same legal value as the Treaties.
nThe provisions of the Charter shall not extend in any way the competences of the Union as defined
in the Treaties.
nThe rights, freedoms and principles in the Charter shall be interpreted in accordance with the
general provisions in Title VII of the Charter governing its interpretation and application and
with due regard to the explanations referred to in the Charter, that set out the sources of those
provisions.
n
n2. The Union shall accede to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms. Such accession shall not affect the Union's competences as defined in the
Treaties.
n
n3. Fundamental rights, as guaranteed by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights
and Fundamental Freedoms and as they result from the constitutional traditions common to the Member
States, shall constitute general principles of the Union's law.“
n

>

Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
2000: The Charter and her story
nCharter building on ECHR and case-law (preamble):
n„This Charter reaffirms, with due regard for the powers and tasks of the Union and for the
principle of subsidiarity, the rights as they result, in particular, from the constitutional
traditions and international obligations common to the Member States, the European Convention for
the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the Social Charters adopted by the Union
and by the Council of Europe and the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union and of
the European Court of Human Rights. In this context the Charter will be interpreted by the courts
of the Union and the Member States with due regard to the explanations prepared under the authority
of the Praesidium of the Convention which drafted the Charter and updated under the responsibility
of the Praesidium of the European Convention.“

>

Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
2000: The Charter and her story
nStructure:
nDignity
nFreedoms
nEquality
nSolidarity
nCitizen´s Rights
nJustice

>

Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
2000: The Charter and her story
nField of application:
n„Article 51
nField of application
n1. The provisions of this Charter are addressed to the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies
of the Union with due regard for the principle of subsidiarity and to the Member States only when
they are implementing Union law. They shall therefore respect the rights, observe the principles
and promote the application thereof in accordance with their respective powers and respecting the
limits of the powers of the Union as conferred on it in the Treaties.
n2. The Charter does not extend the field of application of Union law beyond the powers of the
Union or establish any new power or task for the Union, or modify powers and tasks as defined in
the Treaties.“
nExplaining the scope of protection
n

>

Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
2000: The Charter and her troubles
nHappy end? That was a good one….
klaus

>

Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
Human Rights in Europe - EU - New level of protection
2000: The Charter and her troubles
nProtocol on the application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union to Poland
and to the United Kingdom (and the Czech Republic?)
n„Article 1
n1. The Charter does not extend the ability of the Court of Justice of the European Union, or any
court or tribunal of Poland or of the United Kingdom, to find that the laws, regulations or
administrative provisions, practices or action of Poland or of the United Kingdom are inconsistent
with the fundamental rights, freedoms and principles that it reaffirms.
n2. In particular, and for the avoidance of doubt, nothing in Title IV of the Charter creates
justiciable rights applicable to Poland or the United Kingdom except in so far as Poland or the
United Kingdom has provided for such rights in its national law.
nArticle 2
nTo the extent that a provision of the Charter refers to national laws and practices, it shall only
apply to Poland or the United Kingdom to the extent that the rights or principles that it contains
are recognised in the law or practices of Poland or of the United Kingdom.“
nYour opinion on HRs protection in EU – does it have legitimacy to do it (input, output, HR
protection)?
n

>