Jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice over issues relating to the common foreign and security policy under the Lisbon Treaty

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Although the Lisbon Treaty maintained the general exclusion of Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) matters from ECJ jurisdiction, it introduced a number of changes into this area, including an explicit statement that the Court is competent to review the legality of the Council decisions imposing restraining measures on persons. The article analyzes the nature and origin of those changes and considers the legal implications for the level of the protection of fundamental rights in the European Union. For this purpose the author firstly considers the context of the exclusion of CFSP matters from the ECJ jurisdiction, including discussions on the issue at the European Convention, and, secondly, takes a closer look at the separate heads of jurisdiction over which the Court is competent to act after the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty. A conclusion is made that the Lisbon Treaty did not introduce significant changes to ECJ jurisdiction. Similarly to the pattern of previous amendment treaties, the Lisbon Treaty again gave recognition to the practice of the ECJ on relevant questions. Nonetheless, the amendments made by the Lisbon Treaty should be welcome for introducing more clarity into the legal regulation of the matter, thus boosting the legal certainty and protection of fundamental rights in the European Union.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)261-279
JournalJurisprudencija: mokslo darbai
Volume1
Issue number119
Publication statusPublished - 2010

Fingerprint

CFSP
Lisbon Treaty
European Court of Justice
jurisdiction
fundamental right
amendment
exclusion
European Convention
legality
treaty
regulation
human being

Keywords

  • Common foreign and security policy
  • Court of Justice jurisdiction
  • Lisbon treaty
  • Right to judicial review
  • Judicial protection

Cite this

@article{9faecb5338834549a2b77c42d159d000,
title = "Jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice over issues relating to the common foreign and security policy under the Lisbon Treaty",
abstract = "Although the Lisbon Treaty maintained the general exclusion of Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) matters from ECJ jurisdiction, it introduced a number of changes into this area, including an explicit statement that the Court is competent to review the legality of the Council decisions imposing restraining measures on persons. The article analyzes the nature and origin of those changes and considers the legal implications for the level of the protection of fundamental rights in the European Union. For this purpose the author firstly considers the context of the exclusion of CFSP matters from the ECJ jurisdiction, including discussions on the issue at the European Convention, and, secondly, takes a closer look at the separate heads of jurisdiction over which the Court is competent to act after the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty. A conclusion is made that the Lisbon Treaty did not introduce significant changes to ECJ jurisdiction. Similarly to the pattern of previous amendment treaties, the Lisbon Treaty again gave recognition to the practice of the ECJ on relevant questions. Nonetheless, the amendments made by the Lisbon Treaty should be welcome for introducing more clarity into the legal regulation of the matter, thus boosting the legal certainty and protection of fundamental rights in the European Union.",
keywords = "Common foreign and security policy, Court of Justice jurisdiction, Lisbon treaty, Right to judicial review, Judicial protection",
author = "Loreta Šaltinytė",
year = "2010",
language = "English",
volume = "1",
pages = "261--279",
journal = "Jurisprudencija: mokslo darbai",
issn = "1392-6195",
publisher = "Mykolas Romeris University",
number = "119",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice over issues relating to the common foreign and security policy under the Lisbon Treaty

AU - Šaltinytė, Loreta

PY - 2010

Y1 - 2010

N2 - Although the Lisbon Treaty maintained the general exclusion of Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) matters from ECJ jurisdiction, it introduced a number of changes into this area, including an explicit statement that the Court is competent to review the legality of the Council decisions imposing restraining measures on persons. The article analyzes the nature and origin of those changes and considers the legal implications for the level of the protection of fundamental rights in the European Union. For this purpose the author firstly considers the context of the exclusion of CFSP matters from the ECJ jurisdiction, including discussions on the issue at the European Convention, and, secondly, takes a closer look at the separate heads of jurisdiction over which the Court is competent to act after the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty. A conclusion is made that the Lisbon Treaty did not introduce significant changes to ECJ jurisdiction. Similarly to the pattern of previous amendment treaties, the Lisbon Treaty again gave recognition to the practice of the ECJ on relevant questions. Nonetheless, the amendments made by the Lisbon Treaty should be welcome for introducing more clarity into the legal regulation of the matter, thus boosting the legal certainty and protection of fundamental rights in the European Union.

AB - Although the Lisbon Treaty maintained the general exclusion of Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) matters from ECJ jurisdiction, it introduced a number of changes into this area, including an explicit statement that the Court is competent to review the legality of the Council decisions imposing restraining measures on persons. The article analyzes the nature and origin of those changes and considers the legal implications for the level of the protection of fundamental rights in the European Union. For this purpose the author firstly considers the context of the exclusion of CFSP matters from the ECJ jurisdiction, including discussions on the issue at the European Convention, and, secondly, takes a closer look at the separate heads of jurisdiction over which the Court is competent to act after the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty. A conclusion is made that the Lisbon Treaty did not introduce significant changes to ECJ jurisdiction. Similarly to the pattern of previous amendment treaties, the Lisbon Treaty again gave recognition to the practice of the ECJ on relevant questions. Nonetheless, the amendments made by the Lisbon Treaty should be welcome for introducing more clarity into the legal regulation of the matter, thus boosting the legal certainty and protection of fundamental rights in the European Union.

KW - Common foreign and security policy

KW - Court of Justice jurisdiction

KW - Lisbon treaty

KW - Right to judicial review

KW - Judicial protection

M3 - Article

VL - 1

SP - 261

EP - 279

JO - Jurisprudencija: mokslo darbai

JF - Jurisprudencija: mokslo darbai

SN - 1392-6195

IS - 119

ER -