Toothless European Citizenship / Šimon Uradnik
the grandiose promoter of this method, T. H. Marshall. 255 Yet, what is crucial to this section is the argument of his and his followers that rights may originate only in a ‘nation-state’, and only a ‘nation-state’ is the guarantor of them. 256 One might not wonder why with respect, on the one hand, to the background of T. H. Marshall in the Anglo-Saxon cultural sphere, which M. Mann criticises as the ethnocentric bias which may have caused he had taken perspective only from the Anglo Saxon history in terms of the evolution of rights. 257 And on the other hand, with respect to the period when this interpretation was developed — early after the Second World War. Nevertheless, already during that time, the European 258 and inter national 259 legal systems of protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms, as legal sources, were evolving; hence, it might have already seemed somewhat anachronic then. 260 Albeit these international and regional regimes have established rights, the citizens’ access to them has still been in the hands of ‘nationstates’; thus, they could not be considered nonvicarious. However, it is apparent that rights do not only stream from a structure of a ‘nation-state’, as T. H. Marshall and his followers argued, but also from the international regimes of protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms. Yet, vicariously through ‘nation-state’ legal orders. A different story is nevertheless in the case 255 Thomas H Marshall, ‘Citizenship and Social Class’ in Citizenship and Social Class and other essays (Cambridge University Press 1950). 256 Exempli gratia , T. H. Marshall, D. Held or M. Mann. To that effect, see Linda Bosniak, ‘Citizenship Denationalized’ (2000) 7/2 Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies 466
67
Made with FlippingBook Digital Publishing Software