Table of Contents Table of Contents
Previous Page  132 / 350 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 132 / 350 Next Page
Page Background

DAVID PETRLÍK

CYIL 4 ȍ2013Ȏ

Admittedly, by this statement, the Czech Constitutional Court makes clear that it

reserves the right to control, to a certain extent, whether EU law respects the national

standard of fundamental rights. Nonetheless, it does not specify what intensity such

review would have and whether it adopts the second or the third above-mentioned

approach of constitutional review.

That said, it might be important that the Czech Constitutional Court found the

Charter compatible with the Czech Constitution because the content of the catalogue

of human rights expressed in it is fully “comparable” with the content protected

in the Czech Republic.

52

Moreover, the court referred to the

Bosphorus

ruling

53

of

the ECtHR.

54

In these circumstances, it seems that this court follows an approach

according to which there is a presumption that the EU protection is sufficient, but

that such a presumption can be rebutted if, in a particular case, this protection is

considered as manifestly deficient (see infra).

III. EU system and the ECHR system

Already for a long time the EU system has adopted a cooperative stance towards

the ECHR system. However, this cooperation has been rather conditional so far (1).

Conversely, it may become unconditional after the accession of the EU to the ECHR (2).

1. Interaction between the systems before the accession of the EU

to the ECHR

As before the Treaty of Lisbon, the ECHR remains a material source of EU

fundamental rights that are expressed in the form of general principles of law, because

Article 6(3) TEU states that “[f ]undamental rights, as guaranteed by the [ECHR],

shall constitute general principles of the Union’s law”. However, this treaty has also

increased the binding force of the ECHR and it strengthened the position of the

ECHR and the ECtHR in the Union legal order.

First of all, the Court of Justice has become formally bound both by the provisions

of the ECHR and by the case-law of the ECtHR by virtue of Article 52(3) of the

Charter, which requires that the meaning and scope of fundamental rights set out

in the Charter shall be the same as those laid down by the ECHR, unless a more

extensive protection is provided.

In this respect, it must be recalled that, already before theTreaty of Lisbon, the ECJ

respected the ECHR and the ECtHR’s case-law. Since 1989 it has stressed repeatedly

that the ECHR had special significance for the interpretation of fundamental rights,

whose protection the Court of Justice ensured.

55

As of 1996 it began to consistently

52

Lisbon I ruling

, paragraph 197.

53

Judgment of 30 June 2005

Bosphorus Hava Yollari Turizmve Ticaret Anonim Şirketi v. Ireland

, Application

No. 45036/98, ECHR 2005-VI.

54

Lisbon I ruling

, paragraph 197.

55

Joined Cases 46/87 and 227/88

Hoechst v. Commission

[1989] ECR 2859, paragraph 13 and

ERT

,

paragraph 41.