The Relations between the German Constitutional Court, the Court of Justice of the European Communities and the European Court of Human Rights in light of Human Rights Protection

Table of Contents

I. Introduction

II. The relations - BVerfG & ECourtHR

1. The nature of the ECHR in the constitutional system

2. The effect of the ECourtHR judgments

3. ECHR as the lowest common denominator

4. Duty to comply

III. The relations - BVerfG & ECJ

1. Supremacy of ECJ ruling in protection of fundamental rights

2. Relativized supremacy in ruling on competence

3. Relations of cooperation

3. “Maastricht” reservations still applicable

4. Supremacy of ECJ, also for fundamental rights, as long as it stays within its competences?

IV. ECJ

1. Human rights in the ECJ jurisprudence

2. ECJ-ECourtHR relations (ECHR in the ECJ jurisprudence)

3. Effective protection of individuals in front of ECJ

3.1. Locus standi of individuals

3.2. Preliminary rulings – cooperation with national courts

3.3. Instruments for the individual

4. Turning to ECourtHR

V. ECourtHR

1. ECourtHR confronted with EC law

1.1. The first case

1.2. Developing the “M&Co.” doctrine – equivalent protection

1.3. “Cantoni”

1.4. “Matthews”

1.5. “Waite and Kennedy” & “Beer and Regan”

1.6. “Posti and Rahko”

1.7. “Senator Lines”

2. The Bosphorus case

2.1. Considerations of the case

2.2. Revision of the “M&Co.” doctrine on a particular case

2.3. Concurring opinion – stronger critique

VI. Conclusions & recommendations

Objectives and Topics

The paper examines the complex interactions between the German Federal Constitutional Court (BVerfG), the European Court of Justice (ECJ), and the European Court of Human Rights (ECourtHR), focusing on the protection of individual fundamental rights and the challenges posed by overlapping legal orders.

• Interactions between national and European judicial levels
• Protection of fundamental rights within the European legal framework
• The impact of ECJ and ECourtHR jurisprudence on national legal certainty
• The "Bosphorus" decision as a landmark case for judicial reconciliation
• Procedural limitations for individual access to justice in the European Union

Excerpt from the Book

Summary of Chapters

I. Introduction: Discusses the historical development of European human rights protection and the emergence of overlapping legal orders.

II. The relations - BVerfG & ECourtHR: Analyzes how the BVerfG incorporates ECHR standards into the national legal order and the impact of ECourtHR judgments on national courts.

III. The relations - BVerfG & ECJ: Explores the hierarchical and cooperative relationship between the BVerfG and the ECJ, particularly regarding fundamental rights.

IV. ECJ: Examines human rights within ECJ jurisprudence and the challenges individuals face regarding access to justice and procedural instruments.

V. ECourtHR: Details the ECourtHR's engagement with EC law, focusing on landmark cases like M&Co., Matthews, and the pivotal Bosphorus decision.

VI. Conclusions & recommendations: Synthesizes the findings and evaluates the potential for better judicial collaboration and legal certainty for individuals.

Keywords

Human Rights, Fundamental Rights, European Court of Justice, ECJ, European Court of Human Rights, ECourtHR, BVerfG, European Union Law, Judicial Dialogue, Access to Justice, Bosphorus Case, Legal Certainty, Integration, Sovereignty, Supremacy.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the core subject of this paper?

The paper examines the judicial relationships between the BVerfG, the ECJ, and the ECourtHR, specifically focusing on how they interact to protect individual human rights within Europe's overlapping legal systems.

What are the primary themes discussed?

Key themes include the limits of national sovereignty, the supremacy of European law, the protection of fundamental rights in the European Community, and the procedural hurdles for individuals seeking legal recourse.

What is the central research question?

The research explores how the various European courts interact to ensure effective judicial protection for the individual and how conflicts of competence are navigated.

Which scientific method is applied?

The author uses a legal analysis method, evaluating case-law, constitutional orders, and international treaties to illustrate the "perplexing" relations between these judicial institutions.

What topics are covered in the main section?

The main sections cover the specific interactions between the national court and European courts, the evolution of human rights jurisprudence, and a detailed analysis of the Bosphorus decision.

Which keywords characterize this work?

Essential keywords are Human Rights, Fundamental Rights, ECJ, ECourtHR, BVerfG, Judicial Dialogue, and Access to Justice.

Why is the Bosphorus case significant?

The Bosphorus decision is considered an "ultimate test case" because it offers guidelines for how the ECourtHR handles cases where Member States act in accordance with EC law, reconciling diverging legal protections.

How does the paper evaluate individual access to justice?

The author criticizes the current limitations on individual "locus standi" (the right to bring a case) before the ECJ, describing the process as restrictive and potentially insufficient for protecting human rights.