Buradasınız

Anasayfa » Content

THE BOSPHORUS CASE: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE AND THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS DECISIONS

Journal Name:

  • İstanbul Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Mecmuası

Publication Year:

  • 2013

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
The lack of a unified set of rules in international law, backed with the lack of hierarchy between the international courts and tribunals, as well as their overlapping jurisdictions create serious obstacles at the expense of the credibility of international institutions and the fundamental rights of private persons and entities. “Bosphorus” constitutes one of the landmark cases handled in the face of the war in the Federal Republic of Former Yugoslavia, where the ECJ and the ECtHR come to a position to choose between two crucial conflicting interests, namely the public interest pursued by the international rules, and the fundamental rights and freedoms of individuals suffering from the application of these rules. This essay initially articulates the facts of “Bosphorus” including the analysis of the ECJ’s preliminary ruling, and the elaboration of the ECtHR decision. Subsequently, a critical analysis of the ECHR judgment will be made. Here, the focus will be on the ECtHR’s assessment regarding the EC’s protection of fundamental rights, with a rather compromising approach avoiding to tamper with the ECJ’s analysis and evaluation.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
(Bosphorus Davası: Avrupa Adalet Divanı ve Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi Kararlarlarının Değerlendirilmesi) Uluslararası hukukta yeknesaklaşmış bir kurallar bütünün bulunmayışı, buna ek olarak uluslararası divan ve mahkemeler arasında hiyerarşik bir ilişki bulunmaması ve bunların yargı yetkilerinin zaman zaman çakışması, uluslararası kurumların güvenilirliği ile temel hak ve özgürlüklerin korunması bakımından olumsuz sonuçlara yol açmaktadır. Avrupa Adalet Divanı ve Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi’nin kamu yararı ile kişilerin temel hak ve özgürlükleri arasında denge kurmaya çalıştığı Bosphorus davası, Yugoslavya Federal Cumhuriyeti döneminde ortaya çıkmış ve döneme damgasını vurmuştur. Bu makale, her iki mahkeme kararının özet ve değerlendirmesini içermektedir. Bu değerlendirmede özellikle Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi’nin, Avrupa Topluluğu bünyesindeki insan hakları koruması bakımından Avrupa Adalet Divanı’nın yaptığı değerlendirme ile çatışmaktan kaçınan bir yaklaşım sergilemiş olmasına dikkat çekilmektedir.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon 15.pdf
  • 1
297-330
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

Books and compilations
Canor, Iris, Exercise in Constitutional Tolerance? When Public
International Law Meets Private International Law: Bosphorus Revisited, The
Shifting Allocation of Authority in International Law, Considering Sovereignty,
Supremacy and Subsidiary, Essays in honor of Professor Ruth Lapidoth, Tomer
Broude, Yuval Shany (ed.), Hart Publishing, Oxford and Portland, Oregon,
2008.
Debbas Vera Gowlland/ Tehindrazanarivelo Liva Djacoba, National
Implementation of United Nations Sanctions: A Comparative Study, Brill
Academic Publishers, Leiden, 2004.
Eeckhout, Piet, External Relations of the European Union. Legal and
Constitutional Foundations, New York: Oxford University Press, 2005.
Harmsen, Robert, National Responsibility for European Community Acts
Under the European Convention on Human Rights: Recasting the Accession
Debate, European Public Law, Vol. 7. Issue 4, Kluwer Law International, 2001.
Kapteyn, P.J.G./ McDonnell, A.M./ Mortelmans, K.J.M./ Timmermans,
C.W.A. (ed.), The Law of the European Union and the European Communities,
Fourth Revised Edition, Kluwer Law International BV, 2008.
Ovey, Clare/ White, Robin C. A., The European Convention On Human
Rights, 4th Ed., Oxford University Press, New York, 2006.
Österdahl, Inger, Threat to the peace: the interpretation by the Security
Council of Article 39 of the UN Charter, Studies in international law (Stockholm,
Sweden), v. 13. Uppsala: Iutus Forlag, 1998.
Walter Christian, History and Development of European Fundamental
Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, European Fundamental Rights and Freedoms,
ed. Dirk Ehlers, De Gruyter Rechtswissenschaften Verlags-GmbH, 2007.
Articles from journals
Canor, Iris “Can Two Walk Together, Except They Be Agreed?” The
Relationship Between International Law and European Law: The Incorporation of
United Nations Sanctions against Yugoslavia into European Community through
the Perspective of the European Court of Justice, Common Market Law Review,
Volume 35, Issue 1, 1998, pp. 137-187.
The Bosphorus Case: A Critical Analysis of the European
Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights Decisions
329
Costello, Cathryn, The Bosphorus Ruling of the European Court of Human
Rights: Fundamental Rights and Blurred Boundaries in Europe, HRLR 6 (2006),
pp. 87-130
Drewniak, Erik, Comment: The Bosphorus Case: The Balancing Of
Property Rights In The European Community And The Public Interest In Ending
The War In Bosnia, 20 Fordham International Law Journal, March 1997, pp.
1007-1088.
Kuhnert, Kathrin, Bosphorus – Double standards in European human
rights protection?, Utrecht Law Review, Volume 2, Issue 2 (December) 2006, pp.
177-189.
Larik, Joris, Two Ships in the Night or in the Same Boat Together? Why
the European Court of Justice Made the Right Choice in the Kadi Case, EU
Diplomacy Papers, 3/2009.
Lickova, Magdalena, European Exceptionalism in International Law,
European Journal of International Law, Volume19 (463) 2008, Oxford
University Press, 2008.
Peers, Steve, Limited Responsibility of European Union member states for
actions within the scope of Community law, Judgment of June 2005, Bosphorus
v. Ireland, Application No. 45036/98, European Consitutional Law Review 2,
2006, pp. 443-455.
Phelps, Joseph, Comment: Reflections on Bosphorus and Human Rights in
Europe, 81 Tulane Law Review, November 1996, pp. 251-278.
Posh, Albert, The Kadi Case: Rethinking The Relationship Between EU
Law And International Law?, 15 Columbia Journal of European Law 1/2009.
Tomuschat, Christian, Case Law: European Court of First Instance,
Judgment of 21 September 2005, Common Market Law Review, Vol. 43, No. 2,
2006, pp. 537-551.
Other publications
A Guide to the Treaty of Lisbon, European Union insight, sponsored by
Allen and Overy, Addleshaw Goddard, Berwin Leighton Paisner, Hugh Mercer,
Philippa Watson and Tim Eicke (Essex Court Chambers), Kingsley Napley,
Mayer Brown, The Law Society, January 2008
Jacobs, Francis G., The Right of Access to Court in European Law, with
Special Reference to Article 6 (1) of the European Convention on Human Rights
and to European Community Law, Developing Human Rights Jurisprudence, Vol.
7, Seventh Judicial Colloquium on The Domestic Application of International
Human Rights Norms, Interights and Commonwealth Secretaiat, 1998.
Wildhaber, Luzius, “The Coordination of the Protection of Fundamental Rights
in Europe“, 3rd Convention of European Lawyers, Geneva, 8 September 2005.
Case law
Case C-29/69, Stauder v. City of Ulm, Sozialamt, 1969 E.C.R. 419.
Case 4/73, Nold v. Commission (1974), E.C.R. 491.
Case 44/79 Hauer v. Land Rheinland-Pfalz (1979) E.C.R. at 3747, P 25,
(1980) 3 C.M.L.R.
Sporrong v. Sweden, 5 E.H.R.R. 35, 50-55, PP 60-74 (1983).
Case 222/84, Marguerite Johnston v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster
Constabulary, 15 May 1986, E.C.R. 1651.
Zeynep Elibol (İÜHFM C. LXXI, S. 1, 330 s. 295-330, 2013)
Wachauf v. Bundesamt für Ernährung und Fortswitschaft (1989), E.C.R.
at 2609.
Case 5/88, Wachauf v. State, (1989) E.C.R. 2609, (1991) 1 C.M.L.R.
Case C-367/89. Criminal Proceedings against Richardt and Les
Accessories Scientifiques SNC, 1991, E.C.R. p. 4621.
Bosphorus Hava Yollari Turizm Ve Ticaret Anonim Sirketi v. Minister for
Transport, Energy and Communications, Ireland and Attorney General and TEAM
Aer Lingus Ltd, (1994) 2 I.L.R.M. 551, 553, (1994) 3 C.M.L.R.
Case C-280/93Germany v. Council, (1994) E.C.R. I-4973, 5065, P 78.
Case C-13/94, P v. S and Cornwall County Council (1995), E.C.R. I-2159.
Case C-84/95, Bosphorus Hava Yollari Turizm ve Ticaret AS v. Minister
for Transport, Energy and Communications and others, July 30 1996, E.C.R.
1996 P. I-03953.
Case C-124/95, The Queen, ex parte Centro-Com Srl. v. HM Treasury and
Bank of England, 1997, E.C.R. I-81.
Application No. 24833/94, Denise Matthews v. United Kingdom, 1999-I
Eur. C. H.R., February 18 1999.
Application No. 45036/98, Bosphorus Hava Yollari Turizm ve Ticaret
Anonim Sirketi v. Ireland, Eur. Ct. H.R. June 30, 2005.
Joined Cases C-402/05 and C-415/05 P, Yassin Abdullah Kadi and Al
Barakaat International Foundation v. Council of the European Union and
Commission of the European Communities, 3 September 2008.
UN SC Resolutions and EC Regulations
S/RES/713 (1991), 25 Sept. 1991.
S/RES/757 (1992), 30 May 1992.
S/RES/787 (1992), 16 Nov. 1992.
Council Regulation No. 1162/76 of 17 May 1976 on measures designed to
adjust wine-growing potential to market requirements, 1976 O.J. (L 135) 32.
Council Regulation No. 1432/92 of 1 June 1992 prohibiting trade
between the European Economic Community and the Republics of Serbia and
Montenegro, 1992 O.J. (L 151) 4.
Council Regulation No. 2656/92 of 8 September 1992 concerning certain
technical modalities in connection with the application of Regulation No
1432/92 prohibiting trade between the European Economic Community and
the Republics of Serbia and Montenegro, 1993 O.J. (L 7) 1.
Council Regulation No. 990/93 of 26 April 1993 Concerning Trade
Between the European Economic Community and the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro), 1993 O.J. (L 102) 14.
Web
ECHR Blog, 15 January 2010, available at http://echrblog.blogpost.com.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com