Activities of Carlo CASINI related to 2009/2241(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Institutional aspects of accession by the European Union to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms - Review Conference of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court in Kampala, Uganda (debate)
Amendments (3)
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses the main arguments in favour of accession of the Union to the ECHR, which may be summarised as follows: – while the Union's system for the protection of fundamental rights will be supplemented and enhanced by the incorporation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights into its primary law, its accession to the ECHR will send a strong signal concerning the coherence between the Union and 'wider Europe', constituted by the Council of Europe and its pan-European human rights system; this accession will also enhance the credibility of the Union in the eyes of third countries which it regularly calls upon in its bilateral reports to respect the ECHR, – accession to the ECHR will afford citizens protection against the action of the Union similar to that which they already enjoy against action by all the Member States; this is all the more worthwhile because the Member States have transferred substantial powers to the Union, – accession will contribute to the harmonious development of the case law of the two European courts in the field of human rights, particularly because of the increased need for dialogue, – accession will not in any way call into question the principle of the autonomy of the Union's law, as the Court of Justice will remain the sole supreme court adjudicating on issues relating to EU law and the validity of the Union's acts, as the Court of Human Rights must be regarded notonly as a superiorn authority but rather as a specialised court exercising external supervision over the Union's compliance with obligations under international law arising from its accession to the ECHR; thus the Court of Justice will have a status analogous to that currently enjoyed by the supreme courts of the Member States in relation to the Court of Human Rights;
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 2
Article 2
2. Recalls that, pursuant to the TreatyArticle 6 EUT and Protocol No 8, accession does not entail any extension of the powers of the Union and in particular does not create a general human rights competence for the Union; , has no effect on the powers of the institutions of the Union and upholds respect for the constitutional traditions and cultural identities of the Member States;
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Is aware that accession as such will not resolve the extremely serious problems facing the ECHR system, namely on the one hand the excessive workload due to an exponential increase in the number of individual applications and on the other hand the reform of the structure and functioning of the Court to cope with it; notes that, in the absence of a solution to these problems, the system is in danger of collapse and that the entry into force of Protocol No 14, which has so far been delayed by the non-ratification of one State party, will certainly help to reduce the number of uncompleted procedures but will not eliminate them; stresses, in the context of the reform of the European Court of Human Rights, the importance of the Interlaken Declaration with particular reference to paragraph 4 thereof which calls for a uniform and rigorous application of the criteria concerning admissibility and the Court's jurisdiction;