consular protection abroad

420 Pages·2012·1.27 MB·English

UNIVERSIDAD AUTÓNOMA DE BARCELONA 

FACULTAD DE DERECHO 

DEPARTAMENTO DE CIENCIA POLÍTICA Y DERECHO PÚBLICO 

CONSULAR PROTECTION ABROAD: 

A UNION CITIZENSHIP FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT? 

TESIS DOCTORAL 
Presentada por 
Eva­Maria Alexandrova POPTCHEVA 
bajo la dirección de la 
Dra. Teresa FREIXES SANJUÁN 
Bellaterra, febrero 2012
«Les hommes n'acceptent le changement que dans la nécessité 
et ils ne voient la nécessité que dans la crise.» 

Jean Monnet 
Mémoires 1976
Table of Contents 

A. INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................7 
B. CONCEPTUALISING “CONSULAR PROTECTION”..................................27 
I. Problem‐Statement..........................................................................................28 
II. Multilevel Context of Consular Protection...........................................29 
1. Differentiation between Diplomatic and Consular Protection 31 
1. 1. Triggering Event.................................................................................45 
1. 2. Nationality Rule and Third States’ Consent............................47 
1. 3. Right to Diplomatic Protection under European Union 
Law?...................................................................................................................50 
1. 4. Discretionary Character of Diplomatic Protection...............59 
1. 5. Interim Findings.................................................................................61 
2.  Relationship  between  International  Law‐  and  European 
Union Law‐Rules..............................................................................................62 
3. Best Possible Effectiveness of Union Provisions in Light of 
International‐Law Rules...............................................................................82 
III. Consular Assistance and Consular Protection..................................85 
IV. Conclusions......................................................................................................94 
C. DOGMATIC FRAMEWORK OF THE LEGAL CHARACTER OF THE 
PROVISION  OF  CONSULAR  PROTECTION  UNDER  EUROPEAN 
UNION LAW................................................................................................................97 
I. General Considerations..................................................................................98 
II. Constitutional Dimension of Union Citizenship..............................104 
III. Subjective Rights in European Union Law.......................................114 
1. Invocabilité and Subjective Rights under Primary Union Law114 
2. Rights as Institutions of Law...............................................................120 
3.  Preliminary  Considerations  to  the  Right  to  Consular 
Protection as a Subjective Right.............................................................125 
IV. Conclusions...................................................................................................141 
1
D.  DIRECT  EFFECT  OF  UNION  PROVISIONS  ON  CONSULAR 
PROTECTION:  EXERCISE  OF  THE  RIGHT  TO  CONSULAR 
PROTECTION...........................................................................................................147 
I. Direct Effect and Direct Applicability of Union Provisions..........148 
II. Direct Effect of Primary European Union Law................................151 
III. Direct Effect of Union Citizenship’ Rights........................................154 
IV. Conditionality of the Provision of Consular Protection?...........158 
1. Implementing Rules................................................................................159 
2. International Negotiations...................................................................164 
3. Member States’ Discretion...................................................................170 
4. Conditionality of Financial Advance?..............................................174 
V. The Right to Consular Protection as a Fundamental Right under 
the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union............179 
VI. Conclusions...................................................................................................189 
E. HOLDERS OF THE RIGHT TO CONSULAR PROTECTION.................193 
I. “Unrepresented” European Union Citizens........................................194 
1. Holders of Union Citizenship...............................................................194 
2. Lack of Diplomatic or Consular Representation of the Member 
State of Nationality.......................................................................................200 
2. 1. Representation by the own Member State or by another 
State Representing it on a Permanent Basis.................................202 
2. 2. Consular Protection Provided by Honorary Consuls.......207 
2. 3. Accessibility of the Representation of the Member State 
of Nationality..............................................................................................212 
II. Family Members who are not Union Citizens..................................218 
III.  Third  Country  Nationals  Enjoying  Consular  Protection  by  a 
Member State......................................................................................................233 
IV. Conclusions...................................................................................................236 
F.  SUBSTANTIVE  SCOPE  OF  THE  RIGHT  TO  CONSULAR 
PROTECTION...........................................................................................................239 
I. Mere Right to Equal Treatment?.............................................................241 
II. The “If” and “How” of Consular Protection.......................................246 
1. Problem‐Statement.................................................................................246 
2. National Rules on Consular Protection...........................................248 
2.1. AUSTRIA...............................................................................................248 
2.2. BELGIUM..............................................................................................249 
2.3. BULGARIA............................................................................................250 
2.4. CYPRUS.................................................................................................251 
2.5. CZECH REPUBLIC.............................................................................252 
2.6. DENMARK............................................................................................252 
2
2.7. ESTONIA...............................................................................................253 
2.8. FINLAND..............................................................................................253 
2.9. FRANCE.................................................................................................254 
2.10. GERMANY..........................................................................................254 
2.11. GREECE..............................................................................................256 
2.12. HUNGARY..........................................................................................256 
2.13. IRELAND............................................................................................257 
2.14. ITALY...................................................................................................258 
2.15. LATVIA...............................................................................................258 
2.16. LITHUANIA.......................................................................................259 
2.17. LUXEMBOURG.................................................................................260 
2.18. MALTA................................................................................................261 
2.19. THE NETHERLANDS.....................................................................261 
2.20. POLAND.............................................................................................262 
2.21. PORTUGAL........................................................................................263 
2.22. ROMANIA..........................................................................................264 
2.23. SLOVAKIA..........................................................................................265 
2.24. SLOVENIA..........................................................................................266 
2.25. SPAIN..................................................................................................267 
2.26. SWEDEN............................................................................................268 
2.27. THE UNITED KINGDOM..............................................................270 
3.  Scope  of  Coverage  and  Limits  to  the  Right  to  Consular 
Protection.........................................................................................................271 
3. 1. A Multilevel Right............................................................................271 
3. 2. Discrimination against Nationals?...........................................275 
3. 3. The Right to Consular Protection as a Right in Process of 
Legal Construction....................................................................................278 
3. 4. Positive Claim under the Right to Consular Protection: an 
“Umbrella Right”.......................................................................................279 
4.  Limits  on  the  Limits  imposed  on  the  Right  to  Consular 
Protection.........................................................................................................283 
III. Conclusions...................................................................................................291 
G. GUARANTEES OF THE RIGHT TO CONSULAR PROTECTION........295 
I. Judicial Guarantees of the Right to Consular Protection..............296 
II. Non‐Judicial Guarantees...........................................................................304 
1. Burden‐Sharing.........................................................................................304 
2. Lead State Concept..................................................................................306 
3. Pooling of Resources...............................................................................309 
4. Cooperation Arrangements as Guarantees of or Restrictions 
upon the Right to Consular Protection?..............................................310 
III. Conclusions...................................................................................................315 
3
H.  PROPOSAL  OF  A  DIRECTIVE  ON  CONSULAR  PROTECTION 
ACCORDING TO ARTICLE 23 PARA. 2 TFEU..............................................317 
I. Legal Basis and Procedure for the Adoption of a EU Directive on 
Consular Protection..........................................................................................318 
II. Is a Directive on Consular Protection Necessary?.........................321 
III. Possible Content of a Directive on Consular Protection............324 
1. Subject of a Directive according to Article 23 para. 2 TFEU..324 
2. Assessment of the European Commission’s 2011 Proposal of a 
Directive............................................................................................................328 
2. 1. Right‐Holders....................................................................................329 
2. 2. Minimum Standard.........................................................................332 
2. 3. Substantive Scope of the Right to Consular Protection...334 
2. 4. Judicial Remedies............................................................................335 
2. 5. Other Cooperation and Collaboration Measures...............335 
IV.  Requirements  for  the  Transposition  of  a  Directive  under 
Article 23 para. 2 TFEU by the Member States.....................................338 
V. Conclusions.....................................................................................................342 
I. CONSULAR PROTECTION BY THE EUROPEAN UNION.....................347 
I.  Political  and  Legal  Background  of  the  Consolidation  of  the 
European Union’ Action Abroad.................................................................348 
II. Consular Protection or Consular Coordination by EEAS?..........356 
III. Conclusions...................................................................................................361 
J. FINAL CONCLUSIONS.......................................................................................363 
Bibliography............................................................................................................379 
4
Abbreviations 

ECHR European Court of Human Rights
ECR European Court Reports
EDT Emergency Travel Document
EEAS European External Action Service
EEC European Economic Communities
ICJ International Court of Justice
TEC Treaty on European Communities
TEU Treaty on European Union
TFEU Treaty on Functioning of the European Union
VCDR Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations
5
6
INTRODUCTION

A. INTRODUCTION

Union citizenship was enshrined in the Treaty establishing the European
Community by the Treaty of Maastricht, signed in 1992, and, since the
entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon on 1 December 2009, also in the
Treaty on European Union1. It has evolved as the European integration
moved on as creating an “ever closer union among the peoples of
Europe" 2 and became the first aim of the European Union to be
mentioned in the EU Treaties completed with the objective of
strengthening the protection of the rights and interests of the nationals of
its Member States through the introduction of a citizenship of the Union3.

The introduction of these new provisions underscored the fact that the
Treaty of Rome was not concerned solely with economic matters, as it
was also meaningfully demonstrated by the change of name from the
European Economic Community to the European Community. For the
first time, the Treaty created a direct political link between the citizens of

1 Article 9 of the Treaty on European Union (modified by the Treaty of Lisbon):
“In all its activities, the Union shall observe the principle of the equality of its citizens, who
shall receive equal attention from its institutions, bodies, offices and agencies. Every national
of a Member State shall be a citizen of the Union. Citizenship of the Union shall be additional
to national citizenship and shall not replace it.”
2 Article A section 2 of the Treaty of Maastricht (Article 1 para. 2 of the consolidated version
of the Treaty on European Union):
“This Treaty marks a new stage in the process of creating an ever closer union among the
peoples of Europe, in which decisions are taken as openly as possible and as closely as
possible to the citizen.”
3 Article B of the Treaty of Maastricht (Article 2 of the consolidated version of the Treaty on
European Union:
“The Union shall set itself the following objectives:
...
- to strengthen the protection of the rights and interests of the nationals of its Member States
through the introduction of a citizenship of the Union;”
7
INTRODUCTION
the Member States and the European Union such as never existed with the
Community, with the aim of fostering a sense of identity with the Union.

As testimony to their importance, the provisions on citizenship were
placed immediately after the introductory provisions of the Treaty of
Rome4. Thus, citizenship of the Union appears in the Treaty even before
the four freedoms which together make up the internal market.

The rights flowing from citizenship of the Union are in effect granted
constitutional status by being enshrined in the Treaties themselves and
became together with the central political status of the citizens the source
of democratic legitimacy of the Union5. These rights are therefore to be
construed broadly and exceptions to them are to be construed narrowly, in
accordance with the general principles of Community law recognised by
the Court of Justice6.

Union’ citizenship relates to the relationship between the citizens and the
European Union, which like national citizenship, is characterised by
competences for action of the institutions of the European Union towards
Union’ citizens on the one side, and citizen’s rights, duties and political
participation on the other side. By this means the gap between the
increasing impact of Community action as well as of measures adopted
under the former second (Common Foreign and Security Policy)7 and

4 Such as Article 6 EC-Maastricht which prohibits discrimination on the grounds of
nationality, and Article 7A EC (formerly 8 A EEC), which provides for the establishment of
the internal market inter alia for persons.
5 PERNICE, I., “The Treaty of Lisbon: Multilevel Constitutionalism in Action”, in The
Columbia Journal of European Law Vol. 15, num. 3 (2009), pp. 385 et seq.
6 See recently Judgement of the Court of Justice of 19.10.2004 in the case C-200/02, Kunqian
Catherine Zhu, Man Lavette Chen v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, ECR 2004,
p. I-09925, para. 31.
7 See for instance the Judgement of the Court of Justice of the European Communities in the
case Kadi on so called targeted sanctions, such as freezing of funds, adopted by the Council of
8