Between Autonomy and Dependence: The EU Legal Order under the Influence of International Organisations

339 Pages·2013·4.268 MB·English

by  Ramses A. Wessel, Steven Blockmans (auth.), Ramses A. Wessel, Steven Blockmans (eds.)

Between Autonomy and Dependence
Ramses A. Wessel Steven Blockmans
•
Editors
Between Autonomy
and Dependence
The EU Legal Order Under the Influence
of International Organisations
123
Editors
Ramses A.Wessel StevenBlockmans
Centre forEuropean Studies EU ForeignPolicy Unit
Universityof Twente Centre forEuropean Policy Studies
Enschede Brussels
The Netherlands Belgium
ISBN 978-90-6704-902-3 ISBN 978-90-6704-903-0 (eBook)
DOI 10.1007/978-90-6704-903-0
LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2012946756
(cid:2) T.M.C.ASSERPRESS,TheHague,TheNetherlands,andtheauthors 2013
PublishedbyT.M.C.ASSERPRESS,TheHague,TheNetherlandswww.asserpress.nl
ProducedanddistributedforT.M.C.ASSERPRESSbySpringer-VerlagBerlinHeidelberg
Nopartofthisworkmaybereproduced,storedinaretrievalsystem,ortransmittedinanyformorby
anymeans,electronic,mechanical,photocopying,microfilming,recordingorotherwise,withoutwritten
permissionfromthePublisher,withtheexceptionofanymaterialsuppliedspecificallyforthepurpose
ofbeingenteredandexecutedonacomputersystem,forexclusiveusebythepurchaserofthework.
Theuseofgeneraldescriptivenames,registerednames,trademarks,etc.inthispublicationdoesnot
imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protectivelawsandregulationsandthereforefreeforgeneraluse.
Printedonacid-freepaper
SpringerispartofSpringerScience+BusinessMedia(www.springer.com)
Acknowledgments
TheEuropeanUnionistraditionallyseenasanew,andpartlyseparate,legalorder
within the framework of international law. At the same time, the EU is an
important player in the global governance network. The strong and explicit link
between the EU and a large number of other international organisations raises
questions concerning the normative impact of international organisations and
regimes on the autonomy of the EU and its legal order. Such questions were
addressedataconferenceorganisedunderthebanneroftheCentrefortheLawof
EU External Relations (CLEER) at the premises of the T.M.C. Asser Institute in
The Hague on 5 November 2010.
We wouldlike toexpressour gratitude to the other membersofthe organising
committee (Dr. Christina Eckes, Jan Willem van Rossem, Dr. Nikos Skoutaris)
and to the academics and practitioners who contributed to the success of this
conference, especially those who expanded and updated their papers so as to
contribute to this volume. The Editors would also like to thank those speakers at
the conference who were not in a position to hand in written contributions:
Dr. Jenö Czuczai (Legal Service, Council of the EU), Dr. Michèle Coninsx
(PresidentofEurojust),Dr.DietrichNeumann(LegalService,Europol)andEdna
Ramirez (World Trade Organization). Thanks also goto colleagues at the T.M.C.
Asser Institute for their help in organising the CLEER conference and to the
European Commission for its financial support under the Lifelong Learning Jean
Monnetprogramme.SpecialthanksarealsoextendedtoLindaAbeelaKræmerfor
her language revision and copy-editing of the book.
Summer 2012 The Editors
v
Contents
1 Between Autonomy and Dependence: The EU Legal Order
Under the Influence of International Organisations—
An Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Ramses A. Wessel and Steven Blockmans
Part I Conceptual and Institutional Questions: Between
Autonomy and Dependence
2 The Autonomy of EU Law: More is Less?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Jan Willem van Rossem
3 Norms Emanating from International Bodies and Their
Role in the Legal Order of the European Union . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
Jan Wouters and Jed Odermatt
4 The Influence of International Organisations on the European
Union: A Political Science Perspective. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Oriol Costa and Knud Erik Jørgensen
5 The European Court of Justice and (Quasi-)Judicial
Bodies of International Organisations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
Christina Eckes
vii
viii Contents
Part II The Normative Impact of Decisions and Practices
of International Organisations
6 The Impact of Council of Europe Standards
on the European Union. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
Elise Cornu
7 WTO Influence on EU Law: Too Close for Comfort? . . . . . . . . . 131
Pieter Jan Kuijper and Frank Hoffmeister
8 The Relationship Between International Monetary
Fund Law and European Union Law: Influence,
Impact, Effect, and Interaction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159
Wolfgang Bergthaler
9 The Influence of the World Intellectual Property
Organization on the European Union . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199
Edward Kwakwa and Autumn Talbott
10 The Influence of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)
on the EU Legal Order. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217
Françoise D. Schild
11 The Influence of NATO on the Development
of the EU’s Common Security and Defence Policy. . . . . . . . . . . . 243
Steven Blockmans
12 The Influence of International Organisations on the EU’s
Area of Freedom, Security and Justice: A First Inquiry. . . . . . . . 269
Claudio Matera
13 The Influence of International Organisations on the EU
and its Legal Order: Between Autonomy and Dependence. . . . . . 297
Steven Blockmans and Ramses A. Wessel
Table of Cases. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313
Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 321
Chapter 1
Between Autonomy and Dependence: The
EU Legal Order Under the Influence
of International Organisations—An
Introduction
Ramses A. Wessel and Steven Blockmans
Abstract The European Union’s legal order is traditionally perceived as largely
autonomous,notonlyinternally(vis-à-vistheMemberStates),butalsoexternally
(inrelationtothirdstatesandotherinternationalorganisations).Thesourceofthis
perceptionistobefoundintheearlycaselawoftheCourtofJustice.Stressingits
autonomy was believed to be necessary to establish an independent identity and
couldperhapsbeseenasadisguisedclaimtosovereignty,somethinginternational
organisations—unlike states—have to fight for. These days, ‘autonomy’ has been
givenastrongconstitutionalmeaning.Yet,theEUdisplaysacertain‘openness’and
does not seem to have a problem with allowing binding international norms to
becomepartofitslegalorder,eitherthroughacceptinginternationalobligationsor
by referring to international agreements in its own Treaties. With the gradual
developmentofitsexternalrelationsandtheincreaseofexternalcompetences,the
EUevenrevealedits‘dependence’oninternationallawandinternationalnormative
processes,asithadnochoicebuttoacceptthatinordertobeabletoplayalongon
the global stage, it had to follow the rules of the game. Increasingly, normative
processes take place within international organisations and other norm-generating
bodies. The strong and explicit link between the EU and a large number of other
internationalorganisationsraisesquestionsconcerningtheimpactofdecisionstaken
byotherinternationalorganisationsandofinternationalagreementsconcludedwith
RamsesA.Wessel—ProfessorofLawoftheEUandotherInternationalOrganisations.Steven
Blockmans—SeniorResearchFellowandHeadoftheEUForeignPolicyUnit.
R.A.Wessel(&)
UniversityofTwente,Enschede,TheNetherlands
e-mail:[email protected]
S.Blockmans
CentreforEuropeanPolicyStudies,Brussels,Belgium
e-mail:[email protected]
R.A.WesselandS.Blockmans(eds.),BetweenAutonomyandDependence, 1
DOI:10.1007/978-90-6704-903-0_1,
(cid:2)T.M.C.ASSERPRESS,TheHague,TheNetherlands,andtheauthors2013
2 R.A.WesselandS.Blockmans
thoseorganisations(eitherbytheEUitselforbyitsMemberStates)ontheautonomy
of the EU and its Member States. In this introductory chapter, the editors give a
flavourofthequestionswhichwillbeaddressedinthebook.
Contents
References.................................................................................................................................. 8
The European Union’s legal order is traditionally perceived as largely autono-
mous, not only internally (vis-à-vis the Union’s own Member States), but also
externally (in relation to third states and other international organisations).1 The
source of this perception is to be found in early case law, which focused on
the‘autonomy’ofa‘newlegalorder’.2Stressingitsautonomywasbelievedtobe
necessary to establish an independent identity and could perhaps be seen as a
disguised claim to sovereignty (something international organisations—unlike
states—have to fight for). These days, ‘autonomy’ has been given a strong con-
stitutionalmeaning.Itisbelievedtobepartof‘‘theveryfoundations’’oftheUnion
legal order, and unity and the uniform application of rules are part and parcel of
that order.3 It is a well-accepted argument that ‘‘the well-functioning of the
European Union ultimately depends on the protection of the principle of
supremacyfromlawoutsidetheEUlegalorder.’’4Afterall,thesupremacyofEU
law is necessary for the functioning of the European constitutional order and
neitherMemberStates,northeEUitself,shouldbeforcedintoapositioninwhich
international obligations negatively affect the effet utile of European law.
In short, the preservation of the autonomy of the EU has been said to require
two things: ‘‘First, that the essential character of the powers of the [EU] and its
institutions remains unaltered by an international agreement. Secondly, that pro-
ceduresforensuringuniforminterpretationoftreaties,specificallyproceduresthat
involveanexternaljudicialbody,donothavetheeffectofbindingtheEUandits
institutions,intheexerciseoftheirinternalpowers,toaparticularinterpretationof
1 Cf.DeWitte1999.
2 In particular, of course, in ECJ, Case C-26/62 NV Algemene Transport en Expeditie
Onderneming Van Gend en Loos v. Nederlandse Administratie der Belastingen [1963] ECR 1,
and ECJ, Case 6/64 Costa v. ENEL [1964] ECR 585. Later references may be found in ECJ,
Opinion 1/91 (EEA Agreement) [1991] ECR I-6079; Opinion 1/00 (ECAA Agreement) [2002]
ECR I-3493; Case C-459/03 Commission v. Ireland [2006] ECR I-4635 (Mox Plant); Joined
Cases C-402/05 P and C-415/05 P Kadi and Al Barakaat International Foundation v. Council
and Commission [2008] ECR I-6351. Cf. also R. Barents 2004, The Autonomy of Community
Law.
3 VanRossem,Chap.2inthisvolume.
4 Eckes2012,230.
1 BetweenAutonomyandDependence 3
therulesofEUlaw.’’5Theprincipleofautonomyhasthusbeenestablishedasone
ofthefundamentalprinciplesofEUlaw.Eveninmorerecentcaselaw,theCourt
didnotshyawayfromphraseslike:‘‘aninternational agreementcannotaffect the
allocation of responsibilities defined in the Treaties and, consequently, the
autonomy of the Community legal system, compliance with which the Court
ensures under Article 220 EC [now to be found in Article 19 TEU]’’.6 Or, ‘‘the
validity ofany Communitymeasure[…] mustbe consideredto bethe expression
[…]ofaconstitutionalguaranteestemmingfromtheECTreatyasanautonomous
legal system’’.7
Yet—and perhaps even paradoxically—the EU displays a certain ‘openness’
anddoesnotseemtohaveaproblemwithallowingbindinginternationalnormsto
becomepartofitslegalorder,eitherthroughacceptinginternationalobligationsor
by referring to international agreements in its own Treaties (i.e. the UN Charter,
the ECHR or the Geneva Conventions). With the gradual development of its
external relations and the increase of external competences (on the basis of both
primary law and case law8), the EU even revealed its ‘dependence’ as it had no
choicebuttoacceptthatinordertobeabletoplayalongatthegloballevel,ithad
to follow the rules of the game (i.e. in accepting global (product or process)
standards or UN Security Council resolutions). This has consequences for the
effects of international obligations of the Union within its own legal order and,
indeed, these days Article 216 (2) TFEU provides that international agreements
concluded by the Union are binding upon the institutions of the Union and on its
MemberStates.9Indeed,afteraninitialperiodinwhichtheCourts’emphasiswas
laid on a strengthening of the autonomous nature of the Community legal order,
beginning in the early 1970s, international treaties were considered to form ‘‘an
integralpartofCommunitylaw’’,10anditwasarguedthatinternationallawranked
between primary and secondary law,11 implying that conflicts between EU deci-
sions and international law should be solved to the advantage of the latter. This
status of international law is not restricted to international agreements (including
5 VanRossem2011.TherequirementscanalsobefoundinOpinion1/91,paras12–13.
6 CaseC-459/03Commissionv.Ireland[2006]ECRI-4635(MoxPlant),para123.
7 JoinedCasesC-402/05PandC-415/05PKadiandAlBarakaatInternationalFoundationv.
Council and Commission [2008] ECR I-6351, para 282. Cf. also Lavranos 2010, who sees the
new line of jurisprudence as an indication of the protection of the autonomy of European law
from international law interfences by excluding, as much as possible, any conflicts between
Europeanandinternationallaw.
8 SeeECJ,Case22/70Commissionv.Council[1971]ECR263(AETR);JoinedCases21-24/72
InternationalFruitCompanyv.ProduktschapvoorGroentenenFruit[1972]ECR1219;Opinion
1/75(UnderstandingonaLocalCostStandard)[1975]ECR1355.
9 SeefurtheralsoEckes2011;aswellasJacobs2008.
10 ECJ,Case181/73Haegemanv.Belgium[1974]ECR449;seeCannizzaroetal.2011.
11 See forinstance: ECJ, Case C-179/97 Spain v.Commission[1999] ECR I-1251;ECJ, Case
C-162/96RackeGmbH&Co.v.HauptzollamtMainz[1998]ECRI-3655,para45.
4 R.A.WesselandS.Blockmans
mixed agreements12), but also holds true for customary law,13 and secondary
international law deriving from international agreements such as Association
Council decisions.14 And, finally, the interplay between international and Euro-
pean law may also be important to understand the reverse effect: the influence of
EU law on the international legal order,15 and the position the EU occupies in
international organisations.16
The ‘openness’ of the EU legal order towards international norms implies the
acceptance of an influence of these norms on the EU legal order. This, in turn,
obviously puts the autonomy of the EU legal order into perspective. Indeed, over
the years the EU has even accepted its ‘dependence’ on international normative
processes.17 And, increasingly, these normative processes take place within
internationalorganisationsandothernorm-generatingbodies.18Thepositionofthe
EU as animportant player inthe global governance network was strengthened by
theLisbonTreaty.Article21(1)TEUinteraliaprovidesthattheEU‘‘shallseekto
developrelationsandbuildpartnershipswith[…]international,regionalorglobal
organisations’’ and that it ‘‘shall promote multilateral solutions to common
problems, in particular in the framework of the United Nations.’’19
The strong and explicit link between the EU and a large number of other
international organisations raises questions concerning the impact of decisions
taken by other international organisations and of international agreements con-
cluded with those organisations (either by the EU itself or by its Member States)
ontheautonomyoftheEUanditsMemberStates.Toacertainextentthisimpact
is shaped by the decisions of international (quasi-)judicial bodies, the two most
influential ones being the dispute settlement mechanism of the World Trade
OrganizationandthatoftheEuropeanCourtofHumanRights.ItisuptotheCourt
of Justice of the EU to square these decisions with its longstanding and ongoing
concern for the autonomy of the EU legal order and its own jurisdiction.20
ThequestionistowhichextenttheCourtofJusticehasacceptedthatitisboundby
the decisions of any external (quasi-)judicial body, although the influence of the
12 SeeonthisissueVanRossem2011.
13 ECJ, Case C-162/96 Racke, supra, para 45; CFI, Case T-115/94 Opel Austria GmbH v.
Council [1997] ECR II-39; as well as ECJ, Case C-84/95 Bosphorus Hava Yollari Turizm ve
Ticaret AS v. Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications and Others [1996] ECR
I-3953.SeeKuijper2008;aswellasWoutersandVanEeckhoute2004.
14 See for instance: ECJ, Case C-192/89 Sevince v. Staatssecretaris van Justitie [1990] ECR
I-3461.
15 SeeHoffmeister2008;Wouters,NollkaemperandDeWet2008.
16 JørgensenandWessel2011;VanVoorenetal.2013.
17 SeeFøllesdal,WesselandWouters2008.
18 Cf.Jørgensen2008,188,whoarguesthatoverthelasttwentyyears,therelationshipbetween
theEuropeanUnionandinternationalinstitutionshasbecome‘‘moresustainedandconsistent’’.
SeealsoVanVoorenetal.2013;andBlockmansandWessel2012.
19 WoutersandOdermatt,Chap.3inthisvolume.
20 Eckes,Chap.5inthisvolume.