EU Counter-Terrorist Policies and Fundamental Rights

Eckes, Christina

doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199573769.001.0001

Cited by 91 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The trigger may very well have been formed by the sanctions regimes of the United Nations Security Council, 77 but the study of the effects on individuals was much broader and has led to new areas such as Global Administrative Law. 78 In general, where traditionally the 'contractual' relations between states were at the forefront, the 'publicness' of international law is gaining more attention.…”

Section: 2mentioning

confidence: 99%

Studying International and European Law: Confronting Perspectives and Combining Interests

Wessel

2018

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: 2mentioning

confidence: 99%

Studying International and European Law: Confronting Perspectives and Combining Interests

Wessel

2018

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The very idea of a regional Court checking the validity of UN Security Council resolutions proved to be a source for heated academic debates (Palchetti, 2011). In that respect, the appeals judgment before the Court of Justice in the Kadi case (De Búrca, 2010; Eckes, 2009), essentially reversed several findings of the General Court. In 2013 the Court affirmed that it will continue to review EU listings implementing strict Security Council obligations in the face of lack of equivalent control at UN level.…”

Section: The Relationship With International Lawmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Legal Dimension of European Foreign Policy

Wessel¹

2015

The SAGE Handbook of European Foreign Policy: Two Volume Set

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sage, 2014 (forthcoming) * The abbreviation ECJ for the European Court of Justice is increasingly replaced by CJEU for Court of Justice of the European Union. While CJEU would refer to the 'main' Court in the EU's judicial system (settling legal disputes between EU governments and EU institutions; and under conditions dealing with claims from individuals, companies or organizations), it is also used more generally as to include the other two parts: the General Court (previously called the Court of First Instance, dealing with cases brought forward by private individuals, companies and some organizations, and cases relating to competition law) and the EU Civil Service Tribunal (ruling on disputes between the European Union and its staff).

show abstract

“…Of all those, the EU counter-terrorism policy has arguably been the focus of most debates (Zimmermann, 2006;Spence, 2007;Eckes, 2009;Brown, 2010;Bures, 2006Bures, , 2011Argomaniz, 2011;Kaunert & Léonard, 2011;Léonard & Kaunert, 2012;Kaunert et al, 2012a;Bossong, 2008Bossong, , 2012MacKenzie et al, 2013), whilst the EU asylum and migration policy (Baldaccini et al, 2007;Geddes, 2008;Boswell and Geddes, 2011), EU cooperation on criminal justice matters (Fletcher & Lööf, 2008;Eckes & Konstadinides, 2011), and EU police and judicial cooperation (Anderson & Apap, 2002;Occhipinti, 2003;Guild & Geyer, 2008) have also received some attention. Nevertheless, institutional issues have been relatively neglected overall, apart from some early works focusing on the legal intricacies of the then 'third pillar' (e.g., Bieber & Monar, 1995), Kaunert's works (Kaunert, 2005(Kaunert, , 2007(Kaunert, , 2010aKaunert & Della Giovanna, 2010) on the role of the European Commission and the Secretariat of the Council in the AFSJ, as well as the emerging literature on the European Parliament's role (Ripoll Servent, 2010Ripoll Servent & MacKenzie, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%