Volltext-Downloads (blau) und Frontdoor-Views (grau)

Do we still need Article (6)2 TEU? Considerations on the absence of EU accession to the ECHR and its consequences

  • Article 6(2) TEU provides that the EU shall accede to the European Convention on Human Rights. However, the EU accession project has been significantly delayed by Opinion 2/13 of the ECJ. At the same time, there appears to be some harmony in the case law of the two European Courts, which could lead to the status quo being considered as a valid alternative to EU accession. It might therefore be tempting to remove Article 6(2) altogether from the TEU at the next revision of the Treaties. This paper argues that Article 6(2) should stay in the TEU, because a closer look reveals that the current status quo is not satisfactory: it does not allow an adequate representation of the EU in the procedure before the European Court of Human Rights, nor is it capable of ensuring in the long-term comprehensive and stable consistency between EU law and the Convention. Moreover, removing Article 6(2) TEU would undermine the very idea of a collective understanding and enforcement of fundamental rights. This could initiate a process leading to the current European architecture of fundamental rights protection being unravelled altogether. Hence, there is no return from Article 6(2) TEU. Neither is there from actually implementing it.

Download full text files

Export metadata

Additional Services

Search Google Scholar


Author:Johan Callewaert
Parent Title (English):Common market law review
Publisher:Kluwer Law International
Place of publication:Alphen an den Rijn
Document Type:Article
Date of Publication (online):2018/12/11
Publishing Institution:Deutsche Universität für Verwaltungswissenschaften
Release Date:2018/12/11
Tag:EMRK; EU-Beitritt
ECHR; EU-Accession
GND Keyword:Beitritt; Europäische Menschenrechtskonvention; Europäische Union
First Page:1685
Last Page:1716
Access Rights:Frei zugänglich
Licence (German):License LogoUrheberrechtlich geschützt