Suchergebnisse

Master Thesis is devoted to the study of the advisory opinion procedure prescribed by the Protocol No. 16 to the European Convention on Human Rights or, to be more precise, to the study of the value of this procedure for the protection of human rights in the European Union. The Master Thesis is aimed on establishing whether the advisory opinion procedure could become an effective tool for improving the human rights protection in the Union. The main objectives of the Thesis were to analyse the provisions of the Protocol No. 16 and to find out whether the aims of the Protocol could be achieved and what will be the obstacles, if any, for doing this; and to establish how the advisory opinion procedure will influence the national courts and EU law. The research has shown that the advisory opinion procedure will enhance the judicial dialogue between the Court and the national courts and will ensure establishing higher human rights protection standards. However, there are still some doubts that the procedure will decrease the Court's workload due to the length of the procedure, the additional burden that will be put on the Grand Chamber, etc. Moreover, the Protocol may prevent the Constitutional Courts from effective realization of the function of constitutional control and can interfere into the relationship between the Constitutional Courts and the Highest Ordinary Courts. The main concern about the non-binding nature of the advisory opinions was, however, refuted. Besides, the research has shown that the Court of Justice of the European Union in Opinion 2/13 reasonably stated that the advisory opinion procedure could undermine the autonomy of EU law that neither can be put higher than the protection of human rights, nor being neglected.

Master Thesis is devoted to the study of the advisory opinion procedure prescribed by the Protocol No. 16 to the European Convention on Human Rights or, to be more precise, to the study of the value of this procedure for the protection of human rights in the European Union. The Master Thesis is aimed on establishing whether the advisory opinion procedure could become an effective tool for improving the human rights protection in the Union. The main objectives of the Thesis were to analyse the provisions of the Protocol No. 16 and to find out whether the aims of the Protocol could be achieved and what will be the obstacles, if any, for doing this; and to establish how the advisory opinion procedure will influence the national courts and EU law. The research has shown that the advisory opinion procedure will enhance the judicial dialogue between the Court and the national courts and will ensure establishing higher human rights protection standards. However, there are still some doubts that the procedure will decrease the Court's workload due to the length of the procedure, the additional burden that will be put on the Grand Chamber, etc. Moreover, the Protocol may prevent the Constitutional Courts from effective realization of the function of constitutional control and can interfere into the relationship between the Constitutional Courts and the Highest Ordinary Courts. The main concern about the non-binding nature of the advisory opinions was, however, refuted. Besides, the research has shown that the Court of Justice of the European Union in Opinion 2/13 reasonably stated that the advisory opinion procedure could undermine the autonomy of EU law that neither can be put higher than the protection of human rights, nor being neglected.