English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

This paper takes up a question whether there exists a possibility for the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) to take a stand on the (in)famous  Opinion 2/13  by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), and to address contained in it argumentation from the perspective of the Strasbourg system's conditions for accession. Particularly, it will focus on the question whether the  Convention  system provides for an appropriate procedure. The paper will not engage into a discussion on how the contentious issues should be addressed by the ECtHR, but will focus on answering whether it at all may have a chance to address them in the current legal setting through advisory procedures with which the  European Convention on Human Rights  ( ECHR ) system is equipped. The text will argue that even if both the Articles 47-49 of the  Convention  advisory procedure as well as the  Protocol 16  to the Convention advisory procedure for the sake of their function and scope could not be applied to directly, holistically and systematically tackle  Opinion 2/13 , then at least the latter could provide a forum to do that in a limited scope and in an indirect way. While the mechanism has been designed with a completely different purpose, some of the features of the  Protocol 16  advisory procedure may even seem to incite such a use, especially in the context of the increasingly turbulent relations between the CJEU and the European Union (EU) Member States’ highest courts and tribunals in the field of fundamental rights.

revue québécoise de droit international

May the Other Side Also be Heard? Some Remarks Regarding the Chances for a Response to Opinion 2/13 From the ECtHR on the Awakening of the EU Accession to the ECHR Process