Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-10-23-Speech-3-109"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021023.2.3-109"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
We voted in favour of the report, as we support, in principle, the incorporation of the Charter in a future treaty (constitution). Our approval should be seen in the light of the following aspects, however.
The report proposes measures to improve direct access to the Court of First Instance. We interpret this wording as a right for individuals to plead directly before the EU Court of First Instance on the basis of the Charter’s rights. It would be an ill-fated measure which ran the risk of opening the floodgates to a legal review of practically all EU decisions (bearing in mind the extent of the Charter). We would rather see a system like the one which characterises the current right to plead before the Court of Justice of the European Communities: the rights under the Charter are applied indirectly, via the right of the national courts to refer cases to the Court of Justice.
The report adopts a rigid stance on changes to the Charter’s horizontal clauses. We are of the opinion, however, that it is reasonable to accept changes even to the substance of the clauses, as we find it hard to see how the Charter could otherwise gain binding status and an application in law which works in practice. We share the opinion of the Convention’s working group on this.
By way of a general observation, we also wish to emphasise that a binding charter in all events must not undermine the model for collective agreements which is applied to the labour market in the Nordic countries."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples