Periodic Reporting for period 3 - RESHUFFLE (RESHUFFLING OUR UNDERSTANDING OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS LAW IN EUROPE)
Reporting period: 2023-02-01 to 2024-07-31
Say an employer dismisses a Muslim employee because she refuses to remove her headscarf. Should employers be allowed to do that? The focus of this project is not on the answer, but on who has the final say: who shapes fundamental rights at the European level?
In the past, the answer was simple: the Council of Europe (comprising 46 member states, 27 of which are member states of the European Union) has been the continent’s leading fundamental rights organization since World War II. Yet, in the past two decades, a distinct organization has also explicitly been shaping fundamental rights at European level: the European Union. Rather than only following the Council of Europe’s lead, the European Union is now issuing its own sets of instruments addressing fundamental rights concerns, such as the directive that protects persons against discrimination on grounds of religion at the workplace. This example is only the tip of the iceberg, a considerable amount of instruments of European Union law nowadays shape the protection at fundamental right at European Union. One could refer to the directives on the rights of asylum seeks and refugees for another example.
What are the pros and cons of this reshuffling of the system for the protection of fundamental rights in Europe? Is the European Union, initially conceived as a project for economic integration, fully equipped to take on a leading role in matters of fundamental rights protection? How does European Union fundamental rights law interact with the corresponding law of the Council of Europe? How do litigants and judges find their way through this maze of sources of law at European level? How can the European Union address challenges to the standards that it seeks to set, as illustrated by heated debates on asylum seekers’ rights or the rights of same sex partners in certain member states? These are the questions that this project aims to answer.
For that purpose, RESHUFFLE is structured around four complementary sub-projects. Firstly, we explore how the European Union articulates its new role in matters of fundamental rights protection when compared to an international human rights organization, such as the Council of Europe itself. Secondly, we look at how the European Union deals with fundamental rights protection when compared to Federal States, such as the U.S.A. or Canada. These comparative lenses will shed light on the strengths and weaknesses of the European Union's approach to fundamental rights protection, analyzed in light of its own distinctive institutional features. Thirdly, we investigate the extent to which the emerging bulk of European Union fundamental rights law influences the law of the Council of Europe in its mandate to protect fundamental rights. Finally, we enquire into the way litigants and judges at national level make use - or fail to make use - of European Union fundamental rights law. These last two sub-projects enable us to critically assess the interplay between the key three layers of authority in the field of fundamental rights in Europe: at national, at European Union level and at the Council of Europe.
In the past, the answer was simple: the Council of Europe (comprising 46 member states, 27 of which are member states of the European Union) has been the continent’s leading fundamental rights organization since World War II. Yet, in the past two decades, a distinct organization has also explicitly been shaping fundamental rights at European level: the European Union. Rather than only following the Council of Europe’s lead, the European Union is now issuing its own sets of instruments addressing fundamental rights concerns, such as the directive that protects persons against discrimination on grounds of religion at the workplace. This example is only the tip of the iceberg, a considerable amount of instruments of European Union law nowadays shape the protection at fundamental right at European Union. One could refer to the directives on the rights of asylum seeks and refugees for another example.
What are the pros and cons of this reshuffling of the system for the protection of fundamental rights in Europe? Is the European Union, initially conceived as a project for economic integration, fully equipped to take on a leading role in matters of fundamental rights protection? How does European Union fundamental rights law interact with the corresponding law of the Council of Europe? How do litigants and judges find their way through this maze of sources of law at European level? How can the European Union address challenges to the standards that it seeks to set, as illustrated by heated debates on asylum seekers’ rights or the rights of same sex partners in certain member states? These are the questions that this project aims to answer.
For that purpose, RESHUFFLE is structured around four complementary sub-projects. Firstly, we explore how the European Union articulates its new role in matters of fundamental rights protection when compared to an international human rights organization, such as the Council of Europe itself. Secondly, we look at how the European Union deals with fundamental rights protection when compared to Federal States, such as the U.S.A. or Canada. These comparative lenses will shed light on the strengths and weaknesses of the European Union's approach to fundamental rights protection, analyzed in light of its own distinctive institutional features. Thirdly, we investigate the extent to which the emerging bulk of European Union fundamental rights law influences the law of the Council of Europe in its mandate to protect fundamental rights. Finally, we enquire into the way litigants and judges at national level make use - or fail to make use - of European Union fundamental rights law. These last two sub-projects enable us to critically assess the interplay between the key three layers of authority in the field of fundamental rights in Europe: at national, at European Union level and at the Council of Europe.
Four researchers have been entrusted with the responsibility of carrying on each of the four sub-projects.
Two post-doctoral researchers working on the RESHUFFLE project are in charge of the comparative studies. Dr Rizcallah has extensive expertise in the respective techniques of adjudication on fundamental rights in the European Union and at the Council of Europe. She is preparing a book proposal on the way the relevant courts in each of these two legal systems articulate their approach to fundamental rights. Dr Scarcello is the author of a monograph on European constitutional pluralism. He is drafting a book proposal on the relationship between common federal fundamental rights' standards and occasional contestation to preserve national identities in the EU, the USA and Canada. These post-doctoral projects were started in fall 2021, and the respective book proposals will be presented to the research group, as well as to two experts in the respective fields, in fall 2022.
Two doctoral researchers are responsible for the enquiries into how European Union Fundamental rights law interacts with the law of the Council of Europe as well as national law. Mr Davio holds an advanced degree in European Union law and has professional expertise in the law of the Council of Europe. He is progressing towards the completion of a doctorate on the influence of EU fundamental rights standards on the case law of the European Court for Human Rights of the Council of Europe. Similarly, Ms van der Meulen is preparing a doctorate on why national judges decide to refer a case, or not, to the Court of Justice of the European Union in the context of fundamental rights' claims. Her approach builds on her background in International and European human rights law combining legal methodology with methods and insights from the social sciences. The doctoral projects were started in fall 2020, and each have been approved both by a committee of independent professors from the law Faculty (doctoral committee, 2021) and by a committee composed of two external experts for each project (doctoral seminar, 2022).
The Principal Investigator is monitoring the parallel progress of each of the four sub-projects and creating a dynamic research environment (interactive research seminars, visiting researchers and speakers). She disseminates knowledge of the project and its output, and stimulates further research in the field. In the second half of the project, she will seek to draw horizontal conclusions from the maturing sub-projects.
All members of the research group have already published preliminary work and presented on various occasions. An overview of our scientific output and dissemination activities, together with information on our open research seminar series, is available on our website.
Two post-doctoral researchers working on the RESHUFFLE project are in charge of the comparative studies. Dr Rizcallah has extensive expertise in the respective techniques of adjudication on fundamental rights in the European Union and at the Council of Europe. She is preparing a book proposal on the way the relevant courts in each of these two legal systems articulate their approach to fundamental rights. Dr Scarcello is the author of a monograph on European constitutional pluralism. He is drafting a book proposal on the relationship between common federal fundamental rights' standards and occasional contestation to preserve national identities in the EU, the USA and Canada. These post-doctoral projects were started in fall 2021, and the respective book proposals will be presented to the research group, as well as to two experts in the respective fields, in fall 2022.
Two doctoral researchers are responsible for the enquiries into how European Union Fundamental rights law interacts with the law of the Council of Europe as well as national law. Mr Davio holds an advanced degree in European Union law and has professional expertise in the law of the Council of Europe. He is progressing towards the completion of a doctorate on the influence of EU fundamental rights standards on the case law of the European Court for Human Rights of the Council of Europe. Similarly, Ms van der Meulen is preparing a doctorate on why national judges decide to refer a case, or not, to the Court of Justice of the European Union in the context of fundamental rights' claims. Her approach builds on her background in International and European human rights law combining legal methodology with methods and insights from the social sciences. The doctoral projects were started in fall 2020, and each have been approved both by a committee of independent professors from the law Faculty (doctoral committee, 2021) and by a committee composed of two external experts for each project (doctoral seminar, 2022).
The Principal Investigator is monitoring the parallel progress of each of the four sub-projects and creating a dynamic research environment (interactive research seminars, visiting researchers and speakers). She disseminates knowledge of the project and its output, and stimulates further research in the field. In the second half of the project, she will seek to draw horizontal conclusions from the maturing sub-projects.
All members of the research group have already published preliminary work and presented on various occasions. An overview of our scientific output and dissemination activities, together with information on our open research seminar series, is available on our website.
The RESHUFFLE project has already shed light on the very active role that the various organs of the European Union nowadays play in shaping fundamental rights at European level. The preliminary publications of the research group have been well read and our research seminar series and research events are well attended. The team members are also given regular opportunities to present the early stages of their research projects.