Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-skm99 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T18:44:06.378Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

6 - EU Sanctions Policy and the Protection of Due Process Rights: Judicial Lawmaking by the Court of Justice of the EU

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2017

Monika Heupel
Affiliation:
Otto-Friedrich-Universität Bamberg, Germany
Michael Zürn
Affiliation:
Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung
Get access

Summary

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
Protecting the Individual from International Authority
Human Rights in International Organizations
, pp. 129 - 151
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2017

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alter, Karen J. 1998. ‘Who are the “masters of the treaty”? European governments and the European Court of Justice’. International Organization 52(1): 121147.Google Scholar
Amnesty International 2005. Human Rights Dissolving at the Borders? Counter-Terrorism and EU Criminal Law. Brussels: Amnesty International.Google Scholar
Börzel, Tanja A. 2001. ‘Non-compliance in the EU: Pathology or statistical artefact’. Journal of European Public Policy 8(5): 830824.Google Scholar
Burley, Anne-Marie and Mattli, Walter 1993. ‘Europe before the court: A political theory of legal integration’. International Organization 47(1): 4176.Google Scholar
Cameron, Iain 2002. ‘Targeted Sanctions and Legal Safeguards’, Report to the Swedish Foreign Office on legal safeguards and targeted sanctions. http://resources.jur.uu.se/repository/5/PDF/staff/sanctions.pdf (1 November 2015).Google Scholar
Cameron, Iain 2003. ‘European Union anti-terrorist blacklisting’. Human Rights Law Review 3(2): 225256.Google Scholar
Cameron, Iain 2008. ‘Respecting Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and EU/UN Sanctions: State of Play’. Study commissioned by the European Parliament. www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/etudes/join/2008/385542/EXPO-DROI_ET(2008)385542_EN.pdf (1 November 2015).Google Scholar
Cameron, Iain 2013. ‘Introduction’, in Cameron, Iain (ed.), EU Sanctions: Law and Policy Issues Concerning Restrictive Measures. Cambridge: Intersentia, pp. 140.Google Scholar
Cichowski, Rachel A. 2004. ‘Women’s rights, the European Court, and supranational constitutionalism’. Law & Society Review 28(3): 489521.Google Scholar
Conant, Lisa 2006. ‘Individuals, courts, and the development of European social rights’. Comparative Political Studies 39(1): 76100.Google Scholar
De Goede, Marieke 2008. ‘The politics of preemption and the war on terror in Europe’. European Journal of International Relations 14(1): 161185.Google Scholar
Eckes, Christina 2008. ‘Sanctions against individuals – Fighting terrorism within the European legal order’. European Constitutional Law Review 4(2): 205224.Google Scholar
Eckes, Christina 2010. EU Counter-Terrorist Policies and Fundamental Rights. The Case of Individual Sanctions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Eriksson, Mikael 2009. ‘In Search of Due Process – Listing and Delisting Practices of the European Union’. Department of Peace and Conflict Research Uppsala University. www.uu.se/digitalAssets/99/99245_in_search_091119.pdf (1 November 2015).Google Scholar
Financial Action Task Force 2009. ‘International Best Practices: Freezing of Terrorist Assets’. FATF Guidance Document (23 June 2009). www.fms.gov.ge/uploads/files/international_bpp_freezing_of_terrorist_assets_sr_iii_cover_2012.pdf (1 November 2015).Google Scholar
Goldirova, Renata 2008. ‘EU terror list criticized’. http://euobserver.com/justice/25693 (1 November 2015).Google Scholar
Guild, Elspeth 2008. ‘The uses and abuses of counter-terrorism policies in Europe: The case of the “Terrorist Lists”’. Journal of Common Market Studies 46(1): 173193.Google Scholar
Hayes, Ben and Sullivan, Gavin 2010. ‘Time to rethink terrorist blacklisting’. Statewatch Journal 20(3). www.statewatch.org/analyses/no-120-terrorist-blacklisting.pdf (1 November 2015).Google Scholar
International Commission of Jurists 2009. ‘Assessing Damage, Urging Action: Report of the Eminent Jurists Panel on Terrorism, Counter-terrorism and Human Rights’. www.un.org/en/sc/ctc/specialmeetings/2011/docs/icj/icj-2009-ejp-report.pdf (1 November 2015).Google Scholar
Lester, Maya and Kennelly, Brian 2013. ‘Judicial Review of Sanctions Decisions: “The Wrong Point in the Wrong Court with the Wrong Defendant”? Judicial Review 18 (2): 206210.Google Scholar
Marty, Dick 2007. ‘United Nations Security Council and European Union Blacklists’. Doc. 11454. 16 November. Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights, Parliamentary Assembly Council of Europe. http://assembly.coe.int/Documents/WorkingDocs/2007/edoc11454.htm (1 November 2015).Google Scholar
Schimmelfennig, Frank 2006. ‘Competition and community: Constitutional courts, rhetorical action, and the institutionalization of human rights in the European Union’. Journal of European Public Policy 13(8): 12471264.Google Scholar
Sullivan, Gavin and Hayes, Ben 2010. ‘Blacklisted: Targeted Sanctions, Preemptive Security and Fundamental Rights’. Report of the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR), Berlin. www.tni.org/files/eu-ecchr-blacklisted-report.pdf (1 November 2015).Google Scholar
Van den Herik, Larissa and Cuyvers, Armin 2012. ‘Litigation update and trends’, in Eckert, and Biersteker, (eds.), Due Process and Targeted Sanctions: An Update of the ‘Watson Report’, pp. 2635. www.watsoninstitute.org/pub/Watson%20Report%20Update%2012_12.pdf (1 November 2015)Google Scholar
Wallensteen, Peter, Staibano, Carina and Eriksson, Mikael 2003. ‘Making Targeted Sanctions Effective: Guidelines for the Implementation of UN Policy Options. Results from the Stockholm Process on the Implementation of Targeted Sanctions’. Department of Peace and Conflict Research, Uppsala University. pcr.uu.se/digitalAssets/173/173853_1final_report_complete.pdf (1 November 2015).Google Scholar
Watson Institute 2001. ‘Targeted Financial Sanctions: A Manual for Design and Implementation. Contributions from the Interlaken Process’. Watson Institute for International Studies, Brown University, Providence, RI. www.watsoninstitute.org/tfs/TFS.pdf (1 November 2015).Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×