Upon closer examination - this is a 2001 report in the Daily Telegraph. I urge you to read it - as the Brexiters would. It can be found at http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1325398/Euro-court-outlaws-criticism-of-EU.html
But go further, as I did. My response (slightly edited) was
The case itself, Bernard Connolly v Commission of the European Commission, is available in full at http://curia.europa.eu/juris/showPdf.jsf?text=&docid=46230&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=726338http://curia.europa.eu/juris/showPdf.jsf?text=&docid=46230&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=726338...
It is a case worth reading in full - to see the arguments that were put forward and the reasoning for each of the conclusions.
I wonder whether anyone - on the facts and arguments in that case - would expect the UK Supreme Court (presumably after the European Communities Act 1972 is repealed) or the US Supreme Court to come to a different conclusion?
Don't the same restrictions apply to Civil Servants the world over? and employees of private companies?
One of the lines of arguments heard in that 2001 case was that the European Commission had violated Connolly's rights under Art 10 of the Convention. The ECJ comes to a reasoned conclusion as to why they didn't accept his claim. That is in the ECJ judgment. I've searched in vain to find any decision by the ECHR which considers whether they accept or reject that reasoning. The Telegraph article mentions - "Mr Connolly now intends to take his case to Europe's other court, the non-EU European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg." - unless I've slipped up in my research (always possible!) no such case has been brought. I'm sure if it had have been, and the ECHR - which the Telegraph acknowledges is not an EU Court - had found that the Commission had been in breach of Mr Connolly's Art 10 right rights - we would have heard about it (& I'd be using it in my teaching!)
No comments:
Post a Comment