The Consequences of Kadi: Where the Divergence of Opinion between EU and International Lawyers Lies?

• Autores: Juan Santos Vara
• Localización: European Law Journal, ISSN-e 1468-0386, Vol. 17, Nº. 2, 2011, págs. 252-274
• Idioma: inglés
• Enlaces
  • Texto completo
• Dialnet Métricas: 1 Cita
• Resumen

  • The divergence of opinion between EU and international lawyers as to the consequences of the Kadi/Al Barakaat judgment is likely to remain for the foreseeable future. While international lawyers focus their analysis on the constitutional role of the UN Charter in international law, EU lawyers seek to assert the autonomy and primacy of the EU treaties. The aim of this article is to analyse where the divergence between the two perspectives can be found. The judgment of the European Court of Justice cannot be interpreted as questioning the authority of the Security Council in discharging its duties for the maintenance of international peace and security. The consequences of the General Court's case‐law as regards the EU autonomous list of terrorists should be borne in mind when faced with the implications of Kadi/Al Barakaat. It is not justified that the level of protection to the individuals or entities affected by targeted sanctions should depend on the legal framework in which the restrictive measures have been adopted (UN or EU), or on the margin of discretion left to the EU Member States by the Security Council.