Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T21:19:07.124Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Fundamental Rights Concerning Biomedicine in the Constitutional Treaty and their Effect on the Diverse Legal Systems of Member States

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2019

Atina Krajewska

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The Constitutional Treaty was thought to address the new challenges occurring in front of the enlarged Europe in relation to the rapidly changing international political, economic, social and cultural circumstances. In this respect, the problem of the new quality of the European Union is being repeatedly disputed. If the EU is to be something more than an arrangement for inter-state cooperation, the Union has to be able to act rationally on a collective basis, in a way that different interests or preferences will give priority to seeking agreement over self-interest maximization. The question of whether the EU envisaged in the Constitutional Treaty represents a deeper form of integration can be answered by examining its ability to achieve consensus on conflicting issues and to form a common will about how to solve common problems. The field in which the most controversies arise nowadays is that of biotechnology and biomedicine.

Type
Part III: Sectoral Differentiation in the Constitution
Information
German Law Journal , Volume 6 , Issue 11: The Unity of the European Constitution: 2nd German-Polish Seminar on the Constitutional Law of the European Union , 01 November 2005 , pp. 1693 - 1709
Copyright
Copyright © 2005 by German Law Journal GbR 

References

1 Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe, Dec. 16, 2004, 2004 O.J. (C 310) 53 (hereinafter CT).Google Scholar

2 E.O. Eriksen, The question of Deliberative Supranationalism in the EU, 43 (Arena, Working Paper No. 99,1999), available at www.arena.uio.no/publications/wp99_4.htm.Google Scholar

3 Juergen Habermas, The future of the human nature 25 (2003).Google Scholar

4 Deryck Beyleveld & Roger Brownsword, Human dignity in bioethics and biolaw 6 (2004).Google Scholar

5 Beth Singer, Pragmatism, Rights and Democracy 127 (1999) (quoting John Dewey, Liberalism and Social Action (1935).Google Scholar

6 Konrad Zweigert & Hein Koetz, An Introduction to Comparative Law 68 (1998).Google Scholar

7 Beyleveld & Brownsward, supra note 4, at 1-47.Google Scholar

8 Id. at 1.Google Scholar

9 Id. at 34.Google Scholar

10 The symbolic role and standard-setting function of the Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine cannot be denied. Still, the fact that it has been ratified only by an extremely small number of states substantially limits its actual legal impact.Google Scholar

11 The European Convention, Updated Explanations relating to the text of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, 828 CONV 1 (July 18, 2003).Google Scholar

12 Id. at 6.Google Scholar

13 European Union Committee, 14th Report: The Future of Europe: “Social Europe,” 2003–14, HL Paper 79 (2003) at 13, available at http://hcl1.hclibrary.parliament.uk/notes/sps/snsp-02906.pdf.Google Scholar

14 A.T.J.M. Jacobs, The fences surrounding the Charter of Fundamental Rights in the new European Constitution 8 (2004), available at www.tilburguniversity.nl/faculties/frw/research/schoordijk/ctld. (P.J.G. Kapteyn)Google Scholar

15 Id. at 4.Google Scholar

16 Art. II-111 CT.Google Scholar

17 jacobs, , supra note 14, at 5.Google Scholar

18 Art. II-112 (2) CT.Google Scholar

19 Paper, HL, supra note 13, at para. 84.Google Scholar

20 Habermas supra note 3, at 25.Google Scholar

21 Art. I-3 CT.Google Scholar

22 Art. II-73 CT.Google Scholar

23 European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, Nov. 4, 1950, art. 10(1), 5 E.T.S. 13.Google Scholar

24 Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine (Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine), Apr. 4, 1997, art. 15, 164 E.T.S. 5.Google Scholar

25 Explanatory Report to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with Regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine: Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine, Dec. 17, 1996, art.15, 164 E.T.S. 17, available at www.conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Reports/Html/164.htm.Google Scholar

26 Art I-14 CT.Google Scholar

27 The Treaty establishing the European Community, Dec. 24, 2002, 2002 O.J. (C 325) 163 [hereinafter EC Treaty], available at www.europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex/en/treaties/dat/12002E/htm/C_2002325EN. 003301.html.Google Scholar

28 Art III-250(2) CT.Google Scholar

29 Irving, Louise, Creating an Ethical Framework for Stem Cell Research in Europe, 305 BioNews 1 2 (2005), available at www.BioNews.org.uk/commentaries.lasso (quoting John Harris).Google Scholar

30 Id. at 3.Google Scholar

31 The analysis is mostly based on Beyeveld & Brownsword supra, note 4.Google Scholar

32 Art II-61 CT.Google Scholar

33 Eriksen, , supra note 2, at 36.Google Scholar

34 Paton v. Great Britain, App No. 8416/79, 19 Eur. Comm'n H.R. Dec. & Rep. 244, para. 24 (1980).Google Scholar

35 See, supra, note 24 at 5.Google Scholar

36 Vo v. France, 2004-VIII Eur. Ct. H.R. para. 80.Google Scholar

37 Id. at para. 85.Google Scholar

38 Habermas, , supra note 3, at 33.Google Scholar

39 Art II-81 CT.Google Scholar

40 Art III-118 CT.Google Scholar

41 Case C-377/98, Netherlands v. EP and the Council, 2001 E.C.R. I-7079, paras. 199-215.Google Scholar

42 Art II-63(2) CT.Google Scholar

43 The case of PGD raises some confusion as to who is actually the patient. Is it the mother or the embryo? The answer to this question depends largely on the concept of the patient-doctor relation. A liberal approach will see the mother as a patient, whereas a more restrictive one will speak in favor of an embryo. See Zbigniew Szawarski, Ethics and prenatal screening, in Biopolitik grenzenlos- Stimmen aus Polen 107-121 (Heidi Hofmann ed., 2005).Google Scholar

44 Case C-377/98, Netherlands v. EP and the Council, 2001 E.C.R. I-7079, paras. 199-215.Google Scholar

45 Beyleveld, & Brownsword, , supra note 4, at 217.Google Scholar

46 The European Convention, Updated Explanations relating to the text of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, 828 CONV 1 (July 18, 2003).Google Scholar

47 Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, Sex selection: options for regulation. A report on the HFEA's 2002-03 review of sex selection including a discussion of legislative and regulatory options para. 84-92 (2003).Google Scholar

48 Additional Protocol to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with Regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine, on the Prohibition of Cloning Human Beings, Jan. 12, 1998, No. 168, 1 E.T.S. 2, available at http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/Commun/QueVoulezVous.asp?NT=168&CM=1&DF=&CL=ENG.Google Scholar

49 The Treaty establishing the European Community, Dec. 24, 2002, 2002 O.J. (C 325) 163 [hereinafter EC Treaty], available at www.europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex/en/treaties/dat/12002E/htm/C_2002325EN.003301.html.Google Scholar

50 Beyleveld & Brownsword, supra note 4, at 248.Google Scholar

51 Habermas, , supra note 3, at 48.Google Scholar

52 Habermas, , supra note 3, at 32 (quoting W. van den Daele, Die Natuerlichkeit des Menschen als Kriterium und Schranke technischer Eingriffe (2000).Google Scholar

53 Habermas, , supra note 3, at 109.Google Scholar

54 Art I-8 CT.Google Scholar

55 Art I-2 CT.Google Scholar

56 Lords Select Committee on the EU, 6th Report: The Future Status of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, 2003-3, H.L. Paper 48 at 98-99.Google Scholar

57 Convention, The European, Working group 2, “Incorporation of the Charter/Accession to the ECHR”, Modalities and consequences of incorporation into the Treaties of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and accession of the Community/Union to the ECHR 17-22, 116 CONV 02 (Jun. 18, 2002).Google Scholar