IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/ceasxx/v66y2014i3p488-506.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union: Central European Opt-Outs and the Politics of Power

Author

Listed:
  • Bogusia Puchalska

Abstract

The proclamation of the Charter for Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in December 2000 at Nice, France, followed by its inclusion within the failed Constitutional Treaty and its current status as a legally binding document under the Treaty of Lisbon, charts the changing fortunes of European Union politics dealing with fundamental rights protection. This article outlines the main rationales and hopes behind the enactment of the Charter and notes that through the process of political conditionality it may have been devalued from its very conception. The article suggests that, following their accession, Poland, and later the Czech Republic, used the Charter and Lisbon Treaty negotiations, including their opt-outs from the Charter, to engage in a game of power politics that had both domestic and European undertones. This politics of power game-play reflected a need by both states, and Poland in particular, to respond to both the political conditionality that they had been required to sign up to as part of the accession process and to emphasise how membership had improved their negotiating power. The article suggests that the consequence of this action by both states has not only further devalued the Charter but potentially undermined the rights of Polish and Czech citizens.

Suggested Citation

  • Bogusia Puchalska, 2014. "The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union: Central European Opt-Outs and the Politics of Power," Europe-Asia Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 66(3), pages 488-506, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:ceasxx:v:66:y:2014:i:3:p:488-506
    DOI: 10.1080/09668136.2013.855019
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/09668136.2013.855019
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/09668136.2013.855019?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:ceasxx:v:66:y:2014:i:3:p:488-506. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/ceas .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.