Recent resolutions of the United Nations Security Council, notably those resulting in the freezing of assets of individuals and organisations suspected of involvement in international terrorism, have had far-reaching consequences for member states and individuals. In addition, they might conflict with international human rights standards that are binding on the Security Council itself. In light of the limited possibility for reviewing the legality of these resolutions on the international level, individuals have recently begun to challenge their implementation on the national and regional level. This emerging practice raises the question whether states and regional organisations such as the EU can engage in such review and, if so, to what extent.
The book provides academics, practitioners and policy makers with a variety of legal insights into these questions. The first two chapters consider whether the Security Council is bound by human rights at all and, if so, whether the UN Charter grants member states any discretion to review binding Security Council decisions. The subsequent two chapters focus on the inter-action between the Security Council and the EU/EC. Whilst Chapter 3 concentrates on the implementation of Security Council sanctions by the EU/EC on behalf of member states, Chapter 4 examines the possible role of the ECJ in reviewing the Security Council. Chapters five and six provide general perspectives on the role that national governments and courts could play in reviewing Security Council resolutions. Chapters seven to nine are devoted to strategies followed by three different national jurisdictions that were confronted with cases that gave rise to the possibility of incidental review of Security Council resolutions. The tenth and final chapter outlines a “ten point plan” by means of which these complex issues could be approached in future.
De individuele hoofdstukken zijn (nog) niet beschikbaar.