Front Polisario: A Step Forward in Judicial Review of International Agreements by the Court of Justice?

(Series Information) European Papers - A Journal on Law and Integration, 2017 2(3), 967-975 | European Forum Insight of 29 August 2017 | (Table of Contents) I. Preliminary remarks: judicial review of international agreements between self-restraint and judicial activism. - II. The decision of the Gen...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Aurora Rasi
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: European Papers (www.europeanpapers.eu) 2017-08-01
Series:European Papers
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.europeanpapers.eu/en/europeanforum/front-polisario-a-step-forward-in-judicial-review-of-international-agreements
id doaj-d186cc109773401d98b3108597965d63
record_format Article
spelling doaj-d186cc109773401d98b3108597965d632021-01-03T17:53:14ZengEuropean Papers (www.europeanpapers.eu)European Papers2499-82492017-08-012017 2396797510.15166/2499-8249/158Front Polisario: A Step Forward in Judicial Review of International Agreements by the Court of Justice?Aurora Rasi0University of Rome "La Sapienza"(Series Information) European Papers - A Journal on Law and Integration, 2017 2(3), 967-975 | European Forum Insight of 29 August 2017 | (Table of Contents) I. Preliminary remarks: judicial review of international agreements between self-restraint and judicial activism. - II. The decision of the General Court in Front Polisario and the procedural approach. - III. The substantive approach in the decision of the Court of Justice in Front Polisario. - IV. The decision of the Court of Justice between self-restraint and activism. - V. Concluding remarks. | (Abstract) In Front Polisario (judgment of 21 December 2016, case C-104/16 P, Council of the European Union v. Front Polisario [GC]), the Court of Justice was called to assess the validity of a decision that had concluded an agreement providing for reciprocal liberalisation measures on agriculture and fishery products between the EU and the Kingdom of Morocco. The agreement had been implemented by the parties as covering also products originating from Western Sahara, a non-self-governing territory militarily occupied by Morocco. In its previous case law, the Court of Justice had mainly limited to procedural aspects the judicial review of acts related to the EU's foreign relations. In Front Polisario it took a different view, and assessed the validity of the decision also on the merits. This Insight examines the technique used by the Court of Justice, and tries to identify which reasons led it to depart from its traditional standard of judicial review.https://www.europeanpapers.eu/en/europeanforum/front-polisario-a-step-forward-in-judicial-review-of-international-agreementsjudicial review of political choicesexternal actioncouncil competencescjeu competencesprinciple of self-determinationviolation by the eu of international peremptory law
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Aurora Rasi
spellingShingle Aurora Rasi
Front Polisario: A Step Forward in Judicial Review of International Agreements by the Court of Justice?
European Papers
judicial review of political choices
external action
council competences
cjeu competences
principle of self-determination
violation by the eu of international peremptory law
author_facet Aurora Rasi
author_sort Aurora Rasi
title Front Polisario: A Step Forward in Judicial Review of International Agreements by the Court of Justice?
title_short Front Polisario: A Step Forward in Judicial Review of International Agreements by the Court of Justice?
title_full Front Polisario: A Step Forward in Judicial Review of International Agreements by the Court of Justice?
title_fullStr Front Polisario: A Step Forward in Judicial Review of International Agreements by the Court of Justice?
title_full_unstemmed Front Polisario: A Step Forward in Judicial Review of International Agreements by the Court of Justice?
title_sort front polisario: a step forward in judicial review of international agreements by the court of justice?
publisher European Papers (www.europeanpapers.eu)
series European Papers
issn 2499-8249
publishDate 2017-08-01
description (Series Information) European Papers - A Journal on Law and Integration, 2017 2(3), 967-975 | European Forum Insight of 29 August 2017 | (Table of Contents) I. Preliminary remarks: judicial review of international agreements between self-restraint and judicial activism. - II. The decision of the General Court in Front Polisario and the procedural approach. - III. The substantive approach in the decision of the Court of Justice in Front Polisario. - IV. The decision of the Court of Justice between self-restraint and activism. - V. Concluding remarks. | (Abstract) In Front Polisario (judgment of 21 December 2016, case C-104/16 P, Council of the European Union v. Front Polisario [GC]), the Court of Justice was called to assess the validity of a decision that had concluded an agreement providing for reciprocal liberalisation measures on agriculture and fishery products between the EU and the Kingdom of Morocco. The agreement had been implemented by the parties as covering also products originating from Western Sahara, a non-self-governing territory militarily occupied by Morocco. In its previous case law, the Court of Justice had mainly limited to procedural aspects the judicial review of acts related to the EU's foreign relations. In Front Polisario it took a different view, and assessed the validity of the decision also on the merits. This Insight examines the technique used by the Court of Justice, and tries to identify which reasons led it to depart from its traditional standard of judicial review.
topic judicial review of political choices
external action
council competences
cjeu competences
principle of self-determination
violation by the eu of international peremptory law
url https://www.europeanpapers.eu/en/europeanforum/front-polisario-a-step-forward-in-judicial-review-of-international-agreements
work_keys_str_mv AT aurorarasi frontpolisarioastepforwardinjudicialreviewofinternationalagreementsbythecourtofjustice
_version_ 1724350266627588096