Citizenship of the European Union


All citizens of European Union (EU) member states enjoy EU citizenship. It was formally created with the passage of the Maastricht Treaty in 1992, at the same time as the European Union​​. EU citizenship complements, not replaces, national citizenship. [1][2] It provides EU citizens with the rights, freedoms and legal protections under EU law.
EU citizens enjoy freedom of movement, as well as freedom of settlement and employment within the EU. They can freely trade and transport goods, services and capital across EU national borders without restrictions on capital movements or fees. [3] Citizens have the right to vote in their state of residence and to stand in elections as candidates, as well as to vote for EU elections and to participate in the European Citizenship Initiative.
EU citizenship confers the consular protection of the embassies of other EU member states when a person’s country of nationality is not represented in the embassy or consulate of the foreign country for which they need protection or other types of assistance. [4] EU citizens have the right to address the European Parliament, the European Ombudsman and EU institutions directly in any EU treaty language[5], provided that the issues raised are within the competence of that institution. [6]
EU citizens enjoy the legal protections of EU law[7], including the EU Charter[8] and Acts and Directives on the protection of personal data, the rights of victims of crime, the prevention and combating of human trafficking, equal pay for equal work, and exemptions in employment. Discrimination based on religion or belief, sexual orientation and age. [8][9] EU citizens can directly contact the Office of the European Ombudsman.

history

“The introduction of a European form of citizenship with clear rights and duties was considered as early as the 1960s”. [11] EU citizenship was first introduced by the Maastricht Treaty and extended by the Amsterdam Treaty. [12] Prior to the 1992 Maastricht Treaty, the European Community treaties provided guarantees for the free movement of persons engaged in economic activities, but generally others did not. The 1951 Treaty of Paris[13] established the European Coal and Steel Community, establishing the right to free movement of workers in these industries, and the 1957 Treaty of Rome[14] provided for the free movement of workers and services.
However, the interpretation of treaty provisions by the European Court of Justice has not a narrow economic purpose, but a broader social and economic purpose. [15] In the Levin case,[16] the Court held that “freedom of employment is important, not only as a means of creating a single market for the economies of member states, but also as a worker’s right to raise his or her standard of living”. [15] According to the European Court of Justice case law, a worker’s right to free movement applies regardless of the purpose of the worker’s employment abroad,[16] part-time and full-time employment,[16] and whether the worker requires additional finances from the Member State to which he moved aid. [17] Since the European Court of Justice held that[18] recipients of services have the right to free movement under the treaty, and that this criterion is easily met,[19] in practice, the nationals of each EU country are in another member state, whether or not they are engaged in economic activities. activities, have a right to non-discrimination under Article 12 of the Treaty on the European Community even before the Maastricht Treaty. [20]
In the Martinez Sala case, the European Court of Justice held that the Citizenship Clause provided a substantive right to equal treatment, as was already conferred by trade union law. The Baumbast case later established that the right to equal treatment applies equally to economically active and economically inactive citizens. Despite these broad interpretations, the landmark Dano case, which combined standards of freedom of movement and equal treatment, said they were interdependent and subsequently limited the scope of Martinez Sala.
D01D02D03D04D05D06D07D08D09D10D11D12D13D14D15D16D17D18D19

European Charter of Fundamental Rights


The European Union’s Charter of Fundamental Rights (CFR) sets out certain political, social and economic rights for citizens of the European Union (EU) and citizens under EU law. It was drafted by the European Convention and ratified by the European Parliament, the Council of Ministers and the European Commission on 7 December 2000. However, its legal status at the time was uncertain, and it was not until the implementation of the Lisbon Treaty on 1 December 2009 that it had full legal impact.
Under the Charter, the EU must act and legislate in accordance with the Charter, and the Court of Justice of the European Union will overturn laws passed by EU institutions that violate the Charter. The Charter applies to EU organisations and their member states in the application of EU law.

Legal Status

After the implementation of the Lisbon Treaty in 2009, the Bill of Rights has the same legal value as the EU Treaty. The charter referred to in the convention is a revised version of the 2000 document, which was humbly submitted by the three bodies the day before the Lisbon Treaty itself was signed.
Article 51(1) of the Charter deals with EU institutions and structures established under EU law and, under applicable EU law, the charters of EU member states. The addition of Article 6 of the EU Amendment Agreement and Article 51(2) of the Charter itself limits the scope of the Charter’s expansion of EU powers. As a result, the EU will not be able to legislate to protect the rights enshrined in the Charter unless the power to do so is provided for in the relevant convention. Furthermore, unless the relevant member state applies EU law, one cannot take a member state to court for failing to uphold rights in the Charter. This is the last point that has caused a lot of debate.
The Charter is not the first attempt to place human rights principles at the heart of EU law. All EU member states and participating countries are required to sign the European Convention on Human Rights so that many of the Convention’s principles, such as the right to a fair trial, can be considered the foundation of Europe. Even before they were reformulated in the charter, a court order. In defining the human rights protection afforded by the general principles of EU law (described in the aforementioned court cases), the European Court of Justice has addressed the question of whether the rights protected by these common principles apply to member states. After finding in Johnston v Royal Ulster Constabulary] that the right to fair proceedings is one of the common principles of EU law, in Kremzow v Austria [11] the ECJ had to decide whether Member States were obliged to apply the principle or not. About unjust murder charges. Lawyers for Kremzo have argued that his case is governed by EU law, arguing that his unfair conviction and sentence violated his right to freedom of movement within the EU. The European Court of Justice responded that because Kremzow’s law was not enforced under EU law, the nature of his criticism was unlawful in EU law. D01D02D03D04D05D06D07D08D09D10D11D12D13D14 D15D16D17D18D19D20D21D22D23D24D25D26D27D28D29