1995 REPORT RECOMMENDATION
Remit of the ECJ in the Third
Pillar
...We are not persuaded that the
Treaty on European Union should be amended on this occasion so
as to make automatic provision for European Court jurisdiction
over third pillar instruments.(282)
OUTCOME OF THE TREATY
Remit of the ECJ in the Third
Pillar
The remit of the Court of Justice
is extended by the new Treaty. One of the amendments gives the
Court competence in the area covered by Title VI (the Justice
and Home Affairs Pillar) under the condition laid down in Articles
K.7 and K.12.
Article K7 would expand the role
of the ECJ in relation to police and judicial co-operation. In
the existing Treaty this is limited to an optional jurisdiction
(which the UK has hitherto rejected) over Conventions. Under
the new arrangements the Court would automatically have jurisdiction
to rule on disputes between the Member States over future conventions
and would acquire a similar jurisdiction with respect to framework
and other decisions if the dispute were not settled in the Council
within six months.
The Court would also acquire the
power to give preliminary rulings on questions referred by national
courts and relating to this title, but only in respect of national
courts in Member States which opt either at the time of signing
the new Treaty, or subsequently, to accept this form of jurisdiction.
The Court of Justice would also
be expected to acquire jurisdiction over those parts of the Justice
and Home Affairs Pillar which have been transferred to Community
competence, but Article H of the Treaty modifies the way in which
references by national courts to the ECJ are to be made. Only
the highest national courts may make references and they must
do so where they consider that an ECJ ruling is necessary to enable
the national court to give judgment. Article H(3) permits the
Council, the Commission or a Member State to seek a ruling on
"a question of interpretation of this Title or of Acts of
the institutions of the Community based on this Title".
However, this power cannot be used to re-open judgments already
made in national courts.
