ABSTRACT This contribution explores the European Union’s dual role as both a recipient and a shaper of international human rights norms, focusing on the potential human rights erosive effects of European Union (EU) law-making—specifically the forthcoming Crisis and Force Majeure Regulation. Whilst the EU legal order offers both direct and indirect remedies to challenge EU legislation before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), these mechanisms are hindered by procedural, admissibility, and legal design constraints. The article argues that Article 52(1) of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (CFR), provides underutilized potential for substantive judicial human rights review of EU law. By extending the application of the legitimate aims test (LAT) beyond qualified rights to absolute rights and treating the LAT as a conceptually distinct standard from proportionality, the article contends that the CJEU can more effectively assess whether EU legislative aims unjustifiably erode fundamental rights. Through this two-pronged argument, the paper demonstrates how reinterpreting the CFR’s limitations clause could enhance the EU’s system of human rights protection, offering a more robust judicial safeguard against rights-restrictive policy- and law-making.
Joyce De Coninck (Sun,) studied this question.