Abstract
EU security action has dramatically increased since the attacks in New York and Washington on 11 September 2001. Several different legal measures have been adopted to combat terrorism, including data surveillance legislation and targeted asset-freezing sanctions. This article considers three such measures and the decisions of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on their validity: the Passenger Name Record (PNR) Agreements with the United States and the related decision in C-317/04 and C-318/04 Parliament v. Council; the Data Retention Directive and the judgment in C-310/06 Ireland v. European Parliament and European Council; and the asset-freezing sanctions regulations and the leading judgment in C-402/05 Kadi. The article concludes that the increased security activity at EU level has left the European judiciary in a difficult position as they attempt to balance compliance with the principle of conferred competence with the need to protect fundamental rights.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
