Diplomatic and Consular Protection with Special Reference to Article 46 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

REVIEW: laws-994856

Title: Diplomatic and Consular Protection with special reference to Article 46 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights

Thank you for providing me the opportunity to review this interesting study.

The paper studies EU law and policies with special focus on the protection of human rights.

The findings seem appropriate based on the research and analysis. I think minor methodological insight should be added so the readers can be informed about how the methodological process, nonetheless the research ethical issues has been conducted. The conclusion part is appropriate, but could benefit of being a bit longer and more comprehensive.  I hope my comments can help the author(s) to improve this interesting study.

I think the study can provide some fresh thinking for the studies in the studied area.

Author Response

Note has been taken and considered in revised article.

Reviewer 2 Report

Unfortunately the paper is descriptive. It does not contain any analysis, problematization, theoretization, contextualization or methodology.

In this paper, there is no theoretical background around one central issue-It is even difficult to understand what is the paper about. Moreover, there is not any reference to methodology. As a whole, the paper seems to me as a description without any analysis and any theoretical insight.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Comments noted and considered.

Reviewer 3 Report

I felt that your structure could be tightened up and in particular you could make further reference to the dilemma facing EU citizens in the UK in your introduction. Indeed more emphasis on the focus is required in that introduction in terms of EU citizenry as opposed to diplomatic and consular protection. I also thought your title was a little misleading in that it might be better to call it possibly: Rights of EU citizens under article 46-A Dilemma Post Brexit, which I think is the main team of your paper.

Having said that with more focus in the introduction on the key points the section on the European Court of Justice is relevant, but should lean towards protecting EU citizens rights under the Charter and some examples of cases might be relevant in terms of authority to guide courts post Brexit. For example you state the Khadi cases on page 6 but you not do not give any analysis of the facts or the implications of the cases directly affecting EU citizens post Brexit.

Whilst you make a good analysis of the Charter and its implications and application I have difficulty in understanding how the Charter will take any precedence in England post Brexit given the UK governments extraordinary statement about international law and the provisions of the Internal Market Bill which not only transgresses the Withdrawal Agreement but gives UK ministers power to override any judgement of our courts. In addition its peculiar interpretation of state sovereignty without proper regard to the development of a seventeenth doctrine inapplicable in the 21st is bewildering. But if their view is followed one has considerable anxiety for English courts allowing the Charter.

We do not know yet whether there will be a final agreement with the EU and it is most disconcerting that the UK government has indicated its intention to breach international law and the withdrawal agreement which underpinned the rights of EU citizens. In this case therefore it seems to me sensible for you to wait until we know the outcome of the negotiations in Brussels as to whether there is going to be a final trade agreement with the EU before concluding your paper.

Author Response

Views expressed considered and taken into consideration.

Reviewer 4 Report

It is not clear to me what this paper is really arguing. The first few pages provide an overview of EU human rights law and relevant institutions, and then a discussion of the meaning and importance of the notion of the rule of law and the basic tenets of EU law, particularly the Kadi cases--but nowhere is a clearly articulated argument presented. If the goal is merely an overview of these principles and institutions, it is fairly effective. However, at times--such as in the discussion of the rule of law on p5--the discussion feels a bit basic, even pollyannaish, lacking the complexity appropriate to the difficult issues raised.

There may be more of an argument starting on the top of p6, concerning the co-existence of national values with EU legal oversight, but I wish this argument had been stated earlier and more concretely. In addition, the paper starts to feel less polished on p6, with exceedingly vague sentences such as "This life trajectory ensures that critical events are evaluated" (166-67). One of the final sections returns to the Charter but there is no clear connection provided between it and the preceding section on the Kadi cases. Similarly, there is not a fluid or clear enough link to the next section on consular protection.

The most interesting part of the paper concerns the rights of EU citizens in the UK post-Brexit on pp. 9-11. I wish this section had been the entirety of the paper and had been greatly expanded in its discussion and argumentation; most of the preceding pages do not seem necessary or helpful as the paper is currently constructed. The Conclusion reminds us that the paper has also made an argument concerning the use of the Charter to its maximum potential, but the connection between that argument and the issue of rights post-Brexit needs further elaboration.

Author Response

Comments noted.

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

The author has made adequate modifications as suggested so that it is more pertinent to the theme.

Further proof reading advised.

Author Response

I have taken note of the reviewer's comments in finalising my revised article which I subsequently resubmitted. Thank you. Riaan Eksteen 

Reviewer 4 Report

This version is improved, particularly by the new paragraph at the top of p3, but I still do not clearly get the need for or connection to the following 4 pages of the paper where this long overview of the ECJ/EU law/Kadi cases is provided (up to the middle of p8). In my view, there still needs to be more explicit connection provided to the central issue the paper claims to be exploring, i.e., the status of and protection available to EU citizens living in the UK beyond 31 December 2020. One short paragraph seems to have been added at the end of this section, but I continue to see this section as needing greater discussion and suggest it be moved earlier and that the overview sections be either jettisoned or incorporated somehow into the analysis.

Author Response

I have taken due note of the comments by this reviewers in my redrafted article which I then resubmitted. Thank you, Riaan Eksteen