World law lecturer talks about E.U. Court

With a legal process all in French and private deliberations, some Americans may look at the… With a legal process all in French and private deliberations, some Americans may look at the European Court of Justice legal system as unusual. But for Kurt Riechenberg, these facets combine to create success.

Riechenberg, who serves as the chief of staff to the president judge at the European Court of Justice, spoke at a lecture titled “The Judicial Branch in the European Union: A Model for International Legal Relations?”

He was the 11th annual McLean Lecturer on World Law, held by the World Federalist Association of Pittsburgh and Pitt’s School of Law.

About 90 people, mostly professionals in business suits with a small number of students, attended the lecture, which took place in the Teplitz Memorial Courtroom in the School of Law Thursday.

Riechenberg began his lecture by describing how the European Court of Justice was started in 1952 to ensure “the law is observed” by individual member states.

He then outlined the court system’s advantages. According to Riechenberg, a big part of the European Court of Justice’s success comes from the fact that “any state court,” not just member states, can refer a judicial case to the European Court if they believe the ruling goes against the Federal Constitution.

The court also operates without the intervention of any government, Riechenberg said. The court can question any law’s constitutionality without the government’s permission.

Another element that contributes to the court’s success is that the court does not have quotas to fill. The court does not have to hire a certain number of French or Germans, for example. Jobs are given to the most qualified, according to Riechenberg.

However, the court is “concerned about delay in cases,” Riechenberg said. Most cases take 1 1/2 to two years to complete. Riechenberg said the court is trying new techniques to increase efficiency.

Despite representing many different nations, the European Court operates all in French. Riechenberg believes this is not a disadvantage. The one-language system is more cost-effective and efficient than a multi-language system.

Riechenberg said although some judges come into the court knowing very little French, if any, they are not laughed at. Instead, other judges encourage and help them to become more fluent. Because of this encouragement, a judge has never demanded a translator, Riechenberg said.

But a controversial aspect of the court is that its deliberations are private. A decision is made based on a majority of the vote. Once a case is settled, the public is not made aware of the number of dissenting votes or the decision of an individual within the court.

According to Riechenberg, some people feel the public has a right to know how close the decision was.

But Riechenberg agreed with the policy. Because the public only knows the decision made, he said, people can’t question the law if it only passed by one vote.

But if a law is passed, the minority is still involved in the draft discussions. They can continue to challenge the law itself or merely the wording of it, Riechenberg said.

During this time, then, it is possible for a member from the majority to switch positions, and make the minority the majority in a close vote, according to Riechenberg. There have been four cases in which the court has overruled its previous decisions this way, Riechenberg said.

After the lecture, Riechenberg was presented with a clock containing a piece of the Berlin Wall inside it.