L’UNIONE EUROPEA E LE ORGANIZZAZIONI ECONOMICHE REGIONALI DEI PAESI IN VIA DI SVILUPPO: SISTEMI GIURISDIZIONALI A CONFRONTO

My project work arises from the consideration that the European Union represents an unicum in international organizations context because of its institutional features, its membership and its material discipline. Indeed it is the best example of supranational integration model. On the contrary, most international regional organizations are structured in the intergovernmental cooperation model, because it ensures the national sovereignty. One of the main features of intergovernmental model is the absence of a permanent judicial system, so generally disputes are settled through political and diplomatic means of international law. Nowadays a new trend is characterizing the international community, that is the judicialization of international organizations; it consists in the establishment of permanent tribunals in regional economic organizations, above all in developing countries. This trend seems to be the outcome of an interstate cooperation strengthening and of the organization gradual evolution from the original intergovernmental model to a more supranational one. This institutional and material evolution of interstate cooperation brings about new kinds of disputes concerning not only States but also the organization and individuals interests. This explains the establishment of permanent judicial systems, in particular in Africa (UEMOA, CEMAC, EAC, COMESA, ECOWAS e SADC) and in Latin America (MERCOSUR, CAn, SICA e CARICOM). In my research I have carried out a comparative analysis between the European Court of Justice on the one hand and the Tribunals or Courts established within regional economic organizations in developing countries on the other hand. My aim is to put in evidence if the European Union and its Court can influence the activity of the other regional judicial systems outside Europe. From a methodological point of view I have divided my research into two parts: the first one comparing the institutional features (structure, functioning, competences) of judicial systems; the second one considering their jurisprudence. In each part the comparison between the ECJ and the “other” Tribunals and Courts has been carried out in a specular way, in order to catch easily the similarities and differences. With reference to the institutional features, my studies have revealed a general trend of such African, Caribbean and Latin-American regional Tribunals and/or Courts of Justice to imitate the European judicial system and, particularly, ECJ competences. This imitation trend is general but not homogeneous; indeed the imitation degree of European judicial system is different from a regional judicial body to another and it seems to depend on the different cooperation model of the regional organizations in which these tribunals are established. So, the more a regional organization tends to reproduce the features of the supranational model, the more its judicial system is similar to European Union’s one. As already said, I have dedicated the second part of my thesis to the comparative assessment of the judicial systems’ jurisprudence. My studies have revealed a general trend to imitate the European jurisprudence, because the ECJ case law seems to offer useful lessons to these regional judicial bodies. In fact, the ongoing integration processes in sub-regions outside Europe make Member States to face the same legal and economic problems faced by European Union in the past. So, in order to manage the various relations and to find the right solutions to these problematic law profiles resulting from their economic integration processes, these regional Tribunals make use of the European judgments and take guidance from its rich jurisprudence, even if it doesn’t bind them. Referring to ECJ case law in their judgments the “other” regional Tribunals outside Europe give authority to their own conclusions. In that way, they tend to import the fundamental European integration principles (such as the principle of the supremacy, of free trade, of proportionality, the responsibility of a member State failing a Community obligation) to their regional law orders. As already said, this imitation trend of ECJ jurisprudence is general because it characterizes every regional Court of Justice I have analyzed. So its diffusion doesn’t depend on the institutional features of each regional judicial system or on the cooperation model of the regional organization it’s established in. On the contrary it depends on the matters referred to the regional court. Indeed the regional Tribunals outside Europe often act as administrative tribunals (CEMAC – COMESA –SADC) or they settle disputes which don’t concern relevant law questions arising from the ongoing integration processes. So, in those cases references to ECJ rulings are absent in regional Tribunals’ judgments. In sum, the EU and its judicial system are perceived as a model to be imitated in order to reach the same European “successful” results. In particular, the European Court of Justice and above all its jurisprudence can influence the evolution of these regional organizations and their Member States’ cooperation. This trend to imitate the European jurisprudence determines the diffusion of EU main principles in other regional integration processes all over the world. So, we can talk about a sort of unilateral fertilization.