VU Research Portal Rightful Relations with Distant Strangers Ganesh, A.R. 2019 document version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Link to publication in VU Research Portal citation for published version (APA) Ganesh, A. R. (2019). Rightful Relations with Distant Strangers: A Kantian Critique of the Law of the European Union in the Wider World. General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal ? Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. E-mail address: [email protected] Download date: 24. Sep. 2021 Rightful Relations with Distant Strangers A Kantian Critique of the Law of the European Union in the Wider World Aravind Ganesh 0 VRIJE UNIVERSITEIT Rightful Relations with Distant Strangers: A Kantian Critique of the Law of the European Union in the Wider World ACADEMISCH PROEFSCHRIFT ter verkrijging van de graad Doctor aan de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, op gezag van de rector magnificus prof.dr. V. Subramaniam, in het openbaar te verdedigen ten overstaan van de promotiecommissie van de Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid op donderdag 6 juni 2019 om 11.45 uur in de aula van de universiteit, De Boelelaan 1105 door Aravind Ratnam Ganesh geboren te Singapore 0 promotor: prof.dr. E. Herlin Karnell copromotor: dr. G. Gordon 1 Acknowledgements ______________________________________________ Having the opportunity to pursue a PhD is an incredible luxury, for which alone one ought to be inordinately thankful. But to be able to write it under the conscientious guidance of the scholar who inspired it, and who in turn introduced me to yet other inspiring scholars, is to be blessed indeed. And so, my first debt of gratitude is owed to Ester Herlin Karnell. The next is owed to Geoffrey Gordon, my second reader, who stuck with me despite having no obligation to do so. His commentary, which was as helpful as it was incisive, vastly improved both my text and my thoughts. I was financially able to pursue a PhD as an external candidate because of my position as a research fellow at the Max Planck Institute Luxembourg for Procedural Law. As a co-director of the institute, as well as my departmental head, Hélène Ruiz Fabri has created a setting for doctoral students that is highly supportive, stimulating in terms of the broad set of ideas and subjects explored, as well as free of certain crucial concentrations of power that are a feature of sadly too many doctoral programs. I am therefore immensely grateful to her, to the Max Planck, as well as to my colleagues, who have been providing me both encouragement and entertainment for more than three years now. I would also like to thank Eyal Benvenisti, without whom this thesis would not have been possible. The seven months I spent in Tel Aviv at his invitation and with the support of the GlobalTrust Research Project were unforgettable for many, many reasons. It would not be too much of an exaggeration to say that this thesis really first took shape there. As such, I would like to thank the Buchmann Faculty of Law, Tel Aviv University, as well as my fellow participants on the ‘Sovereigns as Trustees of Humanity’ seminar. I would also like to thank the scholars I have pestered and persecuted for draft papers, comments and insights, as well as those unfortunates who read my drafts at conferences and workshops. I would have liked to mention you individually, but there are rather too many of you. Finally, there are my parents Latha and Ratnam, my brother Bharath, and my grandmothers Saraswati and Padma. These I could never thank enough, even if I were to devote several lifetimes to the task. 2 Table of Contents _____________________________________________________________________________________ Table of Cases .................................................................................................................................. i Table of International Treaties and Instruments ........................................................................... xv Table of Legislation and Official Documents .............................................................................. xix Abbreviations ............................................................................................................................. xxiii Chapter I - Introduction .................................................. ............................................................. 1 I. Formality, Force, and Freedom: Kant’s Legal Positivism....................................................... 3 II. Methodology: Immanent Critique and Private Law Analogies ............................................. 9 III. Outline of the Thesis ........................................................................................................... 11 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ 15 Chapter II - ‘Territorial Extension’: Authority in the Wider World .................................... 16 I. The Post-Lisbon Articles ....................................................................................................... 17 A. Between Multilateralism and Messianism .................................................................................. 19 II. Bartels and the ‘Compliance’ Interpretation ........................................................................ 22 A. Human Rights Jurisdiction.......................................................................................................... 25 B. General Jurisdiction under International Law ........................................................................... 28 C. Standing ...................................................................................................................................... 30 III. Legal Effects and the Spatial Scope of EU Law ................................................................. 31 A. Territorial Extension and Lotus .................................................................................................. 35 IV. Power and Authority– A Subtle Difference ........................................................................ 37 A. The Nature of Territorial Extension .................................................. .......................................... 39 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ 45 Chapter III – The ‘Missionary Principle’: A False Start .................................................. ...... 46 I. The Sovereign Trusteeship of Humanity ............................................................................... 50 II. Harms and Wrongs ............................................................................................................... 56 A. Public Actors and Human Rights Jurisdiction .................................................. .......................... 58 B. The Failure of the Argument from Well-being .................................................. .......................... 60 0 III. ‘Values’ and ‘Constitutional Objectives’............................................................................ 62 A. Policy Consistency/Coherence in the light of EU Constitutional Objectives ............................. 63 B. The Missionary Principle and Territorial Extension .................................................................. 66 Conclusion: Dignity as Independence ...................................................................................... 70 Chapter IV – Kant’s International Order and the Forms of Private Law ............................ 75 I. Private Right: The Building Blocks of Kant’s General Theory of Law ................................ 76 A. The Division of Torts: Wrongs against Property, and against Personality ................................ 79 B. The Three Defects in the State of Nature .................................................................................... 83 C. Legislating With Respect to Property and Personality ............................................................... 87 II. Public Right: The Fiduciary State ........................................................................................ 88 A. The Separate, Public Person of the State .................................................. .................................. 88 B. Human Rights and the Fiduciary State ....................................................................................... 92 III. International Law: No Property, Only Personality ............................................................. 94 A. Territory: Property or Body? .................................................. .................................................... 96 B. Illustrations in Positive International Law ................................................................................