In the late 1970s, the two organisations organised formal and informal discussions on the EU`s accession routes to the ECHR, before the issue was again highlighted with the adoption of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (7 December 2000). In 2001, the GT-DH-EU Working Group was commissioned to carry out a study on the legal and technical issues that the Council of Europe should address in the event of possible EU accession to the ECHR, as well as on ways to avoid any contradiction between the legal order of the Union and the legal order of the ECHR. 236. It is true that the need for the prior notification procedure of the Court of Justice, as is apparent from point 65 of the draft explanatory report, is linked to compliance with the subsidiary nature of the control mechanism set up by the ECHR in accordance with point 19 of this Opinion. However, it should also be noted that this procedure is also necessary to ensure the proper functioning of the Union judicial system. 184. In particular, the action of the institutions endowed with decision-making powers by the ECHR, as provided for in the envisaged agreement, must not lead the European Union and its institutions to be bound, in the exercise of their internal powers, to a specific interpretation of the provisions of EU law (see Opinion 1/91, EU:C:1991:490, paragraphs 30 to 35); and 1/00, EU:C:2002:231, paragraph 13). In December 2014, the Court of Justice of the European Union issued one of the most controversial decisions in recent decades, the famous Opinion 2/13 which prevented the European Union from acceding to the European Convention on Human Rights. This article deals with the analysis of the mechanism of the other respondents – one of the main features of the draft agreement on the accession of the European Union to the Convention. The interviewees` mechanism was deliberately designed to preserve the specificities of EU law by breaking the resolution of complex issues of the internal division of EU competences at the European Court of Human Rights. Although the European Commission and most Member States did not see any major threats from the mechanism, the Luxembourg court rejected the mechanism because of the European Union`s motivations for the protection of autonomy. .
. .