Congratulations Dr. Seewald on successfully defending your doctoral thesis. What sparked your interest in the topic?
The law of EU external relations is a highly complex and challenging field. It requires the ability to analyse and evaluate the intricate synergies between different areas of law. I was immediately fascinated, and it has proved to be a particularly rewarding area of study.
What was the research question and aim of your dissertation?
My research looked at how the human rights clause and the context in which it is embedded have evolved since it was first introduced in the early 1990s. The aim of the thesis was to assess whether the human rights clause is an effective legal instrument to address violations of human rights and democratic principles, or whether it is, or may have become, more of a “decorative” element of a treaty.
What is the human rights clause and how does it work?
The human rights clause is comprised of two distinct parts: a substantive clause and a non-execution clause. The substantive clause requires the parties to the treaty to respect certain norms, typically human rights and democratic principles, by declaring them to be “essential elements” of the treaty. The non-execution clause, on the other hand, offers a contractual response mechanism for parties to enforce breaches of the essential elements.
Could you outline the main findings of your thesis?
My doctoral thesis has shown that the human rights clause is being included in new categories of treaties, and that the parties to treaties with human rights clauses have also changed. Originally, the clause was mainly included in so-called ‘framework agreements’ with states that are or were at the time economically perhaps not as powerful. Especially in the past ten years, however, the EU has done much to establish new treaty relationships, now involving major economic powers, such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand or Japan, and the EU has been particularly adamant about including human rights clauses in these new agreements. According to my analysis some 170 states, including the EU Member States, are now subject to a human rights clause. This almost global spread of the clause undoubtedly demonstrates that it has become an important instrument of the EU’s external action.
Furthermore, the analysis has led me to identify a new category of non-execution clauses, which I termed the “New Zealand clause”, as the EU-New Zealand Partnership and Cooperation Agreement was the first to contain such a clause. The New Zealand clause has been included in a small but significant number of international treaties with economically strong countries. The findings of my work indicate that this new generation of clauses has resulted in the most significant changes since the introduction of the human rights clause. However, the changes have been found to be overwhelmingly negative. The New Zealand clause was perceived as a relatively “toothless” and “watered-down” instrument, allowing for appropriate measures to be taken in only the most exceptional cases.
Finally, my thesis has shown that the context in which the human rights clause is embedded has changed considerably since the early 1990s. Although the clause is becoming increasingly prevalent in international agreements, the number of instances in which it is invoked is declining. This decline in the use of the clause can be attributed, at least in part, to the fact that it is now just one of many instruments with which human rights violations can be countered. For instance, in addition to invoking the human rights clause in response to human rights violations, the EU may impose restrictive measures under the Common Foreign and Security Policy or adopt countermeasures. Moreover, the thesis demonstrated that there are also conditionality clauses in other instruments that the EU can activate, and which can lead to sanctions in the broader sense.
You also had the opportunity to do an internship with the European Commission in Brussels for five months during 2022 and 2023. Did this experience change your view about the EU and if so, how?
The five-month internship in the RELEX team of the Legal Service of the European Commission was an important milestone in the preparation of my dissertation. It gave me a first-hand insight into the European legal framework and enabled me to gain a better understanding of how the EU institutions work.
Can we look forward to any publications relating to your doctoral research?
Yes, the intention is to publish my thesis as a book, further details will be announced in due course.
If you look back over your time as a doctoral scholar at the University of Graz and the way you approached your thesis, is there – with the benefit of hindsight – anything you would have done differently?
Ultimately, the outcome of my work aligned precisely with my initial vision. However, in hindsight, I would have approached the task in a different manner. I believe it is part of the learning process to figure out for yourself how best to get there.
Is there any advice that you would like to give to future doctoral scholars at the University of Graz?
Writing a dissertation is a process that takes time and inevitably has its ups and downs. It is important not to be intimidated by the scale of the task, but to set smaller goals and take it one step at a time. Most importantly, you must learn to set priorities for your own research. Set aside specific days and hours of your best working time for your own research, and do not leave it until the end, when you have no energy left. I have learnt that completing a dissertation is not a task that can be ticked off a list, but that academic writing also requires a degree of inspiration and creativity.