1. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union should be a part of the constitution of Europe. It would certainly be redundant or objectionable if it were adopted or implemented in a way that purported to override the constitutional or legislative provisions of the Member States concerning guarantees of fundamental rights. Nor would it be acceptable to undermine in any way the standing of the European Court of Human Rights or the European Convention of which it is the final arbiter and interpreter. However, the Charter expressly guards against both these points of objection. For it explicitly restricts its own application to the activities of the institutions of the European Union, and the Member States when they are acting to implement Union law, and thus acting as organs of the Union. And it explicitly saves the jurisprudence of the Human Rights Court, and the authority of the Convention, for the Charter may not be interpreted in such a way as to cut down or restrict any Convention right, though Charter Rights within the Union may have more extensive scope than Convention Rights
2. It seems absurd that a Charter containing such safeguards against abuse should be restricted to being a political declaration rather than being given legal effect subject to the safeguards as part of the European Constitution. For it would not override national law, and would be implemented in a way that respects the framework of the European Convention on Human Rights, and the established jurisprudence of the Human Rights Court.