ABSTRACT
This chapter focuses on particular aspect of the Kadi decisions: their employment of the Solange argument as justification for disobeying the Security Council by not implementing its binding decisions. The Kadi judgments of the courts of the European Union have received enormous scholarly attention and have had significant practical impact. And reasonably so: they are landmark decisions, with numerous implications for several crucial issues, from the relationship between different legal orders to the primacy of Security Council decisions, from the required level of protection of fundamental human rights in the application of coercive measures against individuals to the competence of the EU, and so forth. The chapter aims to dispel the pretension to some extent put forward by the Court of Justice of the European Union in Kadi I, and maintained by the EU courts throughout the Kadi saga. The General Court drew a distinction between the two regimes of General Court: the OMPI regime is structured in two tiers.
