Soon after the entry into force of the EEC Treaty, the Community established itself as a major political entity with policy ramifications beyond its economic aims.

[3] In ruling as it did in Internationale Handelsgesellschaft the ECJ had in effect created a doctrine of unwritten rights which bound the Community institutions.

[8] However, it did come with the political weight of having been approved by three powerful institutions and as such was regularly cited by the ECJ as a source of fundamental rights.

All EU member states are, and candidate states are required to be[citation needed], signatories to the Council of Europe's European Convention on Human Rights, so that many principles from the convention, such as the right to a fair trial, were taken as the baseline for European Court of Justice jurisprudence even before their formal reiteration in Charter.

In 2019, the German Federal Constitutional Court established in Recht auf Vergessen II that it applies the Charter as the standard of review for matters regarding EU law and its national implementation, under the premise that the Charter offers sufficiently effective protection of relevant fundamental rights when compared to the Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany.

The protocol, in article 1(1) states that the "Charter does not extend the ability of the Court of Justice of the European Union, or any court or tribunal of Poland or of the United Kingdom, to find that the laws, regulations or administrative provisions, practices or actions of Poland or of the United Kingdom are inconsistent with the fundamental rights, freedoms and principles that it reaffirms."

[16] Poland, on the other hand, disliked what it perceived as the Charter's liberal stance on social issues, and so in September 2007 the Polish government indicated that they wished to be included in the British protocol.

One view, shared by Jan Jirásek,[18] is that the protocol is an opt-out that excludes the application of the Charter to Poland and the United Kingdom.

"[20] In NS v Home Secretary, the ECJ ruled that Article 1(1) of the protocol "explains Article 51 of the Charter with regard to the scope thereof and does not intend to exempt the Republic of Poland or the United Kingdom from the obligation to comply with the provisions of the Charter or to prevent a court of one of those Member States from ensuring compliance with those provisions.

"[21] Under section 5(4) of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, the Charter of Fundamental Rights was not retained in British law after its exit from the EU.

[22] During the ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon, Czech President Václav Klaus expressed concern that the Charter would allow families of Germans who were expelled from territory in modern-day Czech Republic after the Second World War to challenge the expulsion before the EU's courts,[23] though legal experts have suggested that the laws under which the Germans were expelled, the Beneš decrees, did not fall under the jurisdiction of EU law.

[32] A vote on a draft report by the European Parliament Constitutional Affairs Committee in January 2012 recommending against granting the Czech Republic's request to be added to Protocol 30 resulted in a tie.

[29][30][36] The Parliament did, however, give its consent in advance that a treaty revision to add the Czech Republic to Protocol 30 would not require a new convention.

[38][39] This was confirmed on 20 February 2014 by the new Prime Minister Bohuslav Sobotka, who withdrew the request for an opt-out during a meeting with President of the European Commission José Manuel Barroso[40][41][42][43] shortly after his newly elected government won the confidence of Parliament.

[44] In May 2014, the Council of the European Union formally withdrew their recommendation to hold an Intergovernmental Conference of member states to consider the proposed amendments to the treaties.

In 2010, the FRA put out a tender for poets to turn the Charter into an 80-minute-long epic poem, with music, dance and multimedia elements.

[51][52] However, Viviane Reding, the European Commissioner for Justice, Freedom & Security, wrote to the director of the FRA slamming the idea on cost and dignity grounds and instructing him to cancel the project.