THE European Court of Justice (ECJ) is a key institution of the European Union.

The main function of this Supreme Court is to consolidate the EU in line with the Lisbon Treaty.

It has no democratic mandate. It can rule on EU directives, regulations rules, policies and the Single European Market to ensure there is “free movement of capital, goods, services and labour.” This affects everybody within the EU.

Like several EU institutions the ECJ dates back to 1952 and the European Coal and Steel Community.

With each successive EU treaty the ECJ has gained more power over the EU, its institutions, national governments and courts.

This power was increased by the illegally imposed Lisbon Treaty.

The ECJ consists of 28 judges, one from each EU member state, for renewable six-year terms.

They are unaccountable and come from the top echelons of national judicial systems.

There is no need to guess which part of society they come from, a further clue being they are all appointed by common accord of the governments of member states.

The ECJ sits in public but decides in secret. Each judge is to be “independent” and this to be “beyond doubt.”

The judges are supported by nine advocate generals, six from the largest member states and three from other member states. This month the number of advocates will be increased to 11, mainly to appease Poland.

Advocate generals give an opinion on cases for the judges to consider. Most rulings fall in line with these opinions. Appeals against judgements are not permitted.

So far this year the British government has referred 27 cases to the ECJ, mostly about trading disputes.

Individuals cannot go to this court, only EU institutions, governments and national supreme courts.

Many consider the signing by the EU of the Ceta treaty with Canada, TTIP and investor state dispute settlement (ISDS) agreements to be illegal in international law. But even three million people across the EU who signed a recent anti-TTIP petition can have no say in this court.

To avoid a tie on the bench, cases are heard by a panel of odd numbers from three to 13 judges.

However, one serious case which could have rocked the very basis of the EU and eurozone was heard recently by a rare sitting of all judges.

This 2012 case was referred to the ECJ by the Republic of Ireland’s Supreme Court over a challenge by an Irish MP against his government and attorney.

The MP’s challenge dealt with Ireland taking part in the European Stability Mechanism (ESM) for eurozone member states.

The final ECJ judgement was a judicial acrobatic exercise which came down on the side of the ESM.

Trade unionists across the EU are aware, or should be if they are not, of a number of recent judgements from the ECJ which effectively outlaw strike action and collective bargaining.

The ECJ ruled in the Viking, Laval, Ruffert, Luxembourg and other cases which simply gave business and corporations the right to trump trade union rights to take industrial action and bargain collectively for their members.

These rulings provide employers with EU legislation and a weapon to oppose industrial action.

This legislation largely negates any illusions about a “social Europe.” Part of David Cameron’s crusade to change the EU is to obtain even more restrictions on hard won trade union rights.

Highly political ECJ rulings are being used to open up health services to competition and to create a single market for healthcare across the EU, which will have huge implications for the NHS.

On top of this TTIP and ISDS could in turn trump the ECJ. This is one more reason to vote for Britain to withdraw from the EU.

The ECJ is not a court for trade unions or workers but for the EU and capitalism which is set in stone as the only economic system permitted in the EU.

• John Boyd is secretary of the Campaign against Euro-federalism and chairman of the European Alliance of EU-critical Movements.