The Role Of The Court Of Justice Of The European Union In The Development Of The Common Foreign And Security Policy After The Treaty Of Lisbon
The research aimed to study EU as a global player. This included the instruments the EU relies on to express its priorities and achieve its objectives, EU methods to engage international partners, European ways to creating global public good through partnerships and multilateral institutions. The analysis focused especially on the EU’s evolving role in the G7/G8 over the last ten years reflecting its growth as soft power and the EU expanding community competencies and legal authority. The timeframe of the analysis spanned the period from 1998 to 2008 to account for the most important developments following signing of the Treaty of Amsterdam in 1997, birth and development of the ESDP and ESS, enlargement of the EU enhancing its representative weight in the international institutions, further extension of the EU competencies; as well as changing international order, and not least of all the start of the G8 in 1998. It has to be noted that though the study focuses on the recent decade whereas the Amsterdam Treaty provisions on the CFSP entered into force in 1999 reinforcing the legal and institutional foundations of the MS political and security cooperation, the research could not ignore the historical role of the EC – EU in the G7/G8.
Quel est le lien entre le récent avis 2/15 de la CJUE, la politique étrangère de l'UE, les Objectifs de développement durable post-2015, et les politiques climatiques et environnementales des Etats-Unis de l’époque dite trumpiste ? Dans son avis 2/15 du 16 mai 2017, la CJUE a constaté que « l’objectif du développement durable fait désormais partie intégrante de la politique commerciale commune [PCC] » . Outre de nombreux éclaircissements sur l’étendue de la PCC et les critères d’appréciation, et par là, l’état de la législation sur les compétences externes exclusives de l’UE, les constats de la Cour en lien avec le développement durable sont susceptibles de mettre en lumière la portée et les implications juridiques des objectifs politiques - notamment, de la politique étrangère - de l’UE post-Lisbonne, post-2015 et post-Trump.
Cet article porte sur les enjeux principaux de l’avis 2/15 de la CJUE, notamment, sur la PCC et les critères d’appréciation de son étendue, et par là, des compétences externes exclusives de l’UE, de manière plus générale. La deuxième partie de l’exposé aborde plus précisément les conséquences juridiques des principaux enjeux des conclusions de la Cour pour les politiques du développement durable. Finalement, les politiques globales du développement durable seront abordées dans la perspective plus large que l’avis ouvre sur ces questions.
English Abstract: This article is a commentary of the CJEU famous Opinion 2/15 of 16 May 2017 issued on the EU-Singapore FTA. The analysis stresses the interplay of sustainable development, international trade, and EU’s foreign policy objectives.
In addition to many clarifications on the scope of the EU's Common Commercial Policy and the criteria for assessment, and thereby the current state of play of legislation on the EU's exclusive competence in external matters, the Court's findings in relation to sustainable development are likely to shed light on the scope and legal implications of EU political objectives post-Lisbon, post-SDGs and post-Trump.
On September 13, 2018, the European Court of Human Rights rendered a judgment in the case of Big Brother Watch and Others v. United Kingdom, in which it examined whether the legal acts of the UK on the mass interception of communications and its meta-data, as well as the intelligence sharing regime with foreign intelligence agencies, corresponds to the Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Having used an approach under which “while States enjoy a wide margin of appreciation in deciding what type of interception regime is necessary to protect national security, the discretion afforded to them in operating an interception regime must necessarily be narrower,” the Court thereby legalized the use of bulk interception of communications and meta-data. Assessing what content stands behind the acceptance of mass surveillance as not violating the Convention per se, this article demonstrates that the court, by acting both explicitly and implicitly, has exempted a number of key issues of these measures from the test on “legality”, “necessity in democratic society”, and “proportionality”, and has also significantly lowered the threshold of requirements in respect to other components of the bulk surveillance regime. This is an obvious reversal from a sufficiently progressive approach to the protection of the right for respect of private life and personal data against the background of the ever-growing appetite of states for mass collection of data, which started to crystallize few years ago in the jurisprudence of the ECHR and the Court of Justice of the EU. The article concludes with reflections on the political grounds that could have influenced the ECtHR’s application of the balancing method and predetermined its position on what is “necessary in a democratic society”.
Over the last quarter of the century relations between Russia and Poland are balancing between trying to understand the burden of mutual guilt and a desire to construct non-emotional pragmatic relations. Sources of tension vary. In particular, it is the desire of Poland to position itself as a valued player in NATO and the EU and the role distance between the two countries in IR system, which does not allow Russia to maintain an equal political dialogue with Poland. In fact, Poland is not afraid of a direct threat from Russia, but the worst scenario is the one in which Russia without changing the content of its imperial policy can be accepted as a full partner in the international community. The evolution of Russian statehood and national specifics of democracy is largely determined the assessment of the prospects of Russian politics in Poland. The mistake of Polish diplomacy last years was that it took no direct efforts to improve relations with Russia, but only tried to impose the dialogue on Russian authorities. Diplomatic methods were designed to hurt Russian interests and to create a topic for discussion. In response, after 2006 Russia chose the tactic of ignoring Poland. But, ignoring Polish authorities, Russian politicians acted similarly with other political forces. In Poland among influential political forces, there was and there is still no loyalty to Russia. For Russian interests it is no matter who are or will be in power in Poland. However as a rule, it is an important factor that foreign policy decisions are de facto within the competences of the President and the government, as well as experiencing a significant influence of the parliamentary forces. Recent trends show no tangible innovations in bilateral programme. But innovations appear in multilateral and conflict enough issues, such as deployment of US missile defense system in Poland or Polish supervision of "Eastern Partnership" programme. The main problem is low self-sufficiency of bilateral relations and excessive influence of third countries. Any efforts to normalize bilateral relations will be meaningless until the weight of bilateral relations really increases to each of the party.
Russia-Polish relations, foreign policy of Poland, Polish-American relations, EU, Common Foreign and Security Policy, NATO
We address the external effects on public sector efficiency measures acquired using Data Envelopment Analysis. We use the health care system in Russian regions in 2011 to evaluate modern approaches to accounting for external effects. We propose a promising method of correcting DEA efficiency measures. Despite the multiple advantages DEA offers, the usage of this approach carries with it a number of methodological difficulties. Accounting for multiple factors of efficiency calls for more complex methods, among which the most promising are DMU clustering and calculating local production possibility frontiers. Using regression models for estimate correction requires further study due to possible systematic errors during estimation. A mixture of data correction and DMU clustering together with multi-stage DEA seems most promising at the moment. Analyzing several stages of transforming society’s resources into social welfare will allow for picking out the weak points in a state agency’s work.
The article is devoted to a particular form of freedom of assembly — the right to counter-demonstrate. The author underlines the value of this right as an element of democratic society, but also acknowledges the risk of violent actions among participants of opposing demonstrations. Due to this risk, the government may adopt adequate measures restricting the right to counter-demonstrate, certain types of which are analyzed in this paper.
Development of standards of international controllability is reviewed in the article. Institutional approach is applied to development of international legal regime of Energy Charter. Definition of controllability is connected to development of international standards of dispute settlement, which are described in the article in detail. In connection with controllability, Russian interest, defense of investment in European Union and ecological investment encouragement, is reviewed in the article.
мировое управление и управляемость, Мировая экономика, международное экономическое право, энергетическая хартия, International control and controllability, International economics, international economic law, Energy Charter
международное частное право; недвижимость; ; школа бартолистов; бартолисты; теория статутов; статуарная теория/