Journal articles on the topic 'Treaty of Amsterdam amending the Treaty on European Union'
To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Treaty of Amsterdam amending the Treaty on European Union.
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Treaty of Amsterdam amending the Treaty on European Union.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Eklof, Tony. "The Coming together of the Nations of Europe: Sources of Information." International Journal of Legal Information 29, no. 2 (2001): 355–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s073112650000946x.
Full textAbstract:
The title of this paper comes from the famous ‘Schuman Declaration’ of 1950, which signaled the placing of Franco-German production of coal and steel under a single High Authority. It is quite astonishing that from this humble beginning, evolved the European Union of today. The phrase takes on new relevance as the Treaty of Nice paves the way for the biggest single enlargement of the European Union. The current Treaty, completes the Intergovernmental Conference which began in February, 2000. The founding treaties, signed in Paris and Rome in 1951 and 1957 respectively, and the amending treaties, most notably the Treaty on European Union, (Maastricht), and the Treaty of Amsterdam, form the Constitution of the European Union. It is important to note that while the earlier treaties concentrated on economic integration, the later treaties have shifted towards political questions. Bibliographic references to the various treaties have become quite complicated because the Treaty of Amsterdam brought about a renumbering of the articles to both the Treaty on European Union (EU) and the Treaty establishing the European Community (EC).
2
Bator-Bryła, Monika Patrycja. "Prohibition of Discrimination on Grounds of Nationality in the Freedom of Movement of Persons within the EU in the Light of Case Law of the Court of Justice of the European Union." Review of European and Comparative Law 46, no. 3 (August 21, 2021): 189–218. http://dx.doi.org/10.31743/recl.12340.
Full textAbstract:
The subject of this article is to analyze the meaning of the prohibition of discrimination on grounds of nationality in the light of the provisions of primary and secondary European Union law and the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, which is inherent to the functioning of the internal market and EU citizenship.
The prohibition of discrimination on grounds of nationality is undoubtedly one of the main goals of the European Union[1] in the social and economic context, which was reflected in the localization of the matter in question in the primary law of the European Union[2], in secondary law and in the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). The Treaty on European Union (TEU)[3] and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU)[4] indicate equality as one of the EU values (Article 2 TEU), require it to be promoted and combat all discrimination (Articles 8 and 10 TFEU) and prohibit discrimination due to the criteria indicated therein (Articles 18 and 19 TFEU). In secondary law, this principle was expressed primarily in the Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council No. 492/2011 on the free movement of workers within the Union and in art. 24 of Directive 2004/38/EC 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their relatives to move freely[5].
A special role in this area is played by the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), which stated that all authorities of the Member States are obliged to refuse to apply a provision of national law that is contrary to the prohibition of discrimination on the grounds of citizenship (Article 18 TFEU)[6]. Moreover, national measures may be examined in the light of art. 18 TFEU, but only to the extent that they apply to situations not covered by specific non-discrimination provisions included in the Treaty[7].
The author puts forward the thesis that the analysis of CJEU jurisprudence reveals a visible dissonance between the application of national regulations of the Member States and the provisions of EU law in this matter, which significantly hinders the implementation of the principle of non-discrimination in practice. Discrepancies mainly occur in domestic legal acts due to the improper drafting of national legal provisions and / or their misinterpretation by national judicial or administrative authorities. It should be emphasized that the Member States are obliged to comply with EU law, which is not tantamount only to the obligation of state authorities to respect directly applicable acts, or to implement required regulations into internal law, but also the obligation to interpret and apply internal law in a manner that does not violate the requirement resulting from EU law[8]. Judicial and administrative authorities of the Member States should therefore interpret national law as far as possible, in line with EU law, because the limits of the pro-EU interpretation will be determined by the powers conferred by domestic law[9].
The study uses the legal-comparative method, consisting in a comparative analysis of the legal systems of the Member States and the European Union in the field of non-discrimination on the basis of nationality, rights and restrictions on the freedom of movement of authorized entities. Comparative verification of EU acts with the internal standards of individual EU Member States allows to reveal the degree of advancement of the implementation process of EU law provisions under the free movement of EU citizens and their family members in the discussed area in the legal systems of European Union Member States. The purpose of this analysis is to, inter alia, diagnose areas in which these countries have not implemented or improperly implemented EU regulations, or have misinterpreted them.
The second method used is the method of analyzing the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union - the rulings of the CJEU constitute a significant part of the study. The case law in question covers the period from the establishment of the Treaties of Rome to the present day. The use of the latter obligated the author to apply the comparative method of judgments based on same or similar legal bases in similar circumstances from different stages of the evolution of the free movement of citizens of the European Union and their family members under the prohibition of discrimination on the basis of nationality.
[1] Cf. Olivier De Schutter, Links between migration and discrimination. A legal analysis of the situation in EU Member States (Brussels: European Commission, 2016), 102 and next; See also Brita Sundberg-Weitman, Discrimination on Grounds of Nationality. Free Movement of Workers and Freedom of Establishment under the EEC Treaty (Amsterdam, New York, Oxford: North-Holland Publishing Co., 1977).
[2] Erica Szyszczak, “Antidiscrimination Law in the European Union,” Fordham International Law Journal, no. 32 (2008): 635.
[3] The Treaty on European Union (consolidated version) OJ of the EU 2012, No. C 326/01.
[4] The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (consolidated version) OJ of the EU 2012, No. C 326/01.
[5] Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council No. 2004/38 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No. 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC (O.J.E.C. L 158, 30 April 2004).
[6] CJEU Judgement of 7 May 1998, Clean Car Autoservice GmbH p. Landeshauptmann von Wien, Case C-350/96, ECLI:EU:C:1998:205.
[7] CJEU Judgement of 18 June 2019, Republic of Austria v Federal Republic of Germany, Case C-591/17, ECLI:EU:C:2019:504, pt 41.
[8] Marek Górski, “Wpływ orzecznictwa Europejskiego Trybunału Sprawiedliwości na interpretację i stosowanie przepisów o ochronie środowiska,” in Wspólnotowe prawo ochrony środowiska i jego implementacja w Polsce trzy lata po akcesji, ed. Jerzy Jendrośka and Magdalena Bar (Wrocław: Centrum Prawa Ekologicznego Press, 2008), 31.
[9] Monika Niedźwiedź, “Stosowanie prawa wspólnotowego przez organy administracyjne,” Casus, no. 32 (October 2004): 6.
3
Waddington, Lisa. "9 Article 13 EC: Mere Rhetoric or a Harbinger of Change?" Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies 1 (1998): 175–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.5235/152888712802820981.
Full textAbstract:
Since the signing of the Treaty on European Union in Maastricht in 1992, calls have gradually been increasing for a greater recognition of, and firmer foundation for, fundamental (social) rights within the European Union. These calls naturally became louder following the Opinion of the European Court of Justice excluding the possibility of EC accession to the European Convention of Human Rights and during the lead up to the Amsterdam Intergovernmental Conference. Academics, independent EU Advisory Committees, groups representing the interests of EU citizens and residents and the European Parliament lamented the almost complete absence of fundamental social rights in the Treaty, and called for an ambitious revision of the Treaty. To a large extent these calls went unheard in Amsterdam, and the new Treaty does not incorporate a comprehensive list of social fundamental rights.
4
Waddington, Lisa. "Article 13 EC: Mere Rhetoric or a Harbinger of Change?" Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies 1 (1998): 175–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1528887000001130.
Full textAbstract:
Since the signing of the Treaty on European Union in Maastricht in 1992, calls have gradually been increasing for a greater recognition of, and firmer foundation for, fundamental (social) rights within the European Union. These calls naturally became louder following the Opinion of the European Court of Justice excluding the possibility of EC accession to the European Convention of Human Rights and during the lead up to the Amsterdam Intergovernmental Conference. Academics, independent EU Advisory Committees, groups representing the interests of EU citizens and residents and the European Parliament lamented the almost complete absence of fundamental social rights in the Treaty, and called for an ambitious revision of the Treaty. To a large extent these calls went unheard in Amsterdam, and the new Treaty does not incorporate a comprehensive list of social fundamental rights.
5
van Loock, F., Mike Rowland, T. Grein, and A. Moren. "Intervention epidemiology training: a European perspective." Eurosurveillance 6, no. 3 (March 1, 2001): 37–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.2807/esm.06.03.00218-en.
Full textAbstract:
Within the widening European Union, large-scale movements of people, animals and food-products increasingly contribute to the potential for spread of communicable diseases. The EU was given a mandate for public health action only in 1992, under the Treaty of European Union ("Maastricht Treaty"), which was broadened in the 1997 with the Treaty of Amsterdam. While all EU countries have statutory requirements for notifying communicable diseases, national and regional communicable disease surveillance practices vary considerably (1). The Network Committee (NC) for the Epidemiological Surveillance and Control of Communicable Diseases in the EU was established in 1998 to harmonise these activities.
6
Dashwood, Alan. "Decision-Making at the Summit." Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies 3 (2000): 79–105. http://dx.doi.org/10.5235/152888712802859033.
Full textAbstract:
Various provisions of the Treaty on European Union (“TEU”) and of the EC Treaty specifically require action to be taken, at the definitive stage or at some preparatory or intermediate stage of decision-making, by the European Council, or by the Council of the European Union meeting in the composition of Heads of State or Government (“the HSG Council”); and there is one instance of an appointing power exercisable by an intergovernmental conference at the level of Heads of State or Government (“an HSG Conference”). Reserving a role for the political leaders of the Union in the adoption of particular decisions was an innovation of the TEU, more especially in the Title of the EC Treaty on economic and monetary policy, and further instances have been added by the Treaty of Amsterdam (“TA”) and the Treaty of Nice (“TN”).
7
Dashwood, Alan. "Decision-Making at the Summit." Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies 3 (2000): 79–105. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1528887000003748.
Full textAbstract:
Various provisions of the Treaty on European Union (“TEU”) and of the EC Treaty specifically require action to be taken, at the definitive stage or at some preparatory or intermediate stage of decision-making, by the European Council, or by the Council of the European Union meeting in the composition of Heads of State or Government (“the HSG Council”); and there is one instance of an appointing power exercisable by an intergovernmental conference at the level of Heads of State or Government (“an HSG Conference”). Reserving a role for the political leaders of the Union in the adoption of particular decisions was an innovation of the TEU, more especially in the Title of the EC Treaty on economic and monetary policy, and further instances have been added by the Treaty of Amsterdam (“TA”) and the Treaty of Nice (“TN”).
8
Beqiraj (Mihani), Pranvera. "The Evolution of the Role of the National Parliaments in the Treaties of the Europian Union." European Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies 3, no. 1 (December 1, 2016): 38. http://dx.doi.org/10.26417/ejms.v3i1.p38-43.
Full textAbstract:
This paper elaborates the evolving role of national parliaments in the different stages of the European integration process. The Review begins with the first stage (the foundation of the European Union) where national parliaments showed no or little interest in the matters of Community, and then the impact of Single European Act, following the first changes in the Maastricht Treaty, through the two Declarations attached to it and then the Protocol to the Treaty of Amsterdam. Finally the paper focuses on the changes and innovations presented in the Lisbon Treaty which will enhance the role of national parliaments in the European Union governance. For this purpose, the paper analyzes chronologically the rights that national parliaments had before the Lisbon Treaty and the new role of national parliaments after the Lisbon Treaty came into force.
9
Dashwood, Alan. "European Community Legislative Procedures After Amsterdam." Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies 1 (1998): 25–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1528887000001038.
Full textAbstract:
When it enters into force on 1 May 1999, the Treaty of Amsterdam will bring amendments to, among other things, the legislative process of the European Community. There will be no change as far-reaching as the introduction of the so-called “co-decision procedure” by the Treaty on European Union (TEU), but a genuine attempt is made to streamline the process, to render it more transparent and to enhance democratic accountability. Inevitably, though, not all the changes will be for the better. Two steps forwards and one back is, as ever, the favoured locomotive style of the Union’s constitution-makers.
10
Dir, I. Yu. "Main treaties of the European Union." Uzhhorod National University Herald. Series: Law 3, no. 81 (April 19, 2024): 263–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.24144/2307-3322.2024.81.3.39.
Full textAbstract:
The article summarizes the main treaties of the European Union, which in one way or another had a significant impact on its development. It was found that after the end of the Second World War, European leaders decided to protect themselves by uniting into a community. Thus, the first treaty where six states united to create a common coal and steel market was Paris Treaty, which was signed in 1951. Its purpose was to create interdependence of states in coal and steel, so that one state could no longer mobilize its armed forces without the knowledge of the others. This is one of the few treaties that has expired. The following treaties, which became the basis of the European integration movement in Europe, became the Rome Treaties concluded in 1957. As a result, the European Economic Community and the European Atomic Energy Community were created. Later, in 1965, the Merger Treaty was signed, the main purpose of which was to streamline the work of European institutions. This agreement has also expired. It was also found that the Single European Act of 1986 reformed the work of the EU institutions in the framework of the Alliance’s preparation for the accession of Portugal and Spain, as well as to speed up the decision-making process in preparation for the creation of the single market. In addition, it was analysed that the Maastricht Treaty was concluded in 1992, which established the modern structure of the EU. In addition, the main purpose of this Treaty is to prepare the European Union for the creation of a monetary union, as well as to introduce the elements of a political union (citizenship, common foreign and domestic policy). Another no less important treaty was concluded in 1997, which was called the Amsterdam Treaty. This Treaty was intended to prepare the EU institutions for future enlargement. It was revealed that in 2001, during the signing of the Nice Treaty, the EU member states determined the need to reform the institutions of the European Union for the purpose of their effective functioning after the expansion to 25 states, to review the system of chairmanship in the Council of the EU. In addition, the last treaty, the main goal of which was to make the EU more democratic, more efficient and capable of solving global problems, was the Lisbon Treaty signed in 2007.
11
Benz, Arthur. "The European Union’s Trap of Constitutional Politics: From the Convention Towards the Failure of the Treaty of Lisbon." Constitutional Forum / Forum constitutionnel 17, no. 1, 2 & 3 (July 11, 2011): 2008. http://dx.doi.org/10.21991/c92h3w.
Full textAbstract:
In a national referendum held on 12 June 2008, 53.4 percent of Irish citizens voted “no” to the Treaty of Lisbon. As its provisions require ratification by all member states, the Irish vote marks a further setback for attempts at consti- tutional reform of the European Union (EU). The Lisbon reform treaty, officially entitled the Treaty of Lisbon amending the Treaty on Euro- pean Union and the Treaty establishing the Eu- ropean Community,1 was signed by the prime ministers and presidents of EU member states in December 2007. It was the result of a pro- cess set in motion by the European Council in a meeting held in Laeken, Belgium in December 2001. Intended to make the “ever closer union” more democratic, and to facilitate the adjust- ment of European institutions to the new po- litical situation brought on by the accession to the EU of Central and Eastern European states, the “Laeken Council” issued a declaration trig- gering efforts to constitutionalize the European Union. To this end, a reform process was ini- tiated involving a body called the Convention on the Future of Europe (Convention), made up of European and member state government representatives and parliamentarians.2 This re- form process resulted in the recommendation in 2003 of a draft Treaty Establishing a Constitu- tion for Europe (Constitutional Treaty),3 which was subsequently approved by the Intergovern- mental Conference and the European Council in Rome in October 2004. Despite several mem- ber states ratifying the Constitutional Treaty, it was rejected by popular referenda in France and the Netherlands in the spring of 2005. At that time, and in view of the obvious risks to ratifi- cation in some other member states, the process of constitutionalization ground to a halt.
12
Dashwood, Alan. "3 European Community Legislative Procedures After Amsterdam." Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies 1 (1998): 25–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.5235/152888712802821133.
Full textAbstract:
When it enters into force on 1 May 1999, the Treaty of Amsterdam will bring amendments to, among other things, the legislative process of the European Community. There will be no change as far-reaching as the introduction of the so-called “co-decision procedure” by the Treaty on European Union (TEU), but a genuine attempt is made to streamline the process, to render it more transparent and to enhance democratic accountability. Inevitably, though, not all the changes will be for the better. Two steps forwards and one back is, as ever, the favoured locomotive style of the Union’s constitution-makers.
13
Sultanova, Nigar T. "Perspectives of Further Institutional Development of the EU: High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security and EU Foreign Policy." India Quarterly: A Journal of International Affairs 75, no. 4 (November 27, 2019): 539–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0974928419874552.
Full textAbstract:
Treaty of Lisbon has contributed significantly to the development of the European Union (EU) institutions. It has abolished the EU pillars system and has made crucial changes to the implementation of external policies of the Union. This article tracks the evolution of the post of High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, starting from its introduction by the Amsterdam Treaty, until the reforms introduced by the Treaty of Lisbon, and also analyses the challenges it is facing, on its path to implement its mandate.
14
Ladjevac, Ivona, and Dragan Djukanovic. "The Lisbon Treaty and the principle of subsidiarity." Zbornik Matice srpske za drustvene nauke, no. 135 (2011): 269–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.2298/zmsdn1135069l.
Full textAbstract:
In this article authors focus their attention to one of the key principles of the European Union - the principle of subsidiarity. In introduction they refer to the European Union as a sui generis entity not just speaking in terms of its organizational structure but also in terms of distribution of power within it. In this line they consider the principle of subsidiarity. In the second part of the paper, authors focus their attention to arrangements provided by the Maastricht Treaty - which introduced the principle of subsidiarity, the Amsterdam Treaty, the Draft on the Constitution for Europe and, at last but not at least, to the Lisbon Treaty. Having on mind significant changes introduced by the Lisbon Treaty regarding the principle of subsidiarity, this treaty has a special place.
15
Denza, Eileen. "Two Legal Orders: Divergent or Convergent?" International and Comparative Law Quarterly 48, no. 2 (April 1999): 257–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020589300063193.
Full textAbstract:
The conclusion of the Treaty of Amsterdam and its progress through the ratification procedures of the 15 member States of the European Union provides an occasion to re-examine a familiar question. What is meant by the claim by the European Court of Justice that the European Com-munity Treaties have created “a new legal order of international law”1 or, more radically, “a new legal order”?2 Is EC law to be regarded as a particularly effective system of regional international law, or has it been created as, or mutated into, an entirely new species of law? If there are indeed two legal orders, to what extent are they still capable of cross-fertilisation? What about “European Union law”? Have the Treaty on European Union and now the Treaty of Amsterdam eroded the dichotomy between the two legal orders of public international law and EU law? Is public international law itself taking on some of the characteristics which have made EC law an attractive as well as an effective system for regulating relations between sovereign States? Are the two streams converging?
16
Alves, Luísa Verdelho. "The Lisbon Treaty and the Accession of Turkey to the European Union." Review of Business and Legal Sciences, no. 20 (July 21, 2017): 7. http://dx.doi.org/10.26537/rebules.v0i20.974.
Full textAbstract:
On December 13, 2007, the Member States of the European Union (EU) signed in Lisbon a treaty amending the founding Treaties of the EU. After a troubled ratification process, due to the adverse outcome of a national referendum in Ireland, the Lisbon Treaty finally entered into force on December 1, 2009, defining a new trajectory for the EU integration process. The present article addresses the possible implications of the recent EU treaty reform to the accession of Turkey to the EU. To that end, I propose an analysis of the modifications introduced in the institutional framework of the Union and I inquire whether the legal change at this level is capable of influencing the attitude of the current Member States concerning the accession of Turkey to the EU.
17
Devuyst, Youri. "Treaty reform in the European Union: the Amsterdam process." Journal of European Public Policy 5, no. 4 (December 1998): 615–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13501769880000051.
Full text
18
Kapony, Elisabeth. "Dilemmas about the protection the core values in the European Union." International Journal of Business & Technology 6, no. 1 (November 1, 2017): 1–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.33107/ijbte.2017.6.1.07.
Full textAbstract:
The European integration was primarily about economic cooperation, but the European Union’s role in protecting the core values in its Member States. EU values were first mentioned in the 1992 Maastricht Treaty on European Union, and since the Amsterdam Treaty the community law has a sufficiently precise description of this values, which should be respected not only by countries aspiring to the EU but also by the Member States themselves. The Lisbon Treaty defines EU values; however, nowadays the EU has to face the phenomenon when some government apparently violate these values. In recent years, defiance of core EU principles by the Polish and Hungarian governments is turning into a political debate. The European Commission has taken legal action against both governments, and the European Parliament supports this course. This short paper would like to address what the European institutions can do in these cases. Is the current treaty of the EU effective to address these phenomena?
19
Betlem, Gerrit, and Gerrit Betlem. "European Private Law after the Treaty of Amsterdam." European Review of Private Law 9, Issue 1 (March 1, 2001): 3–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/335681.
Full textAbstract:
The communitarization of the private law of the Member States has been given a significant impetus by the transfer of EC competence regarding judicial cooperation in civil matters from the third to the first pillar of the European Union. That is to say, under a new title of the EC Treaty, a single judicial area will be established; in terms of private law, the fields of private international law is involved to a large extent, whereas the civil procedure of the Member States will be affected to a lesser extent. In particular, the Community is in the process of transforming a number of conventions into secondary EC law, the most important one is the conversion into a Regulation of the Brussels Jurisdiction and Judgement Convention. Although the measures (to be) adopted in this context are 'real' acts of Community law - being based on the EC Treaty rather than the Treaty of European Union, the 'normal' regime for references for preliminary rulings does not apply. A more restricted regime is applicable. Also, the unity of Community law has been fragmented in that the measures are not binding on Denmark (the UK and Ireland are also not bound by acts adopted under this new Title but have opted in insofar as civil law measures are concerned). Harmonisation of substantive private law, unlike the conflicts of law and civil procedure, has not been affected significantly by the Treaty of Amsterdam. Private initiatives such as the Commission of European Contract Law (Lando Commission) are still the primary focus for proposals involving large scale harmonisation of private law, such as a systematic approximation of the whole of the law of obligations or even a European Civil Code.
20
Fennelly, Nial. "The Area of “Freedom, Security and Justice” and the European Court of Justice—a Personal View." International and Comparative Law Quarterly 49, no. 1 (January 2000): 1–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020589300063934.
Full textAbstract:
The Treaty of Amsterdam enshrines in Article 2 (formerly Article B) of the Treaty on European Union under the new Title I called “Common Provisions” (which contains, with some amendments, the provisions of the former Articles A to F) a new objective for the Union, namely:“to maintain and develop the Union as an area of freedom, security and justice in which the free movement of persons is assured in conjunction with appropriate measures with respect to external border controls, asylum, immigration and the prevention and combating of crime.”
21
Ravluševičius, Pavelas. "The primacy and supremacy clauses of European Union Law and their application in the legal order of the Republic of Lithuania." Revista da Faculdade de Direito, Universidade de São Paulo 112 (August 28, 2018): 303–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.11606/issn.2318-8235.v112i0p303-322.
Full textAbstract:
The primacy and supremacy clauses of European Union law (“EU law”) are to one of the most prevalent issues concerning the relationship between EU law and domestic law of the Republic of Lithuania. It seems that such issues were not definitely settled even when the Treaty of Lisbon amending the Treaty on European Union, which established the European Community. During that period, significant changes were made in EU Member States, regarding the domestic application of the principle of primacy and supremacy of EU law. Lithuanian law has undergone the development in this sphere too.The European Court of Justice (“ECJ”) has developed the meaning of the principle of primacy, which means that European Union law should take precedence over the national law (even over constitutional provisions) and, in case of conflicts between EU law and national law, every national court is obliged to apply the European Union law. The comparative analysis of the Lithuanian Constitutional Court case law shows counter development to the ECJ case law, which may cause the jurisdictional collision of setting aside EU law based on constitutional grounds.The paper includes some relevant examples of application of EU law arising from preliminary ruling procedure under Art. 267 of Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union in the praxis of the Lithuanian Constitutional Court and Lithuanian courts of general and special competences.
22
Pratt, Timothy. "11 The Role of National Parliaments in the Making of European Law." Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies 1 (1998): 217–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.5235/152888712802821016.
Full textAbstract:
While the Community Treaties provided the institutional framework for the European Community, much of what now makes up the constitution of the European Union was not provided for in those Treaties, but evolved within that framework. This is certainly true of the role of national parliaments. There is nothing about the role of national parliaments in any of the Treaties concluded prior to the Maastricht Treaty, and even then the references appear not in the body of the Treaty, but only in two Declarations annexed to it, one on the role of national parliaments in the European Union and the other on the Conference of the Parliaments. While the former states that it is important to encourage greater involvement of national parliaments in the activities of the European Union, it gives no indication of what that involvement should be. The Treaty of Amsterdam goes a step further. It includes a protocol on the role of national parliaments. This is important in that, for the first time, it gives substantive treaty recognition to their involvement in European Union activities. But, while it is markedly more supportive than the Maastricht Declarations, it does not confer any specific powers on national parliaments, nor does it attempt to define their functions.
23
Pratt, Timothy. "The Role of National Parliaments in the Making of European Law." Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies 1 (1998): 217–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1528887000001154.
Full textAbstract:
While the Community Treaties provided the institutional framework for the European Community, much of what now makes up the constitution of the European Union was not provided for in those Treaties, but evolved within that framework. This is certainly true of the role of national parliaments. There is nothing about the role of national parliaments in any of the Treaties concluded prior to the Maastricht Treaty, and even then the references appear not in the body of the Treaty, but only in two Declarations annexed to it, one on the role of national parliaments in the European Union and the other on the Conference of the Parliaments. While the former states that it is important to encourage greater involvement of national parliaments in the activities of the European Union, it gives no indication of what that involvement should be. The Treaty of Amsterdam goes a step further. It includes a protocol on the role of national parliaments. This is important in that, for the first time, it gives substantive treaty recognition to their involvement in European Union activities. But, while it is markedly more supportive than the Maastricht Declarations, it does not confer any specific powers on national parliaments, nor does it attempt to define their functions.
24
Newman, Karl, and Eileen Denza. "IV. External Relations." International and Comparative Law Quarterly 48, no. 3 (July 1999): 716–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020589300063569.
Full text
25
Rynkowski, Michał. "Remarks on Art. I-52 of the Constitutional Treaty: New Aspects of the European Ecclesiastical Law?" German Law Journal 6, no. 11 (November 1, 2005): 1719–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s2071832200014644.
Full textAbstract:
The question of churches and religious communities in the EU/EC law arose for the first time in 1997, when Declaration No. 11 on the status of churches and non-confessional organisations was attached to the Amsterdam Treaty. According to this Declaration, “The European Union will respect and does not prejudice the status under national law of churches and religious associations or communities in the Member States. The European Union will equally respect the status of philosophical and non-confessional organisations.” The content of this Declaration was commented on many times by distinguished experts of the European ecclesiastical law. Art. I-52 of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (Constitutional Treaty/CT) repeats in paragraph one and two Declaration No. 11, and introduces in paragraph three a provision on dialogue between the EU and religious bodies: “Recognising their identity and their specific contribution, the Union shall maintain an open, transparent and regular dialogue with these churches and organisations.”
26
Jean, Cynthia. "La citoyenneté européenne : signification et perspectives dans le cadre du traité d'Amsterdam (Note)." Études internationales 28, no. 4 (April 12, 2005): 735–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.7202/703806ar.
Full textAbstract:
Since the objective of the European Union is to be closer to Us citizens, the Treaty of Amsterdam contributes to the development and the significance of the European citizenship. Through a neo-liberal perspective, it strengthens, in both national and community levels, the compromise between democratic values, such as social justice and equity principle, and economic liberalism. While the social dimension of the European citizenship is reinforced, the specific rights provided only to Union's citizens are, however, marginalized. In order to explain this situation, the paper will first present the implications of the European citizenship, and then, analyze the main provisions of the draft treaty related to a stronger relationship between the Union and Us citizens.
27
Lonbay, Jules. "II. Free Movement of Persons." International and Comparative Law Quarterly 50, no. 1 (January 2001): 168–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/iclq/50.1.168.
Full textAbstract:
As mentioned in the previous note1 the Amsterdam Treaty significantly alters the treaty structure as regards the free movement of persons. The EC treaty now has, as one of its formal activities as set out in article 3(1)(d), “measures concerning the entry and movement of persons as provided for in Title IV”. The creation of a new Title IV in the EC Treaty on establishing an area of freedom, security and justice moves a corpus of subject matter2 from the inter-governmental pillar on Justice and Home Affairs to the Treaty of Rome. The aim clearly set out is to establish, within five years, all the measures necessary to create “an area without frontiers” in accordance with Article 143 together with “flanking measures with respect to external board of controls of asylum and immigration” as well as “measures to prevent and combat crime in accordance with the provisions of Article 31 (e) of the Treaty on European Union”.4 Co-operation between the Member States is also to be strengthened and encouraged5 as well as measures in the field of police and judicial co-operation in criminal matters though the latter is in accordance with the provisions of the Treaty on the European Union.6
28
Muszyński, Mariusz. "ŚWIADOMOŚĆ UNORMOWANA. TOŻSAMOŚĆ NARODOWA I TOŻSAMOŚĆ EUROPEJSKA JAKO PRZEDMIOT PRAWA UE." Zeszyty Prawnicze 9, no. 1 (June 25, 2017): 27. http://dx.doi.org/10.21697/zp.2009.9.1.02.
Full textAbstract:
Standardized Awareness. National and European Identity as a Matter of the European Union LawSummarySince the very beginning of the European integration process, the national identity has constituted a problematic issue for the integration as such. The main question was, whether the national identity is an opportunity or an obstacle to the European Union. The national identity constitutes collective awareness – comprising such elements as “material culture” (history, literature, arts, music, folklore), language, spiritual culture (customs, public morality, religion) and legal culture.Initially, the European Union welcomed these distinguished characteristics. The European Union founders believed that for its durability the community needs not only an open economic area but also social diversity. Hence, the Maastricht Treaty establishing the European Union includes an article guaranteeing the national identity of the European Union member states. The obligation to respect the national identity is associated with instruments that are left to the disposal of the member states. In this respect, two groups of treaty provisions are to be distinguished. Some of the existing treaty provisions require that the European Community operate to preserve the national identity (to stimulate, to support and to supplement the member states activities in the field of propagation of culture and history, preservation of national heritage and in non-commercial exchange of literary and art works). Other treaty provisions block Brussels’ (the European Union’s organs) actions against those member states which for the purpose of preserving national identity, infringe the regulations of the European Community.In the Amsterdam Treaty of 1997, its authors introduced a system reconstruction of the ideological foundations of the European Union. Although the national identity has not been replaced with the supranational identity, the new axiological fundament of the united Europe was defined. It should be stressed that the Amsterdam Treaty created so called “European identity” existing parallel to the national identity One of the treaty goals is to transform the national-particularistic way of thinking about the European Union citizens into the “European awareness”. The European Union is obliged not only to support the State Parties’ culture but also to display all of the axiological elements that are common for the entire European continent. Hence, national identity as a sociological value is no more autonomic. The European Union started to create a substrate of the European culture that has gone beyond the simple sum of national’s cultures, which would be the basis for the future European statehood.What remains unanswered is whether the European identity created in such a way poses a threat to the national ties or not. National and European identities are autonomous institutions only on the surface. European standards of human rights protection go far beyond political and economic rights. These standards interfere in customs and traditions and in public morality of nations, trying to find a balance between them. In reality, the danger of such a process is correlated with the nature of the economic integration as well. In the process of creation of the law of the European Union , economic issues are treated with priority. Hence, free trade undermines the protection of works of art, open borders create favourable conditions for the transfer of pornography as well as the trend to re-define the history. Therefore, the authors of the treaties have created a “safety valve” – all of the aforementioned norms which constitute legal instruments of protection of the national values. Hence, the problem consists in their proper use by the member states.
29
Usher, John A. "Flexibility—The Experience So Far." Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies 3 (2000): 479–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.5235/152888712802859079.
Full textAbstract:
The choice of the word “flexibility” in the title of this paper rather than the term “closer co-operation” introduced by the Treaty of Amsterdam is not accidental: since the general Amsterdam provisions on closer co-operation have not so far been used, a paper on the experience of those provisions since their entry into force would be very short—even if they have given rise to an extensive literature. It should nevertheless be remembered that under the terms of the Amsterdam Treaty itself there are situations where those provisions are deemed to have been used: under Article 1 of the Protocol Integrating the Schengen acquis into the Framework of the European Union, Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Greece, Spain, France, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Austria, Portugal, Finland and Sweden, as signatories to the Schengen agreements, are “authorised to establish closer co-operation among themselves” within the scope of those agreements and related provisions; furthermore, under Article 5 of that Protocol, where either Ireland or the United Kingdom or both have not notified the President of the Council in writing within a reasonable period that they wish to take part, “the authorisation referred to in Article 11 of the Treaty establishing the European Community or Article 40 of the Treaty on European Union shall be deemed to have been granted to the Member States referred to in Article 1 and to Ireland or the United Kingdom where either of them wishes to take part in the areas of co-operation in question”.
30
Usher, John A. "Flexibility—The Experience So Far." Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies 3 (2000): 479–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s152888700000389x.
Full textAbstract:
The choice of the word “flexibility” in the title of this paper rather than the term “closer co-operation” introduced by the Treaty of Amsterdam is not accidental: since the general Amsterdam provisions on closer co-operation have not so far been used, a paper on the experience of those provisions since their entry into force would be very short—even if they have given rise to an extensive literature. It should nevertheless be remembered that under the terms of the Amsterdam Treaty itself there are situations where those provisions are deemed to have been used: under Article 1 of the Protocol Integrating the Schengen acquis into the Framework of the European Union, Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Greece, Spain, France, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Austria, Portugal, Finland and Sweden, as signatories to the Schengen agreements, are “authorised to establish closer co-operation among themselves” within the scope of those agreements and related provisions; furthermore, under Article 5 of that Protocol, where either Ireland or the United Kingdom or both have not notified the President of the Council in writing within a reasonable period that they wish to take part, “the authorisation referred to in Article 11 of the Treaty establishing the European Community or Article 40 of the Treaty on European Union shall be deemed to have been granted to the Member States referred to in Article 1 and to Ireland or the United Kingdom where either of them wishes to take part in the areas of co-operation in question”.
31
HOFFMANN, Tomasz. "POLAND AND HER RELATION TO THE EUROPEAN FOREIGN COMMON POLICY AND THE DEFENCE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION." Scientific Journal of the Military University of Land Forces 161, no. 3 (July 1, 2011): 70–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0002.3037.
Full textAbstract:
Together with the effect of the Treaty with Maastricht one called into being II the pillar of the European Union - the Common Foreign Policy and Safeties. In 1999 together with the implementation of the Amsterdam Treaty , one began to initiate European Security policy and Defenses which became define in the Treaty Reforming. Initial Poland was skeptically disposed to that policy, considering that a guarantor of the safety in Europe is NATO. Some time later the optics of the perception EPBiO underwent change. The relation of our country changed to the reference to the foreign policy and the safety into the moment of the obtainment of the membership into the European Union. At present Poland launches out into civil missions and the crisis management led (driven) within the framework of this policy by the European Union. An aim (target) of the present article is presenting of the creature of the Common European Foreign Policy and the Defense. Particularly the author assembled on tracing of history and the change of the relation of Poland to this policy and also to the proof of essential positive elements as and negative aspects of the Common European Foreign Policy and the Defense
32
de Zwaan, Jaap W. "6 Opting In and Opting Out of Rules Concerning the Free Movement of Persons: Problems and Practical Arrangements." Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies 1 (1998): 107–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.5235/152888712802821025.
Full textAbstract:
The opt-ins and opt-outs, which appear at different places in the Amsterdam Treaty where the policy related to movement of persons is concerned, are the result of difficult negotiations concerning the future of the Third Pillar, which was introduced by the Treaty on European Union. More particularly, these arrangements are the result of the discussions on “communautarisation” and the integration of Schengen co-operation in the framework of the European Union. “Communautarisation” concerns the process of transferring substantive matters from the Third Pillar area to the First Pillar area. This process implies, as a result, that proper Community procedures become applicable in these new policy fields.
33
de Zwaan, Jaap W. "Opting In and Opting Out of Rules Concerning the Free Movement of Persons: Problems and Practical Arrangements." Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies 1 (1998): 107–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1528887000001105.
Full textAbstract:
The opt-ins and opt-outs, which appear at different places in the Amsterdam Treaty where the policy related to movement of persons is concerned, are the result of difficult negotiations concerning the future of the Third Pillar, which was introduced by the Treaty on European Union. More particularly, these arrangements are the result of the discussions on “communautarisation” and the integration of Schengen co-operation in the framework of the European Union. “Communautarisation” concerns the process of transferring substantive matters from the Third Pillar area to the First Pillar area. This process implies, as a result, that proper Community procedures become applicable in these new policy fields.
34
Bozhko, Volodymyr, Inna Kulchii, and Volodymyr Zadorozhnyy. "Comparative legal analysis of the Directive 2019/1152 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on transparent and predictable working conditions in the European Union with the current labour law of all its Member States." SHS Web of Conferences 85 (2020): 01005. http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20208501005.
Full textAbstract:
The article deals with the comparative legal research of the current labour legislation of each of the 28 EU member states with the Directive 2019/1152 of 20 June 2019 on transparent and predictable working conditions in the European Union. The relevance of the research topic is because after the adoption of Council Directive 91/533/EEC in the EU, a number of acts of primary and secondary legislation were adopted that significantly change the content and scope of labour rights of workers. These are, in particular, The Maastricht Treaty, The Treaty of Amsterdam, The Treaty of Nice and the Treaty of Lisbon. Furthermore, on December 7, 2000, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union was signed, and on December 17, 2017, The European Parliament, the Council and the Commission solemnly proclaimed the European Pillar of Social Rights. As a result, collisions arose between the above Acts and Directive 91/533/EEC, which required the adoption of a new Directive 2019/1152 and a comparative legal analysis of this Directive with the current labour legislation of each of the 28 EU member states.
35
Vasilkov, Zorančo, and Dragana B. Lazić. "Development of criminal jurisdiction of the European Union." Juridical Analytical Journal 16, no. 1 (November 13, 2021): 7–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.18287/1810-4088-2021-16-1-7-14.
Full textAbstract:
The criminal jurisdictions of the European Community and subsequently the European Union began to develop as subsidiary competencies aimed at protecting economic and industry policies established by the founding treaties. Their development has pointed to the necessity of using forced measures for the preventing abuse and countering criminal activities in the area of the customs union and the common market. This paper presents the gradual transfer of limited criminal jurisdictions from the jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice and communitarian law into the contractual competences of the European Union with an explicit legal basis after the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon. Using the teleological method, the method of the content analysis (of the legal norms) and the comparative method the paper emphasizes examples of using criminal jurisdictions within the framework of communitarian law, the delimitation of competencies between the EU and the EC, and the changes made by the Treaty of Lisbon in relation to the EU Treaty of Amsterdam. Amendments to the founding treaties have set the foundations for developing criminal jurisdictions into the supranational criminal law that through its norms would supplement national criminal justice systems in the areas of substantive criminal law and the law of criminal procedure.
36
Pacian, Anna. "Public Health in the Health Care System." Gubernaculum et Administratio 27, no. 1 (2023): 79–89. http://dx.doi.org/10.16926/gea.2023.01.04.
Full textAbstract:
Public health encompasses a wide range of activities related to almost all aspects of the society’s health. Public health influences the shape of social and health policy of the state, and cooperates with all socio-economic sectors and social organizations. The goal of public health is to reduce morbidity rate, premature deaths and conditions leading to suffering and disability. Public health activities in the European Union are determined by specific regulations which include: the Treaty of Maastricht, the Treaty of Amsterdam and the Treaty of Lisbon. The Directorate-General for Health and Consumer Protection is responsible for the implementation of health policy in the European Union. Other institutions include: Executive Agency for Health and Consumers (EAHC), European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA), European Medicines Eval uation Agency (EMEA), European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), European Environment Agency (EEA), European Agency for Safety and Health at Work (EU – OSHA), European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC). The European Union plays a significant role in the organization and functioning of health care systems in the Member States. The activities of the European Union determine the directions of cooperation in health services, aimed at the creation of supranational, highly specialized centres focusing on rare medical concerns and problems that require very specific and expensive medical procedures.
37
Tsebelis, George, and Geoffrey Garrett. "The Institutional Foundations of Intergovernmentalism and Supranationalism in the European Union." International Organization 55, no. 2 (2001): 357–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/00208180151140603.
Full textAbstract:
We present a unified model of the politics of the European Union (EU). We focus on the effects of the EU's changing treaty base (from the Rome to Amsterdam Treaties) on the relations among its three supranational institutions—the Commission of the European Communities, the European Court of Justice, and the European Parliament—and between these actors and the intergovernmental Council of Ministers. We analyze these institutional interactions in terms of the interrelationships among the three core functions of the modern state: to legislate and formulate policy (legislative branch), to administer and implement policy (executive branch), and to interpret policy and adjudicate disputes (judicial branch). Our analysis demonstrates that the evolution of the EU's political system has not always been linear. For example, we explain why the Court's influence was greatest before the passage of the Single European Act and declined in the following decade, and why we expect it to increase again in the aftermath of the Amsterdam Treaty. We also explain why the Commission became a powerful legislative agenda setter after the Single European Act and why its power today stems more from administrative discretion than from influence over legislation.
38
Zmykalo, O. I. "Experience of legal regulation of copyright in the European Union: search for ways to harmonize the legislation of Ukraine." Analytical and Comparative Jurisprudence, no. 6 (February 18, 2023): 83–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.24144/2788-6018.2022.06.15.
Full textAbstract:
This article reveals the peculiarity of the legal regulation of copyright as a component of intellectual property in the legal system of the European Union, primarily through the prism of the study of the stages of its formation and development.
Within the framework of this article, the stages of formation and development of the copyright institution from the time of the founding of the European Economic Community to the present time were investigated. Important attention is paid to the study of copyright regulation in the provisions of the founding treaties of the European Union, in particular in the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, the Treaty on the European Union (Maastricht Treaty), the Treaty of Amsterdam, the Treaty of Nice, the Treaty of Lisbon and the sources of "secondary law" of the European Union, in particular, directives, regulations, decisions of the European Parliament and the Council on the harmonization of intellectual property rights of the member states of the European Union.
The position is argued, according to which at the initial stages of the formation of the legal system of the European Union in terms of the legal regulation of copyright, an approach was used, according to which the legal acts did not establish direct requirements for its legal regulation and instead established provisions that would contribute to the formation of the functioning of the common market of the European Union. It is noted that parallel to the "primary sources" of the European Union, the sources of "secondary law" were formed. It was noted that a special place in the legal regulation of copyright in the European Union was played by the directives, which, being binding on the member states to which they were addressed, left the freedom of choice of the form and methods of their implementation to the national bodies of the latter.
In order to achieve the goal, the author used the methods characteristic of legal science. The research was conducted primarily using the historical-legal, comparative-legal, formal-legal method and the dialectical method of learning legal reality.
On the basis of the conducted research, the author comes to the conclusion that the law of the European Union is characterized by a rather exhaustive list of sources, their hierarchy, as a result of which this law is well organized, systematized and internally agreed. It was established that the formation of European intellectual property rights took place on the one hand under the influence of international law, and on the other hand, the peculiarities of the legal regulation of copyright in the member states.
39
Heffernan, Liz. "The Community Courts Post-Nice: A European Certiorari Revisited." International and Comparative Law Quarterly 52, no. 4 (October 2003): 907–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/iclq/52.4.907.
Full textAbstract:
In December 2000 the European heads of government, gathered at Nice, took several important steps in the constitutional development of the European Union. Chief among them are the various provisions in the Treaty of Nice1 disposing of the so-called ‘Amsterdam leftovers’, ie, those issues of institutional reform left unresolved by the Treaty of Amsterdam. The central focus of IGC 2000, and of the publicity surrounding its negotiations, was reform of the political institutions, notably the Commission and the Council, in preparation for enlargement. Reform of the Community courts was a less conspicuous but, ultimately, no less important item on the agenda. In the case of the judicial branch, the new provisions are inspired in large part by the well-publicised need to remedy overburdened dockets and the attendant inefficiencies in the administration of justice in Luxembourg.2
40
Kaveshnikov, N., and A. Domanov. "Factors Behind Legislative Duration in the European Union." International Trends / Mezhdunarodnye protsessy 20, no. 1 (2022): 80–108. http://dx.doi.org/10.17994/it.2022.20.1.68.3.
Full textAbstract:
This article investigates the impact of various institutional factors on the duration of legislative process negotiations in the European Union. The empirical data consists of EU secondary law directives adopted in 1990-2019 (1124 directives). We use the methodology of survival analysis (Cox model). We detected that after 2004 the rules of voting in the Council (unanimity or qualified majority) do not affect the duration of the legislative process; this conclusion changes the traditional vision of the functioning of the Council. We prove that of all the EU enlargements, only that of 1995 has influenced the legislative process and slowed it down. Other EU enlargements, including one in 2004 when 10 CEE countries joined the EU, did not show a significant impact. We demonstrate that of all basic treaty reforms that have taken place since 1990 only the Amsterdam Treaty has accelerated the decision-making process. In addition, we conclude that the Interinstitutional Agreement of 2007 between the Council and the European Parliament had a stronger impact on the legislative process than most treaty reforms. It favoured the acceleration of decision-making by consolidating cooperative practices between EU institutions based on trilogues. Besides, the study confirms some previous conclusions tested on the new dataset: more active involvement of the European Parliament in the legislative process (ordinary legislative procedure), the novelty and complexity of the act slow down the decision-making process.
41
Galily, Daniel. "Philosophy of Law or Philosophy of Reason –The Idea of a Treaty Establishing a Constitution for the European Union." Athens Journal of Philosophy 2, no. 3 (September 14, 2023): 211–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.30958/ajphil.2-3-4.
Full textAbstract:
The main purpose of the study is to analyze the feasibility and necessity of an EU Constitution. Briefly, the history of the draft constitution is as follows: The draft treaty aims to codify the two main treaties of the European Union - the Treaty of Rome of 1957 and the Treaty of Maastricht of 1992, as amended by the Treaty of Amsterdam (1997) and the Treaty of Nice (2001). The debate on the future of Europe is believed to have begun with a speech by German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer in Berlin in 2000. The process began after the Laeken Declaration, when the European Convention was set up, chaired by former French President Valerie Giscard d'Estaing, with the aim of drafting a constitution. The draft contract was published in July 2003. After lengthy discussions and debates over the proposal for qualified majority voting, the final text was approved in June 2004 and signed by representatives of the Member States on 29 October 2004. The failure of the treaty in France and the Netherlands is a serious blow to the European Union because these two countries are considered to be loyal supporters of the European project. The text of the treaty was subsequently rewritten by the Amato Group, officially the Active Committee on European Democracy (ACED), a group of high-ranking European politicians. During the German presidency of the Union, a new treaty was proposed - the Treaty of Lisbon - to replace the original draft of the Constitution. On 12 June 2008, the Lisbon Treaty was also rejected in a referendum in Ireland. But if we want to look beyond history, we can ask - Why does the EU need a Constitution and how can the Constitution be the roadmap to an advanced future for the EU? The answers to this question can be found by analyzing several directions (these are the main points of the article): historical reflexivity; socio-cultural analysis of the philosophical concepts of well-known political and social philosophers such as Immanuel Kant, John Locke; the modern constellation through the prism of Jürgen Habermas and the decision to make a text as a Constitution which its aim is to reach the starting point of an entire community like the EU. Keywords: constitution, EU, philosophy, law, John Locke, Immanuel Kant, Jurgen Habermas
42
Mindus, Patricia. "Dimensions of Citizenship." German Law Journal 15, no. 5 (August 1, 2014): 735–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s2071832200019118.
Full textAbstract:
The Maastricht Treaty (the “Treaty”) first introduced the status of EU citizenship. The twentieth anniversary of the signing of the Treaty, marked in 2013, was declared the European Year of the Citizen. Union citizenship has been understood as the world's first post-national citizenship, although it is still complementary to national citizenships. EU citizens enjoy rights that have been expanded, modified, and reinterpreted in light of the EU integration process. The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has been a driving force in this process. This twentieth anniversary has provided theoccasiofor this special issue. Indeed, much has happened over the last two decades. The Maastricht Treaty entered into force on the heels of German reunification, and afterwards, a series of EU treaties followed: The Amsterdam Treaty, the Nice Charter of Fundamental Rights, the aborted constitutionalization process and the Rome Treaty in 2004, and the Treaty of Lisbon. The Euro took over former national currencies in 2002; the enlargement process led to today's twenty-eight Member States. But theratioof this special issue is based on other events as linked to the 2008 financial crisis, bailouts, the fiscal compact, and similar measures. In a nutshell, the timeliness of this volume is linked to the current financial disarray. Since prognosis presupposes diagnosis, no further words are necessary as to the importance of this task. It is (almost) self-evident that before taking action and preparing for the future, one needs to address the very first question:Nosce te ipsumor know thyself. Union citizens need to take a step back and ask what they need to be and who they want to become.
43
McMahon, Joe, and Eileen Denza. "II. External Relations." International and Comparative Law Quarterly 51, no. 4 (October 2002): 990–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/iclq/51.4.990.
Full textAbstract:
The last account of developments in the external relations of the European Union, described how the Treaty of Amsterdam, which had just entered into force, had reformed the Common Foreign and Security Policy. Three years on one can begin to assess the impact of these changes.
44
Juc, Victor, Maria Diacon, and Anastasia Catan. "Legal support for the functioning of the European Union." Vector European, no. 2 (November 2021): 27–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.52507/2345-1106.2021-2.06.
Full textAbstract:
The study represents the analysis of the legal support for the creation and functioning of the European Union and offers the possibility to know its structure, contributing to the definition and understanding of the objectives of the Maastricht and Amsterdam Treaties on the organization and functioning of the European Union. Nice and the Convention on the Future of Europe and providing information on the new system of organization and functioning of the Union in the light of the provisions of the Treaty of Lisbon.
45
Schuck, Martin. "Verwirklichungsformen der Religionsfreiheit in Europa." Zeitschrift für Evangelische Ethik 46, no. 1 (February 1, 2002): 270–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.14315/zee-2002-0144.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract The article describes the different systems of religious right in the European Union as a result of the different historical developments in the European countries. ln the declaration of the Amsterdam- Treaty of 1997 was fixed, that the European Union respects the status, churches and ideological communities take within the member states. At the perspective of the churches this guarantee of continued existence is important, but it is not enough to realize full individual and institutional freedom of religion.
46
Hug, Simon, and Thomas König. "In View of Ratification: Governmental Preferences and Domestic Constraints at the Amsterdam Intergovernmental Conference." International Organization 56, no. 2 (2002): 447–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/002081802320005531.
Full textAbstract:
The bargaining product of the Amsterdam Intergovernmental Conference—the Amsterdam Treaty—dwindled down the draft proposal to a consensus set of all fifteen member states of the European Union (EU). Using the two-level concept of international bargains, we provide a thorough analysis of how this consensus set was reached by issue subtraction with respect to domestic ratification constraints. Drawing on data sets covering the positions of all negotiating actors and ratifying national political parties, we first highlight the differences in the Amsterdam ratification procedures in the fifteen member states of the EU. This analysis allows us to compare the varying ratification difficulties in each country. Second, our empirical analysis of the treaty negotiations shows that member states excluded half of the Amsterdam bargaining issues to secure a smooth ratification. Because member states with higher domestic ratification constraints performed better in eliminating uncomfortable issues at the Amsterdam Intergovernmental Conference, issue subtraction can be explained by the extent to which the negotiators were constrained by domestic interests.
47
Simpson, Gerald. "Asylum and Immigration in the European Union after the Treaty of Amsterdam." European Public Law 5, Issue 1 (March 1, 1999): 91–124. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/euro1999009.
Full text
48
CEBECİ, Münevver, Rana İZCİ, and Yonca KAYA ÖZER. "THE AMSTERDAM TREATY TH EUROPEAN UNION ON THE EVE OF 21st CENTURY." Marmara Üniversitesi Avrupa Topluluğu Enstitüsü Avrupa Araştırmaları Dergisi 2, no. 2 (1998): 73–177. http://dx.doi.org/10.29228/mjes.403.
Full text
49
Cuc, Nguyen Thi Kim. "Fundamental Rights in the AFSJ: Strenthening or impediment?" Pécs journal of international and European law, no. I (June 25, 2024): 71–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.15170/pjiel.2024.1.5.
Full textAbstract:
The Area of Freedom, Security and Justice was created with the entry into force of the 1997 Amsterdam Treaty. This Area, ten years later, has been improved when the 2007 Lisbon Treaty amended the Treaty Establishing the European Community and renamed it the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. The Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ) is an extensive field of law covering many policies and there is hence an increased risk for fundamen- tal rights violations. To describe the relevance of the protection of fundamen- tal rights within this Area as well as evaluate the effectiveness of fundamental rights, by using the polemic-critical method and analytical-logical method, this paper will focus on the scope of fundamental rights in some of the EU human rights instruments and the scope of these rights and freedoms in the AFSJ. As a result, this paper will answer the question related to the strengthening or imped- iment of fundamental rights as well as the balance between personal rights and collective interests such as security.
50
Garry, Hannah R. "Harmonisation of Asylum Law and Policy within the European Union: A Human Rights Perspective." Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights 20, no. 2 (June 2002): 163–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/016934410202000202.
Full textAbstract:
From 1986 to the present, there has been a dramatic increase in the numbers of asylum applications within the borders of the European Union largely from Eastern European countries and former colonies in Africa, Asia and the Middle East. Reacting to the influxes of the 1980s, European States began to implement and coordinate policies to control entry of asylum seekers. Within this climate, the EU has moved towards harmonisation of asylum policy and procedure as necessary for its pursuit of an ‘area of freedom, security and justice’ without internal borders for the purpose of greater economic and political integration. In light of the current restrictive attitudes and practice towards asylum seekers in the individual Member States of the EU, the harmonisation of asylum policy through the institutions and law of the EU may prove to be problematic from a human rights perspective. This paper first traces the development of a common asylum policy within the EU through the Maastricht Treaty and the Amsterdam Treaty. Second, this paper analyses the implications of harmonisation after the Amsterdam Treaty with reference to the international obligations of the Member States under international human rights and refugee law. Third, this paper critiques the development of various current asylum policies and practice through intergovernmental development of ‘soft law’. Through this overview and analysis, it is argued that further steps towards harmonisation will continue to reflect European concerns with security, economic prosperity, and cultural homogeneity unless the moves towards supranationalism within the EU framework lead to a deliberate effort to make respect for human rights the core of asylum law and policy.