Добірка наукової літератури з теми "Dimension supranationale"

La constitutionnalisation du droit au respect de la vie privée a trouvé sa place progressivement, mais avec l’avènement du numérique de nouvelles problématiques se sont imposées. La société est en pleine mutation depuis quelques décennies déjà, et même si l’indéniable efficacité des technologies modernes se montre séduisante, les évolutions sont très rapides et le droit ne peut intervenir qu’à retardement. Dans ce contexte et face à l’hégémonie du numérique, nous devons nous interroger sur la réalité des libertés individuelles et des droits fondamentaux. La vie privée est bousculée par les nouvelles pratiques mises en œuvre. Ces problématiques sont incontournables, quels que soient les enjeux mondiaux, aussi bien sécuritaires, économiques que politiques. Il est nécessaire d’analyser comment le Conseil constitutionnel se positionne afin de parvenir à mieux identifier ses limites. Dans notre réalité numérique, comment l’indispensable protection du Conseil constitutionnel peut-elle paraître lacunaire en matière de droit au respect de la vie privée ? Cette thèse a pour objet de démontrer que dans un monde en constante évolution technologique, les trois thèmes de l’étude ne sauraient être dissociés : le droit au respect de la vie privée, à l’instar des libertés individuelles qui priment, le numérique qui se rend indispensable et la cour constitutionnelle pour garantir le bon fonctionnement et la gestion de ces notions qui pourraient facilement devenir antagonistes. Nous identifierons les objectifs constitutionnels opposables au droit au respect de la vie privée ainsi que les garanties qui conditionnent la conciliation de ce droit avec les objectifs législatifs. Nous allons estimer pour notre étude que la vie privée dans le monde virtuel du numérique présente deux facettes dont le Conseil constitutionnel tente de se montrer garant : d’une part celle qui préserve notre relation avec autrui et d’autre part celle qui se rapporte directement à la personne.Il est important de garder l’esprit critique sur l’utilisation qui est faite des données personnelles de chacun d’entre nous. Avec le numérique, la protection de la vie privée doit nécessairement être analysée au-delà des frontières de notre pays. Pour analyser les dangers qui menacent celle-ci, il est intéressant de se pencher sur l’étude des décisions du Conseil constitutionnel afin de pouvoir comparer la jurisprudence et la législation française à celles d’autres pays. Les outils numériques, par leur capacité à impacter de très nombreux aspects de nos vies, réduisent considérablement les limites spatio-temporelles, qui semblent de plus en plus désuètes. Le réseau numérique a la capacité de relier les personnes de manière virtuelle aux quatre coins du monde. Ainsi, la protection constitutionnelle s’inscrit aujourd’hui dans un tout autre contexte dans la mesure où l’exercice de nos libertés et de nos droits, comme la vie privée, a inévitablement une dimension supranationale<br>The constitutionalisation of the right to privacy has progressively found its place, but with the advent of digital technology, new issues have emerged. Our society has undergone major changes over the last few decades, and even though modern technologies are very attractive due to their undeniable efficiency, they are evolving very fast and the law can thus only intervene too late.In this context and with regard to the supremacy of digital technology, we must question the reality of individual freedoms and fundamental rights. Privacy is shaken up by new practices. These issues are inescapable whatever the global challenges be they security, economic or political ones. It is necessary to analyse how the constitutional Council positions itself in order to better identify its limits. In our digital age, how can the much needed protection of the constitutional Council appear as inadequate as regards the right to privacy ?The purpose of this thesis is to demonstrate that in an ever-evolving technological world, the three themes studied here are inextricably linked: the right to privacy, as with individual freedoms which prevail, digital technology which makes itself indispensable and the constitutional court to guarantee the proper functioning and the management of these notions which could easily become antagonistic. We will identify the constitutional objectives which can be opposed to the right to privacy as well as the guarantees which determine the conciliation of this right with legislative objectives. In our study, we will consider that privacy in the digital virtual world has two sides that the constitutional Council is attempting to guarantee: on the one hand, protecting our relationship with others and on the other hand protecting the individual.It is important to remain critical of the use made of our personal data. With digital technology, the protection of privacy must unquestionably be analysed beyond our national borders. To analyse the dangers which threatens it, it is interesting to look at the study of the constitutional Council decisions in order to be able to compare case law and French legislation to those of other countries. Digital tools, due to their possible impacts on many aspects of our lives, considerably reduce spatial and temporal boundaries, which increasingly appear as obsolete. The digital network can virtually connect people all over the world. Therefore, constitutional protection is today part of a very different context insofar as exercising our freedoms and rights, such as privacy, inevitably has a supranational dimension

There is an increasing recognition of the international presence and regulatory influence of the EU in competition policy. Despite a scholarly focus on its international dimension, the issue of nationality-based (non-) discrimination has insufficiently been investigated in the existing literature on EU competition policy. Thus, this research aims to fill this gap in the literature by examining whether the EU internally and externally utilizes its competition rules for the objective of promoting (potential) national and European champions, while disadvantaging non-EU based companies operating inside and outside the European internal market. Empirical findings validate two hypotheses of this research: that the supranational institutional setting of the EU in competition policy constrains the ability of member states to use their competition policies for neomercantilist, and even for protectionist purposes; and that the institutional setup assures nationality-blind enforcement by EU competition regulators, even vis-à-vis non-EU based companies. The research also identifies key systemic factors which either constrain or empower the EU as a regulatory power in the competition policy domain. The empirical analysis draws on both quantitative data and in-depth studies of recent major cases. Most cases are from the period between September 1990 and August 2015, involving American and Japanese companies, which have a strong presence in European economies.EU competition policy is highly supranational and has a distinctive goal of market integration. In order to understand better how these features shape EU competition policy, this research proposes an original model of ‘stringent competition policy’, drawing on the theory of regulatory states. This model is more useful than the essentially neomercantilist model of strategic competition policy in explaining the EU’s enforcement without regard to the nationality of firms. Internally, the supranational institutional setting significantly constrains the ability of the member states to utilize their competition policies for neomercantilist and protectionist purposes. Regarding external consequences of this policy, the EU stringently enforces its competition rules regardless the nationality of firms involved in law infringements, though some cases involving non-EU firms were highly politicized and contested. To ensure that its stringent competition policy does not deteriorate the international competitiveness of European firms, the EU has been promoting competition policy externally, especially since the 1990s. However, the EU’s ability to play a leadership role in global multilateral fora is limited, despite its dedication and ambitions. This is because the EU’s regulatory power is fundamentally constrained by systemic factors such as a sharp increase in the number and heterogeneity of competition policies around the world, the deadlock of WTO negotiations on world competition law, and the emergence of transgovernmental networks such as the ICN. At the same time, these systemic factors have created the demand of younger competition authorities for reference points, if not models, and this opened up a window of opportunity for the EU to promote its competition policy rules and norms more extensively in third states. Overall, this research contributes to the EU competition policy literature by firmly placing it in a wider debate on competition and/versus competitiveness in the study of global political economy.<br>Doctorat en Sciences politiques et sociales<br>info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished

This book continues the collaboration between the department of BioLaw of the University of Florence and the non-profit association Madre Provetta, to contribute to a project of study and research that can build towards a common European law on Bioethics. In view of the professional activity in which they are engaged, the authors are among the leading experts in their respective fields on the issues addressed. Biotechnologies have rendered both birth and death more complex, which explains why the approach must be multidisciplinary. In effect, the research ranges from the medical and scientific sphere to the fields of law, sociology and philosophy and through to the institutional dimension. The leitmotif is the responsibility and self-determination of the individual: an anthology addressing issues concerning the beginning and the end of life. Particular focus is placed on the aspect of legal update in the light of recent case law, which is increasingly called upon, on the one hand to lend support to the legislator, and on the other to adapt national legislation to the rules and principles emerging from the supranational and European institutions.

The first inclusive collection to examine post-2008 developments in Balkan cinema, this book brings together a number of international scholars working within and beyond the region to explore its industrial contexts and textual dimensions. Exploring both mainstream and arthouse cinemas, the authors identify patterns, trends and common characteristics in the subject matter and aesthetics of films produced and distributed since the global economic crisis. With a focus on transnational links, global networks and cross-cultural exchanges, the book addresses the role of national and supranational institutions as well as film festival networks in supporting film production, distribution and reception. Through critical and comprehensive profiles of the cinematic output in each Balkan country, and with an equal focus on smaller and underrepresented cinemas from Montenegro, Kosovo, North Macedonia and Albania, the collection argues for the continuing relevance of the concept of ‘Balkan cinema’. This study conceptualizes Contemporary Balkan Cinema as a hybrid, trans-national encounter that offers multifarious responses to political and social challenges in the region: gravitation and/or disillusionment toward the European Union; migration; political and social instability; and economic recession.

The establishment, consolidation, and transformation of EU institutions—in short, EU institutional politics—is the subject of this book. This chapter asks how the different institutions surveyed are situated along the five dimensions of EU institutional politics: (1) intergovernmental vs supranational; (2) international vs transnational; (3) separate vs fused; (4) followers vs leaders; and (5) legitimate vs contested. We show that while tension between supranational and intergovernmental bodies remains a key dimension of EU institutional politics, the four other institutional dimensions have become more pronounced, especially as the crises facing European integration have become more salient over the past twenty years. These crises have not had a homogenous or unidirectional effect on EU institutional politics. The chapter also looks to the future of EU institutions, including institutional tensions over EU–UK relations after Brexit and the Conference on the Future of Europe.

This chapter highlights how nationalisms vary instead of being one-dimensional. National or supranational identities tend to affect behavior, foreign policy attitudes, and the norms they operate. The chapter clarifies how the title will simply explain which nationalisms support conflict and which supranationalisms promote cooperation. It clarifies the conceptualization that nationalism has two dimensions: the strength of nationalist identity and the norms defining a nationalist. Conceptualizing nationalism as a social identity allows the synthesis of insights from other disciplinary factors and psychological micro-foundations for studying nationalism in international politics. However, nationalisms tend to instil a sense of moral superiority when people start comparing social groups.

The Economic Monetary Union (EMU) has been famously portrayed as a ‘metaphor for the European Union’, involving high stakes for the integration process as a whole. Since its origins, the creation of the EMU was an eminently political project, with a direct bearing on the prospects of the European Union (EU) as a polity, its social model, and its constitutional identity. Yet, the main political aspects of the project were mostly discarded in the process that led to the establishment of the EMU’s institutional structure and its substantive rules. The creation of the common currency was not accompanied by the establishment of supranational institutions with a strong political mandate to accommodate conflicting interests, while the exercise of political autonomy at national level has been increasingly seen as a potential danger for the stability of the whole edifice. The crisis and the ensuing reform of the European economic governance consolidated the technocratic character of the EMU architecture and hardened its grip on national political processes.

The European Union (EU) cannot be understood without reference to its institutions. But scholars differ on the questions of what precisely EU institutions are, what they do, and why they matter. This chapter defines EU institutions as decision-making bodies. It refers to the notion of EU institutional politics as the sphere of informal and formal rules, norms, procedures, and practices that shape such decision-making. The chapter explores how different theoretical traditions—international relations, integration theory, new institutionalism, the separation of powers, governance, public policy and administration approaches, and critical perspectives—think about EU institutions. Drawing on these traditions, this chapter encourages readers to think about EU institutions along five dimensions: intergovernmental versus supranational, international versus transnational, separated versus fused power, leaders versus followers, and contested versus legitimate. Seeing how the Union’s decision-making bodies move within and between these dimensions offers a deeper understanding of why EU institutions matter.

In the post-global economic and financial crisis, Europe is suffering from significantly low levels of investment. This applies both to national level in the individual Member States and to those with a supranational scope. For this reason, the EC tried to stimulate the development of any investment initiative through the Juncker Plan, which is based on three pillars: the European Fund for Strategic Investments, the European Investment Advisory Center and the European Investment Projects Portal, and third, improving the business environment by removing regulatory barriers to investment at national and European level. Policies in this direction will continue and build on over the period 2021-2027 through the InvestEU program, which aims to continue to support increased investment, innovation and job creation in Europe. The process of implementation of each such initiative directly affects the individual legal and natural persons as investors who enter different bond relations, which have both national and international dimension. The development of new investment products and instruments would be unthinkable without the Bank’s involvement as a major creditor in the implementation of investment projects. This fact shows that it is necessary to examine the legal guarantees for the protection of creditors in these relationships in case of possible threat the debtor to damage the creditor in case of unfavourable development of the respective investment initiative. This paper will justify the significance and the peculiarities of Paul’s claim as a means of protecting creditors in the context of a developing EU investment environment and its legal framework. This method of preventing the decline of the asset and / or the increase of the liability of the debtor’s property is characterized by extreme persistence over time as a legal institution that originated in the Roman era and has survived to the present without losing its significance.

Short-term rentals mediated by digital platforms have positive and negative impacts that are unevenly distributed among socio-economic groups and places. Detrimental impacts on the housing market and quality of life of long-term residents have been particular contentious in some cities. • In the 12 cities studied in the report (Amsterdam, Barcelona, Berlin, Brussels, Lisbon, London, Madrid, Milan, Paris, Prague, Rome and Vienna), city governments have responded differently to the growth of short-term rentals. • The emerging local regulations of short-term rentals take multiple forms and exhibit various degrees of stringency, ranging from rare cases of laissez-faire to a few cases of partial prohibition or strict quantitative control. Most city governments have sought to find a middle-ground approach that differentiates between the professional rental of whole units and the occasional rental of one’s home/ primary residence. • The regulation of short-term rentals is contentious and highly politicised. Six broad categories of interest groups and non-state actors actively participate in the debates with contrasting positions: advocates of the ‘sharing’ or ‘collaborative’ economy; corporate platforms; professional organisatons of short-term rental operators; new associations of hosts or ‘home-sharers’; the hotel and hospitality industry; and residents’ associations/citizens’ movements. • All city governments face difficulties in implementing and enforcing the regulations, due to a lack of sufficient resources and to the absence of accurate and comprehensive data on individual hosts. That data is held by corporate platforms, which have generally not accepted to release it (with a few exceptions) nor to monitor the content of their listings against local rules. • The relationships between platforms and city governments have oscillated between collaboration and conflict. Effective implementation is impossible without the cooperation of platforms. • In the context of the European Union, the debate has taken a supranational dimension, as two pieces of EU law frame the possibility — and acceptable forms — of regulation of online platforms and of short-term rentals in EU member states: the 2000 E-Commerce Directive and the 2006 Services Directive. • For regulation to be effective, the EU legal framework should be revised to ensure platform account- ability and data disclosure. This would allow city (and other ti ers of) governments to effectively enforce the regulations that they deem appropriate. • Besides, national and regional governments, who often control the legislative framework that defines particular types of short-term rentals, need to give local governments the necessary tools to be able to exercise their ‘right to regulate’ in the name of public interest objectives.