scholarly journals The Netherlands

2020 ◽  
pp. 73-87
Author(s):  
Nina Amelung ◽  
Rafaela Granja ◽  
Helena Machado
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Practical Application ◽  
Member States ◽  
Effective Implementation ◽  
Track Record ◽  
Dna Database ◽  
Genetic Technologies ◽  
Technical Framework ◽  
The Eu

Abstract The Netherlands’ DNA database was legally established in 1994 and became operational in 1997. It represents one of the mid-sized databases in the EU. The Netherlands has a track record of ‘innovation’ regarding the regulation and practical application of genetic technologies for forensic purposes. The Netherlands was involved with the Prüm regime from its beginnings in 2005. In terms of bordering practices, the country serves as an exemplary case of an expansive and diffusive mode of debordering. This positioning derives from the fact that the Netherlands has been a front-runner in building and implementing the technical framework for Prüm in its most expansive form; it is currently one of the most active countries in the Prüm regime. In addition, the Netherlands has also proactively trained other Member States, guiding them towards effective implementation and thus diffusing the expansive mode of debordering.

Age Equality after the Employment Directive

2003 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen Meenan
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Age Discrimination ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Life Course Approach ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Eu

This article examines the Employment Directive from the age perspective and endorses a life course approach to ageing. It explores the permitted exclusions on grounds of age and especially the exceptional justification for direct age discrimination, contained in Article 6. In the end, EU Member States may find it more difficult to successfully transpose Article 6 than they imagine. The article reveals special challenges for age and refers to age laws in Ireland and the USA, in particular. It also refers to preparations for transposition in a number of Member States, including the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. Whether and to what extent age will ultimately receive the least protection of all the new grounds, remains to be seen and will depend largely on the individual approaches of the Member States. The ultimate consequence of the additional opportunities for excluding or justifying age discrimination may well be different protected areas throughout the EU.

THE EU CONSTITUTION IS DEAD, LONG LIVE THE REFORM TREATY: No early funeral for the institutional innovations in the Constitutional Treaty after being rejected in France and the Netherlands

2007 ◽  
Vol 72 (2) ◽  
pp. 151-170
Author(s):  
John W. Sap
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
General Public ◽  
European Council ◽  
Constitutional Treaty ◽  
Member States ◽  
European Constitution ◽  
Institutional Innovations ◽  
To Come ◽  
The Eu

At its meeting on 16 June 2005, the European Council decided to postpone its introduction of the European Constitution, originally planned to come into force on 1 November 2006. As the Treaty establishing a European Constitution could in principle only take effect if all the Member States agree, following the clear rejections in the French referendum on 29 May 2005 (55% against) and the Dutch referendum on 1 June 2005 (61.5% against), the Member States needed a period of reflection, a search for explanations and debate. The European Council did not feel that the date initially planned for a report on the ratification of the treaty was still tenable, since those countries which had not yet ratified the treaty would be unable to provide a clear reply before mid- 2007. But the process of ratification by the Member States was not abandoned. The timetable was adjusted to reflect the circumstances in the countries which had not yet ratified the treaty. This period was intended to regain the trust of the general public (see Defargues 2005, 97).

The Netherlands’ Rutte may be losing grip on power

2020 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Prime Minister ◽  
Strong Support ◽  
Social Spending ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Party Government ◽  
Track Record ◽  
Defence Spending ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Eu

Subject Outlook for the Dutch government. Significance The popularity of Prime Minister Mark Rutte’s four-party government has decreased in recent months amid workers’ protests and controversy over parts of its new climate deal. Having lost its majority in both houses, the government will struggle to pass legislation in order to strengthen its track record ahead of the 2021 election unless it compromises with the opposition, which will likely alienate core supporters. Impacts The priority given to social spending will likely mean the Netherlands will not reach the NATO goal of 2% of GDP defence spending by 2025. Climate legislation is now far more likely to be contested and amended in parliament, as it cannot be passed without opposition parties. Rutte’s departure would be an important loss for the EU, given his strong support for EU cooperation and negotiating skills.

scholarly journals Economic and Environmental Aspects of Agriculture in the EU Countries

Energies ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (22) ◽  
pp. 7826
Author(s):  
Joanna Domagała
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Agricultural Sector ◽  
Greenhouse Gas Emission ◽  
Environmental Aspects ◽  
Member States ◽  
Dea Model ◽  
Eu Countries ◽  
Emission Efficiency ◽  
European Environmental Agency ◽  
The Eu

The analysis of the economic efficiency of agriculture has been the subject of numerous studies. An economically efficient agricultural sector is not always environmentally efficient. Agriculture is a large emitter of greenhouse gases. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change states that food production and agriculture are responsible for 21–37% of total global CO2 emissions. Due to the comprehensive assessment of the agricultural efficiency, it is worthwhile to apply to its measurement an integrated approach based on economic, energy and environmental aspects. These aspects were the main reasons for undertaking this research. The purpose of the study was to determine the economic, energy and environmental efficiency of agriculture in the EU Member States in 2019. The environmental analyses relate to the period 1990–2019. A total of 26 member states of the European Union (excluding Malta and Luxembourg) were selected for research. The sources of materials were Eurostat and the European Environmental Agency. This study was based on the Data Envelopment Analysis method, and used the DEA model focused on minimizing inputs. The research also adopts energy productivity and greenhouse gas emission efficiency indicators. The DEA model features the following variables: one effect (value of agricultural production) and four inputs (land, labour, use of fertilizers and use of energy). It was found that seven out of the 26 studied EU countries have efficient agriculture. The efficient agriculture group included the Netherlands, Denmark, Greece, Cyprus, the United Kingdom, Italy and Ireland. Based on the DEA method, benchmarks have been defined for countries with inefficient agriculture. On the basis of these benchmarks for inefficient agricultural sectors, it was possible to determine how they could improve efficiency to achieve the same results with fewer inputs. This issue is particularly important in the context of sustainable agricultural development. In the next stage of the research, the analysis of economic and energy efficiency was combined with the analysis of GHG emission efficiency in agriculture. Four groups of countries have been distinguished: eco-efficiency leaders, eco-efficiency followers, environmental slackers, eco-efficiency laggards. The leaders of the classification were the Netherlands, Italy, Greece, Cyprus and Portugal.

scholarly journals Mind the Gap! ECN+ Directive Proposal on its Way to Eliminate Deficiencies of Regulation 1/2003: Polish Perspective

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 125-150
Author(s):  
Agata Jurkowska-Gomułka
Keyword(s):  
Eu Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Total Period ◽  
Effective Implementation ◽  
Competition Rules ◽  
Substantive Law ◽  
Point Of Reference ◽  
The Eu

This article aims at answering the question whether the Commission’s proposal intended to empower Member States’ competition authorities to be more effective enforcers (ECN+ Directive) actually brings effective solutions to all weaknesses of Regulation 1/2003, which influenced an inefficient application of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU in some Member States (among them Poland, which will be taken as a point of reference). The first part of the article constitutes a review upon the application of Regulation 1/2003 in Poland. Interestingly, the beginning of its enforcement coincides with the total period of application of EU law in Poland, since the country joined the EU on the same day the Regulation entered into force. The problem with Regulation 1/2003 is that it does not seem to enhance the enforcement of the Community’s competition rules by national enforcers, including NCAs and courts. The reason for this failure lies inter alia in the deficiencies of the principles adopted in the Regulation itself, including a lack of procedural unification (or at least some harmonisation) in cases where European substantive law is to be applied. In the second part of the article, the content of the Commission’s proposal on ECN+ Directive is analysed in order to find whether new regulations are able to solve problems identified in the Polish application of the Treaty’s provisions. The article concludes with an overall assessment of the proposed Directive and a list of conditions for effective implementation of the Directive.

scholarly journals Germany

2020 ◽  
pp. 55-71
Author(s):  
Nina Amelung ◽  
Rafaela Granja ◽  
Helena Machado
Keyword(s):  
European Commission ◽  
Data Exchange ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Member States ◽  
Dna Database ◽  
String Pulling ◽  
The Creation ◽  
German Situation ◽  
The Eu

Abstract Germany’s DNA database was established in 1998 and grew into one of the mid-sized databases in the EU. Under the leadership of its Minister of the Interior, Germany was among the countries that drove the creation of the Prüm system and was among the first signatories of the Prüm Treaty in 2005. The 2007 German Presidency of the EU, along with the European Commission, also pushed for the integration of the Convention of Prüm into an EU legal framework. In terms of bordering practices, the German situation serves to illustrate an expansive and diffusive mode of debordering. This expansiveness is documented by the country’s early involvement and comprehensive establishment of data exchange with most of the countries in the system; this diffusive character is illustrated by the string-pulling practices employed by Germany, and some other Member States’ governments, to influence transnational police collaboration in the EU.

Alternative Dispute Resolution in Civil and Commercial Matters in the EU

2016 ◽  
pp. 111-127
Author(s):  
Marco Carvalho Gonçalves
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Comparative Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Effective Implementation ◽  
Initial Approach ◽  
Alternative Means ◽  
The Eu

This chapter seeks to analyze the implementation and integration of alternative means of dispute resolution in the European Union. Thus, from an initial approach to the various alternative means of dispute resolution, with particular emphasis on negotiation, conciliation, mediation and arbitration, will be held a comparative law analysis of the different legislative solutions adopted by the major EU Member States, allowing to determinate the degree of implementation and development of alternative means of dispute resolution in those Member States. Finally, there will be an analysis of the main legislative instruments adopted by the European institutions with a view to creating and developing alternative means of dispute resolution in Europe, indicating, in the end, some solutions and recommendations that are adequate having a view to effective implementation of alternative justice in the European Union.

Article 9 of the eu Water Framework Directive

2014 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 249-271 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erik Gawel
Keyword(s):  
Water Framework Directive ◽  
Water Protection ◽  
Practical Application ◽  
Mathematical Task ◽  
Member States ◽  
Strict Interpretation ◽  
Article 9 ◽  
The Common ◽  
Resource Costs ◽  
The Eu

Article 9 of the eu Water Framework Directive (wfd) requires Member States to take account of the principle of recovery of the costs of water services, including environmental and resource costs (ercs). Whilst legally the Member States have broad scope for discretion when applying Article 9, the idea that the eu legislator has effectively assigned the Member States a mathematical task to determine the level of cost recovery achieved for environmental and resource costs is increasingly gaining ground in the Common Implementation Strategy (cis) process. The present paper shows that this strict interpretation of taking account of environmental and resource costs has no basis in Article 9, is conceptually misleading, and could even prove counter-productive for the practical application of water protection.

scholarly journals PUBLIC ATTRIBUTION OF CYBERATACS BY EU MEMBER STATES AND THE APPLICATION OF CYBERSANCTIONS BY THE UNION TO CYBERATTACKS THREATENING THE UNION OR ITS MEMBER STATES

2021 ◽  
pp. 209-216
Author(s):  
O. O. Surilova
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Private Sector ◽  
Limited Range ◽  
Deterrent Effect ◽  
State Responsibility ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Political Decision ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Eu

The article examines the issue of public attribution of cyberattacks threatening the European Union or its Member States, and effectiveness of the adopted «cyber diplomacy toolbox» within the Framework for a joint EU diplomatic response to malicious cyber activities. Since public attribution of cyberattacks is a sovereign political decision, which differs from legal attribution for the purpose of invoking state responsibility under Articles on State Responsibility for Internationally Wrongful Acts, author defines the rationale behind decisions to attribute or not to attribute cyberattacks to a particular state by examples of the Netherlands and France. While the Netherlands insist on deterrent effect of public attribution, France believes in the effectiveness of attribution provided to the allege wrongdoer by diplomatic channels. In the article, the effectiveness of cybersanctions implemented at Union level against a limited range of cyberattacks threatening the Union or its Member States was also under assessment. Article concludes that imposition of targeted sanctions in conjunction with sectoral sanctions will increase sanctions` purposes to coerce, constrain, and to signal. However, nowadays only targeted sanctions against individuals and legal entities are foreseen by the EU`s decision. At the same time, this fact does not exclude the possible application of sectoral sanctions against the most serious cyberattacks against EU` or its member states` infrastructure. Finally, the article justifies the possibility of using attribution reports prepared by the private sector to include individuals in the sanctions list if the attribution of Member States is based on intelligence that they do not wish to disclose. Moreover, malicious cyberoperations affect not only states`, but also private sector`s, interests. Private IT and cybersecurity companies thus have a chance to prove their ability to produce detailed and reliable reports on attribution of cyberoperations. Author is convinced both centralized (governmental) and decentralized (private) attribution of cyberattacks is necessary for correctness of findings.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document