The European Union and the Concept of Flexibility: Proliferation of Legal Systems within International Organizations

2001 ◽  
pp. 381-414
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (40) ◽  
pp. 233-243
Author(s):  
Lyudmyla Luts ◽  
Iryna Nastasiak ◽  
Catherine Karmazina ◽  
Stepan Kovbasiuk

Mankind is facing new civilizational problems (management of global processes, environmental safety, health care, etc.). A significant role in their solution is given to international organizations, interstate legal systems. Analysis of actions to solve global problems raises before legal science questions about the real capabilities of international organizations, interstate legal systems, their ability to adequately respond to globalization challenges, the need to clarify their role in the new reality, as well as their nature, form, and significance. This is a new model of interaction between states within the international system, which could ensure not only their cooperation but also integration through a new institutional mechanism and system of legal acts. The study uses universal and European international legal acts (in particular, sources of law) and other documents that offer a description of their nature, form, significance, ability to adequately respond to the globalization challenges of today. The main in the research process were: globalization approach, logical methods, general theoretical, sociological, comparative law, and international legal methodology. An analysis of the provisions of international, foreign, and Ukrainian legal science, sources of law, and legal practice revealed that modern international organizations arose in connection with the need to ensure the functioning of sovereign states and their cooperation. After the Second World War, those were formed that are designed to ensure closer cooperation based on universal and regional cooperation (United Nations, Council of Europe, European Union). New world order and interstate legal systems are being formed, which structure it. Their forms of integration are emerging, such as the legal system of the European Union. These systems have successfully fulfilled their role in streamlining the regional (European) and universal space. Although new globalization challenges of socio-economic, security, information, health, and environment necessitated the formation of a new model of interstate legal systems, which would ensure not only cooperation but also integration, through the creation of a new institutional mechanism and an effective system of legal acts.


2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (10) ◽  
pp. 1980-1996
Author(s):  
T.S. Malakhova

Subject. Foreign economic and trade ties among countries are getting tighter and less predictable in the early 21st century. This directly stems from a growing disparity of partners, especially if it goes about their future cooperation as part of integration groups or international organizations. Communities of experts suggest using various approaches to locally adjusting integration phases, especially implementing the two-speed integration in the European Union. Objectives. The study is an attempt to examine an improvement of foreign economic cooperation and suggest its implementation steps for the European Union. This all is due to considerable inner controversies and problems within the EU, which grow more serious year by year. Methods. The methodological framework comprises the historical logic, dialectical principles, scientific abstraction method. The process and system approach was especially important for justifying the implementation of the above steps. It was used to examine foreign economic relations of partners in the European Union. Results. The article sets forth the theoretical and methodological framework for the geostrategic economic bloc, including a conceptual structure model. I present steps to implement a foreign economic cooperation of partners in the EU in terms of its form. Conclusions and Relevance. Should the form of the foreign economic relations among the EU countries be implemented, counties at the periphery of the EU will be able to become active parties to the integration group.


Author(s):  
Antoine Vandemoorteele

This article analyzes the role of the European Union (EU) and Canada in the promotion of Security Sector Reforms (SSR) activities in two regional organizations, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). The concept of SSR seeks to address the effective governance of security in post-conflict environment by transforming the security institutions within a country in order for them to have more efficient, legitimate and democratic role in implementing security. Recent debates within the EU have led to the adoption of an SSR concept from the Council and a new strategy from the European Commission on the SSR activities. Within the framework of the ESDP, the EU has positioned itself as a leading actor, in this domain, including in its crisis management operations. On the other hand, Canada, through its whole-of government and human security programs has also been an important actor in the promotion of SSR activities. Yet, even though several international organizations (including the United Nations, the OSCE and NATO) are effectively doing SSR activities on the ground, there does not exist a common framework within any of these organizations despite the role of the EU and Canada. As such, it is surprising to found no global common policy for SSR while this approach is precisely holistic in its foundations. Taking these elements into consideration, this paper analyzes two specific aspects : a) the absence of a common policy framework within international organizations and b) the major differences between the approaches of the OSCE and NATO in the domain of SSR and the implications for the EU and Canada’ roles.   Full extt available at: https://doi.org/10.22215/rera.v3i2.186


Author(s):  
Tetjana Humeniuk

Purpose. The purpose of the article is to analyze topical issues of divergence of the Romano-Germanic and Anglo-American legal systems on the example of Brexit. Methodology. The methodology involves a comprehensive study of theoretical and practical material on this subject, as well as formulation of relevant conclusions and recommendations. The following methods of scientific cognition were used in the research process: dialectical, terminological, formal and logical, comparative and legal, system and functional methods. Results. The study found that an important role in resolving conflicts between EU law and UK national law was played by the Court of Justice of the European Union which declared British legislation invalid since it was not in line with EU law. Thanks to the case law of the CJEU and the national courts of the United Kingdom, it has been possible to adjust and harmonize the interaction between EU law and the national law of this country. As European integration is formed on the basis of a supreme legal force created by external (supranational) bodies, the national bodies that form the national rules of British law inevitably give up part of their powers in favor of EU law. Brexit is just the beginning of a long series of problematic issues that will arise in the EU as a result of member states’ more or less serious objections to a radical course to deepen European integration. And under such conditions, there is a widespread understanding that finding clear and effective answers to new challenges requires finding new conceptual (and most importantly, effective) approaches to the future functioning of the EU, as old mechanisms and methods no longer work properly and do not resolve contradictions spreading and becoming more acute. Scientific novelty. The study shows that the withdrawal of Britain from the European Union initiates a large-scale process of mutual transformation of the legal systems of both parties, the effectiveness of which will be determined by the realities of European geopolitical environment as well as domestic political processes within Great Britain itself. Practical importance. Research materials can be used for comparative law studies.


Author(s):  
Wolfram Cremer

This chapter states that, as opposed to most states, legal systems of different states of the European Union do not regulate the possibility of filing a constitutional complaint or a fundamental rights complaint against the European Union’s sovereign acts. However, individual complaints directly against the European Union’s sovereign acts are regulated in Article 263 para 4 of the Lisbon Treaty, and is complex as well as difficult to comprehend. According to this, a person’s standing especially requires an act to be of ‘direct and individual’ concern to him. Merely the prerequisites for taking legal actions against a ‘regulatory act’ are diminished since the Treaty of Lisbon came into force in 2009. The multifaceted jurisprudence of the union’s jurisdiction regarding this chapter is unfolded, systematized, and evaluated in this contribution.


Author(s):  
Philipp Dann ◽  
Maxim Bönnemann ◽  
Tanja Herklotz

Discussing several methods of comparative legal research and emphasizing upon the point that the two or more systems to be compared should not either be so similar that there is nothing for the one to learn from the other, nor should they be so dissimilar that there is no relationship whatsoever between them. Following this principle, this chapter finds that there is enough similarity as well as dissimilarity between the Indian legal system and the legal system of the European Union. Acknowledging that fact, the chapter then proceeds to compare some of the aspects of European and Indian legal systems from which both of them may benefit.


Author(s):  
Mathias Stephen ◽  
Trengove Stadler

This chapter explains the membership practices in international organizations (IOs). It focuses on criteria for membership, rights and obligations of membership, suspension, expulsion, and withdrawal. In addition to setting out the legal criteria in an international organization's constitutive treaty relating to membership, it also discusses how these criteria have been applied in practice and how decisions that are political in nature have been made within the established institutional and legal framework. The chapter focuses on three different types of IOs: the universal, represented by the United Nations (UN); the regional, such as the European Union (EU) and African Union (AU), where membership is restricted to countries from a particular geographic area; and the specialized agencies which, while fulfilling a limited and technical function, are often open to universal membership.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document