LEGAL FRAMEWORK OF THE EUROPEAN UNION’S COUNTER-TERRORISM ACTIVITIES

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
E.V. Alferova ◽  
T.V. Zakharov
Keyword(s):  
Legal Framework ◽  
Terrorist Attacks ◽  
The European Union ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Conflict Zones ◽  
Counter Terrorism ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Regional Strategies ◽  
The Eu

In recent years, European states have been repeatedly subjected to deadly terrorist attacks. The threat faced by EU Member States is multifaceted: from the return of foreign terrorist fighters from conflict zones to the extremist activities of homegrown terrorists and «lone wolves». In order to prevent terrorist attacks and combat terrorism, EU authorities and national states develop counter-terrorism policies and legislation. Based on the long-term activities of the UN in this area and on its own experience, the European Union adopts a large number of political and regulatory legal documents. The EU’s anti-terrorism policy and legislation are becoming more effective and realistic year after year, and intergovernmental cooperation mechanisms are being developed in the form of international treaties or politically binding recommendations and guidelines. In recent years, a number of new legal and other standards have been developed, which, together with existing international and regional strategies, conventions, recommendations and agreements, form the basis for current and future work in the field of combating terrorism and preventing radicalization and extremism leading to terrorism. The article examines some key documents of the EU and the Council of Europe adopted after September 11, 2001, including the EU Counter-Terrorism Strategy of 2005, updated in 2016, as well as new directions and measures to combat terrorism in the last three years (2018-2020). Based on the legal databases of the Council of the EU, the European Commission, the European Parliament, and the Council of Europe, a quantitative sample and an approximate count of anti-terrorist and related regulatory legal and individual acts adopted in 2018-2020 were made. The proposals of scientists and experts, including those expressed at the forums of international organizations, on improving the EU Counter-Terrorism Strategy are summarized.

scholarly journals The European Union and Education for Democratic Citizenship

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kris Grimonprez
Keyword(s):  
Legal Framework ◽  
Democratic Citizenship ◽  
Quality Education ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Legal Competence ◽  
The Eu

The study makes an analysis of the legal framework which Member States must take into account when designing their policies on citizenship education. The Charter on Education for Democratic Citizenship and Human Rights Education of the Council of Europe and the international right to education are read in conjunction with EU law. Suitable content for the EU dimension in mainstream education is explored. A method for objective, critical and pluralistic EU learning is proposed, based on the Treaties and on case teaching (stories for critical thinking). Member States are invited to take more action to ensure quality education. The EU has the legal competence to support the EU dimension in education. In the present state of EU law, quality education is no longer conceivable without an EU dimension incorporated in various key competences. At present the author works at the implementation of the ideas developed in the book as an Affiliated Senior Researcher at Leuven University (Case4EU-project in Belgium and other EU Member States).

Front-of-pack nutrition labelling in the European Union: a behavioural, legal and political analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-24
Author(s):  
Vincent DELHOMME
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Dietary Habits ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Present Contribution ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Nutrition Labelling ◽  
Political Analysis ◽  
Legislative Proposal ◽  
The Eu

Amidst a growing interest from European Union (EU) Member States, the European Commission recently announced that it would put forward a legislative proposal for the adoption of a harmonised and mandatory front-of-pack nutrition labelling scheme at the EU level. The present contribution discusses the implications of such an adoption, taking a behavioural, legal and policy angle. It introduces first the concept of front-of-pack nutrition labelling and the existing evidence regarding its effects on consumer behaviour and dietary habits. It then presents the legal framework currently applicable to (front-of-pack) nutrition labelling in the EU and discusses some of the main political and practical aspects involved with the development of a common EU front-of-pack label.

Caught Between National and Supranational Values: Limitations to Judicial Cooperation in Criminal Matters as Part of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice within the European Union

2008 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-72
Author(s):  
Olivia den Hollander
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Judicial Cooperation ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Third ◽  
The One ◽  
Criminal Matters ◽  
The Eu

AbstractCurrently, the European Union is based on both supranational (first pillar) and international (second and third pillar) law. The third pillar signifies police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters and although formally based on international law, it has been under increasing "supranational pressure" by the developments in the "Area of Freedom, Security and Justice". This Area is focused on a set of common values and principles closely tied to those of the single market and its four "freedoms". The main argument of this article is that the legal framework of the third pillar is an impediment to judicial cooperation in criminal matters in general, and to the coordination of conflicts of jurisdiction and the principle of ne bis in idem in particular. The legal framework of the third pillar finds itself in the middle of an identity crisis, since it can neither be identified as a traditional intergovernmental, nor as a supranational institutional framework. Criminal law is a politically sensitive matter, which on the one hand explains why the EU member states are reluctant to submit their powers over the issue to the European level and on the other hand, it implies that if the EU member states really want to cooperate on such an intensive level, they will have to submit some of their powers in order to strengthen EU constitutional law. The article suggests a reform of the third pillar through the method of "communitization", which is exactly what will happen in case the EU Reform Treaty will enter into force. This would offer the ingredients for a true international community in which the ambitious agenda of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice can realise its aim of a common set of values and principles which supersedes those of each of the member states individually.

scholarly journals Contradictions in Frontex Operations: the Push-back

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 85-92
Author(s):  
Gábor Kemény ◽  
Michal Vít
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Influencing Factors ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Organisational Structure ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Eu

The aim of the paper is to introduce the legal misfits between the standards of human rights as stated by the European Union and the Council of Europe and practical day to day experience related to EU member states. For this purpose, the article focuses on political and legal assessment of the so-called pushbacks at the Greek-Turkish external border and introduces the influencing factors, such as the various interpretation of the legislation, differences in the organisational structure and values. Authors concluded that these factors are endangering the fulfilment of the fundamental rights and the efficiency of the border protection thus the security of the EU and its member states.

scholarly journals The Implication of Fiscal Principles and Rules on Promoting Sustainable Public Finances in the EU Countries

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (7) ◽  
pp. 2772 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mihaela Onofrei ◽  
Anca Gavriluţă (Vatamanu) ◽  
Ionel Bostan ◽  
Florin Oprea ◽  
Gigel Paraschiv ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Panel Data Analysis ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Fiscal Rules ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Fiscal Responsibility ◽  
Public Finances ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Status ◽  
Outstanding Debt ◽  
The Eu

The purpose of this study was to analyze fiscal behavior in the European Union countries, to highlight the implications of institutional constraints on healthy fiscal attitudes, and to test the relationship between government decisions, fiscal responsibility instruments, and the sustainability of public finances during the period 2000–2014. By using panel data analysis, we tested the responsiveness of primary balance to government indebtedness, as well as to some determinants of fiscal responsibility, such as the degree of public spending or fiscal rules effectiveness, and we included two different perspectives regarding fiscal rules status. First, we computed a fiscal responsibility index, which measures the applicability of or compliance with the fiscal rules, referring to legal dimensions and administrative and institutional capacity. Second, we established a fiscal responsibility convergence index, which measures the status of the EU Member States regarding the approach of numerical rules. The empirical findings indicate that fiscal authorities do not act to the existing stock of public debt and highlights a negative response of budget balances to the stock of outstanding debt. Fiscal position improves when the index of fiscal responsibility is involved and countries become more sustainable when they are related to the entire level of fiscal governance, with respect to legal framework, institutional and administrative capacity, but at the debt ratio threshold of over 90%, the effect of the overall fiscal rule comes out as less relevant for the improvement of the primary balance.

EU Immigration Policy: from Amsterdam to Lisbon

2010 ◽  
pp. 42-51
Author(s):  
O. Potyomkina
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Immigration Policy ◽  
European Countries ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Migration Stream ◽  
Treaty Of Lisbon ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Different Levels ◽  
The Eu

The article is devoted to immigration problems in the European countries and to their solving options within the European Union. The Mediterranian EU member states keep calling for help insisting that they are unable to cope with the migration stream on their own. The EU countries' solidarity regarding the distribution of material and moral expenditures on the immigrants reception is problematized on meetings at different levels and calls especially sharp debates, particularly in connection with an entry of the Treaty of Lisbon into force and establishment of the new Stockholm Program for the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice by the Council of Europe.

EU security and counter-terrorism policies and human rights

2020 ◽  
pp. 457-477
Author(s):  
Mikaela Heikkilä ◽  
Elina Pirjatanniemi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Terrorist Attacks ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Judicial Cooperation ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Counter Terrorism ◽  
International Human

Numerous terrorist attacks both within and outside the European Union (EU or the Union) have prompted the Union to increasingly act in the field of counter-terrorism. Since the adoption of the Union’s counter-terrorism strategy in 2005, the Union’s action in relation to counter-terrorism has been based on four connected pillars: to prevent, to protect, to pursue, and to respond. A general trend in the Union’s counter-terrorism action has been a move towards a pre-emptive approach, where the focus lies on countering terrorism threats in advance. The aim of this chapter is to discuss whether the adoption of these pre-emptive measures strengthen the security landscape of the Union. The chapter thus takes a closer look at how the Union strives to detect persons planning or preparing terrorist offences, and to hinder actual attacks from taking place. In particular, attention is paid to the EU’s police and judicial cooperation, general surveillance, the criminalisation of preparatory terrorist offences, and cooperation with third states and international organisations. A central objective is also to assess how the various counter-terrorism measures concur with international human rights law, including the Union’s legal framework on data protection.

Public participation in decisions on specific activities in environmental matters in Croatia

elni Review ◽  
2012 ◽  
pp. 13-19
Author(s):  
Lana Ofak
Keyword(s):  
Public Participation ◽  
Positive Outcome ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Aarhus Convention ◽  
Specific Activities ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

Croatia finished accession negotiations with the EU in June 2011. The Accession Treaty was signed on 9 December 2011. The EU accession referendum in Croatia was held in January 2012 with a positive outcome. 66.27% of Croatian citizens voted in favour of Croatian accession to the European Union and 33.13% of votes were against the accession. Following ratification of the Accession Treaty by the 27 EU member states, accession of Croatia to the EU is expected to take place on 1 July 2013. In the 2011 Progress Report, European Commission stated that there has been progress in the area of environment. Overall, Croatia’s environmentorientated preparations are nearing completion in terms of both alignment and implementation of the relevant legislation. However, implementation of the horizontal acquis, and in particular effective public participation and access to justice in environmental matters, need to be improved. The purpose of this article is twofold. Firstly, it provides a general overview of the legal framework for public participation in decisions on specific activities in Croatia, which is intended to implement provisions of Art. 6 of the Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (hereinafter: the Aarhus Convention or Convention). Implementation of Art. 7 and 8 of the Aarhus Convention are not discussed. Secondly, specific problems in exercising the right to participate in environmental impact assessment procedures in Croatia are analysed. It is shown that there are cases of non-compliance with the provisions of Art. 6 of the Aarhus Convention.

Resolution 2300 (Council of Eur. Parl. Assembly)

2020 ◽  
Vol 59 (3) ◽  
pp. 487-494
Author(s):  
David Lewis
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Member States ◽  
National Legislation ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Eu Directive ◽  
The Eu

This Resolution was adopted in October 2019 following a report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights. It has to be seen in the context of previous Council of Europe activity on this topic as well as the European Union (EU) Directive on the protection of persons who report breaches of Union law. The content of the EU Directive was agreed earlier in 2019 and EU Member States are obliged to transpose it into national legislation by December 2021.

Disaster Strikes: Regulatory Barriers to the Effective Delivery of International Disaster Assistance within the EU

2011 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 53-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Williams ◽  
Justine N. Stefanelli
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
Natural Disasters ◽  
Quality Standards ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
The European Union ◽  
International Assistance ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Disaster Assistance ◽  
Legal Frameworks ◽  
The Eu

AbstractThis article considers the European Union's legal framework and its ability to facilitate – or hinder – international assistance for natural disasters occurring within the European Union. At a time when the frequency and severity of natural disasters in the EU appears to be increasing, and when it is more likely that affected EU Member States are required to seek assistance from outside their borders, or even outside the EU, it is important to ensure that international assistance is able to reach its intended target. Member State domestic legal frameworks may delay, obstruct or prevent international assistance from reaching those in need, often due to a failure to consider the special situation of disasters when drafting, interpreting and applying legislative regimes. For example, immigration, customs, food and transport laws may not contain sufficient exemptions for emergency personnel, materials and goods, and domestic licensing requirements and quality standards may prevent a nation from accepting assistance. At the same time, there is a need to ensure that any assistance accepted by an affected Member State is subject to appropriate quality standards without unduly impeding the delivery of assistance.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document