scholarly journals Sprawiedliwe przygotowanie decyzji według ReNEUAL Modelu kodeksu postępowania administracyjnego Unii Europejskiej

2016 ◽  
pp. 31-47
Author(s):  
Przemysław Ostojski
Keyword(s):  
Procedural Fairness ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Public ◽  
Model Code ◽  
Administrative Procedure ◽  
Administrative Procedures ◽  
High Standards ◽  
The One ◽  
The Given

The subject of the article this paper is the theoretical analysis of the concept of procedural fairness, as well as analysis of the dogmatic institutions contained in ReNEUAL Model Code of Administrative Procedure of the European Union. The aim of the pape ris the verification of the thesis that ReNEUAL proposes a procedure which allows to issue a decision which will fullfill of the principles of procedural fairness. The results of the analisysy indicate the given project respects to the greatest possible extent, in the area of issuing the decision, the principle of procedural fairness. The creators of the project – representatives of the doctrine of administrative law of the Member States of the EU – understand the concept of fair preparation of the decision in the proceedings, which is described in the Book III of the Model. on the one hand, as a high standards of protection of individual rights, and on the other, as the guarantee of effectiveness, efficiency and orientation to the public service in the field of administrative bodies. Creators of the project gathered, systematised and perfected in the draft of the Code of Administrative Procedure of the Union previously developed standards of administrative procedures of the Member States. In the case of multiple solutions ReNEUAL is innovative.

scholarly journals Implementation of the European Union Requirement to Coordinate Activities of Public Administration Authorities in the Process of the Authorisation, Certification, and Licensing of Renewable Energy Sources Investments

2020 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 121-144
Author(s):  
Kamila Sobieraj
Keyword(s):  
Public Administration ◽  
Opposite Effect ◽  
Renewable Energy Sources ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Public ◽  
Gross Energy ◽  
Administrative Procedures ◽  
Energy Share

The aim of this article is analysis of one of the barriers to the functioning of procedures for authorization, certification and licensing of RES investments - lack of coordination in actions of the public administration authorities while conducting those procedures, both in the context of EU law, as much national laws of selected Member States. Why this barrier is still dominant? The article is devoted to analysis of possible and applied models for such coordination in the area of RES investments. Attention has also been drawn to restrictions which should be taken under consideration by Member States while the regulations regarding procedures coordination implementing. Constructing and applying of coordination of public administration authorities activities in such a way as it might contribute to streamlining and accelerating administrative procedures in the area of RES investments and consequently achieve a designated RES energy share in the final gross energy consumption, is not an easy task. Inappropriately constructed and applied mechanisms may lead to an exactly opposite effect

scholarly journals Europeanisation and German Public Administration

2021 ◽  
pp. 53-60
Author(s):  
Hans Hofmann
Keyword(s):  
Public Administration ◽  
National Level ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Level ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Public ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Legal Remedy ◽  
Administrative Procedures ◽  
The Eu

AbstractThis chapter discusses how public administration in Germany is influenced by the making and implementation of law by the organs of the European Union (EU). Although the public administrations of the EU Member States are, in principle, responsible for enforcing the laws made by the EU, the EU’s influence on the public administration of Germany as EU Member State is constantly growing. This is true, not only of those areas in which the Member States have transferred to the EU the authority to make laws, but increasingly also of those areas in which the Member States have retained such authority. At the same time, however, there is no systematic codification of the law on administrative procedures at European level and no system of legal remedy for Union citizens equivalent to those at national level.

scholarly journals The European Competition Network in the European Administrative System: Theoretical Concerns

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (17) ◽  
pp. 53-74
Author(s):  
Erzsébet Csatlós
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Level Structure ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Public ◽  
Administrative Procedure ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
Administrative Procedures ◽  
Core Issues ◽  
The Eu

The public administration of the European Union (EU) is a sui generis multi-level structure under constant development. After five decades of successful functioning, the European Union still lacks a coherent and comprehensive set of codified rules of administrative procedure at all levels. The existing acquis related to European administration and administrative procedures is fragmented, sector specific and although it is based on the constitutional principles of the democratic traditions of its Member States, such coincidence is often insufficient for the present requirements of good administration. The EU basically relies on indirect administration, while a growing number of cooperation forms exists of the competent authorities that aims to ensure efficacy of execution and to overcome diversity of non-harmonised legal areas. The aim of this paper is to place the European Competition Network (ECN) in this structure, explore and examine its legal nature as it is probably the most advanced example for such cooperation. The ECN incorporates and reveals the major procedural law questions of European administration; it is a rather successful form of cooperation, and although its core issues fail to correspond to the fundamental requirements of European administrative procedures, there seem to be positive changes in the evaluation of soft law and the functioning of the system.

scholarly journals European Seaports Information Systems. The Impacts of Directive 2010/65/EU

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 38-49
Author(s):  
Claudio Jose Pinto ◽  
Pedro Fernandes Anunciacao
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Information Systems ◽  
Mixed Model ◽  
Research Purpose ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
European Directive ◽  
Administrative Procedures ◽  
The One

AbstractResearch purpose. The European Union recognizes the importance of information systems for improving the performance of trans-European transport network ports by promoting a set of initiatives focused on their use. The Directive 2010/65/EU obliges the provision of electronic services for the reception and treatment of declaratory acts necessary for the entry and exit of ships into the European Community and opens the way for future harmonization in the European Union of such services. The research purpose is to analyze and assess the degree of adequacy of European seaport information systems relative to the requirements of the European Directive to the availability of electronic services. Are they complying with the directive?Design / Methodology / Approach. The objective of the study was to characterize the current situation of the main European seaports regarding the impacts of the European Directive. In this sense, it was decided to construct a survey to facilitate the identification and characterization of the options and actions taken by each country regarding the implementation of the Directive 2010/65/UE. This study was attended by the main EU Members and Norway.Findings. From the analysis of the results of the European survey on the implementation of the Directive, we can conclude that the implementation of the Directive is carried out by entities of the State sphere. Member States show a low priority to the exchange of information between the Member States and the majority has not taken any action in this direction. With respect to the Single Window development model, the mixed model is the one adopted in most Member States.Originality / Value / Practical implications. The central objective of Directive 2010/65/EU is to simplify and harmonize the administrative procedures required for maritime transport through electronic means. This Directive is seen as an opportunity to facilitate trade and administrative barriers through harmonization and standardization of the European Seaports Organization. The analysis of directive adoption represents an opportunity to increase scientific knowledge in this economic sector.

NON-DISCRIMINATORY TRADE RESTRICTIONS AFTER KECK

2002 ◽  
Vol 61 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-52
Author(s):  
Alan Dashwood
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Sales Promotion ◽  
Trade Restrictions ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Public ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Equivalent Effect ◽  
The One ◽  
Domestic Products ◽  
By Products

IN its Keck judgment—famous or notorious according to taste—the Court of Justice drew a distinction, for the purposes of the application of the prohibition in Article 28 EC against measures having equivalent effect to quantitative restrictions (“MEEQRs”), between two categories of national measures. On the one hand were “product requirements”: measures specifying requirements to be met, in order to obtain access to the market of a Member State, by products coming from other Member States where they are lawfully manufactured and marketed, like the minimum alcohol requirement for fruit liqueurs in Cassis de Dijon (Case 120/78 [1997] E.C.R. 649). Such product requirements are liable to constitute MEEQRs, and therefore require specific justification, in order to escape prohibition, on one of the public interest grounds recognised by Community law. On the other hand was the category of measures described in the judgment as “provisions restricting or prohibiting certain selling arrangements”. An example was the legislation at issue in the main proceedings in Keck, which prohibited the resale of products below their purchase price, thereby depriving retailers of a form of sales promotion. Other examples, attested by the case law post-Keck, are measures regulating advertising methods, the kind of shop in which goods of a certain description can be sold, shops’ opening hours and Sunday trading. National provisions in this latter category are not normally such as to hinder trade between Member States under the test formulated by the Court in Dassonville (Case 8/74 [1974] E.C.R. 837, at para. 5), and so do not call for justification; not, that is, “so long as those provisions apply to all relevant traders operating within the national territory and so long as they affect in the same manner, in law and in fact, the marketing of domestic products and those from other Member States”: see Joined Cases C-267 and 268/9 [1993] E.C.R. I-6097, at paras. 15–17.

La incidencia de la Ley del Procedimiento Administrativo Común de las Administraciones Públicas sobre la potestad normativa local

2017 ◽  
pp. 87-141
Author(s):  
Lucía CASADO CASADO
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Public ◽  
Administrative Procedure ◽  
Legislative Initiative ◽  
The Law ◽  
Regulatory Evaluation ◽  
Regulatory Powers ◽  
Laws And Regulations

LABURPENA: Ekonomiako Lankidetza eta Garapenerako Erakundeak eta Europar Batasunak bultzatutako erregulazioa hobetzeko politika gero eta gehiago garatu da Espainian eta 2015ean bultzada esanguratsua jaso du, urriaren 1eko 39/2015 Legea, Herri Administrazioen Administrazio Prozedura Erkideari buruzkoa, onartuta. Lege horrek titulu berria dakar —VI.a— legegintza-ekinbidea eta erregelamenduak eta bestelako xedapenak emateko ahalmena arautzeko. Bertan, legegintza-ekinbidea eta lege mailako arauak egiteko ahala erabiltzeari, erregelamenduak egiteko ahala erabiltzeari, erregulazio onaren printzipioei, araudiaren ebaluazioari, arauen publizitateari, arauen plangintzari eta herritarrek lege mailako arauak eta erregelamenduak egiteko prozeduran parte hartzeari buruzko xedapen batzuk jasotzen dira. Lan horrek arlo horretan 39/2015 Legeak sartutako berritasunak aztertzen ditu, tokiko ikuspegitik, haren xedapenak administrazio publiko guztiei eta, beraz, toki-administrazioei ere, aplikatzen baitzaizkie. Helburu nagusia Legeak tokiko arauak egiteko ahalean daukan eragina aztertzea eta, ondorioz, arlo horretan tokiko eremuan sartzen diren berritasun nagusiak zehaztea da, haren aplikazioak ekar ditzakeen erronka, arazo eta zalantza batzuk ikusteko eta balizko irtenbideak emateko. RESUMEN: La política de mejora de la regulación, impulsada por la Organización para la Cooperación y el Desarrollo Económico y por la Unión Europea, se ha desarrollado en España de forma reciente y ha recibido un impulso significativo en 2015, con la aprobación de la Ley 39/2015, de 1 de octubre, del procedimiento administrativo común de las administraciones públicas. Esta Ley incluye un nuevo Título —el VI—, destinado a regular la iniciativa legislativa y la potestad para dictar reglamentos y otras disposiciones. En él se recogen algunas previsiones sobre el ejercicio de la iniciativa legislativa y la potestad para dictar normas con rango de ley, el ejercicio de la potestad reglamentaria, los principios de buena regulación, la evaluación normativa, la publicidad de las normas, la planificación normativa y la participación de los ciudadanos en el procedimiento de elaboración de normas con rango de ley y reglamentos. Este trabajo se centra en el análisis de las novedades incorporadas en esta materia por la citada Ley 39/2015 desde una perspectiva local, dada la aplicación de sus previsiones a todas las administraciones públicas y, por consiguiente, también a las administraciones locales. El objetivo primordial es analizar la incidencia de esta Ley sobre la potestad normativa local y, en consecuencia, determinar las principales novedades que se incorporan en esta materia en el ámbito local, con el fin de apuntar algunos retos, problemas e incertidumbres que su aplicación puede suscitar y aportar posibles soluciones. ABSTRACT: Policies to improve regulation promoted by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and the European Union have recently been applied in Spain and in 2015 received a significant boost with the passing of Law 39/2015, of 1 October, on common administrative procedure for the public administrations. This Law includes a new Section (VI) which regulates legislative initiative and the power to create regulations and other provisions. The law contains provisions regarding the execution of legislative initiative and the power to create regulations with the force of laws, the exercising of regulatory power, the principles of good regulation, regulatory evaluation, regulatory publicity, regulatory planning and the participation of citizens in the process of creating legislation with the force of laws and regulations. The present study analyses the changes made to local regulatory powers by the aforementioned Law 39/2015, given that its provisions are applicable to all public administrations and, therefore, also to the local administrations. The primary objective is to analyse the effect of this Law on local regulatory powers and, therefore, to determine the principle new changes that have been made to local regulatory powers, with the aim of identifying the challenges, problems and uncertainties that may arise through the application of the Law and to propose possible solutions.

scholarly journals The European Union's policy on human rights and Chinese sovereignism: The case of Xinjiang

2021 ◽  
Vol 73 (1) ◽  
pp. 58-86
Author(s):  
Dragan Trailovic
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Individual Case ◽  
The Other ◽  
Individual Member ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
The One ◽  
Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region ◽  
Rights Issues ◽  
The Eu

The article explores the European Union's approach to human rights issues in China through the processes of bilateral and multilateral dialogue on human rights between the EU and the People's Republic of China, on the one hand. On the other hand, the paper deals with the analysis of the EU's human rights policy in the specific case of the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, which is examined through normative and political activities of the EU, its institutions and individual member states. Besides, the paper examines China's response to the European Union's human rights approaches, in general, but also when it comes to the specific case of UAR Xinjiang. ?his is done through a review of China's discourse and behaviour within the EU-China Human Rights Dialogue framework, but also at the UN level and within the framework of bilateral relations with individual member states. The paper aims to show whether and how the characteristics of the EU's general approach to human rights in China are reflected in the individual case of Xinjiang. Particular attention shall be given to the differentiation of member states in terms of their approach to human rights issues in China, which is conditioned by the discrepancy between their political values, normative interests and ideational factors, on the one hand, and material factors and economic interests, on the other. Also, the paper aims to show the important features of the different views of the European Union and the Chinese state on the very role of Human Rights Dialogue, as well as their different understandings of the concept of human rights itself. The study concluded that the characteristics of the Union's general approach to human rights in China, as well as the different perceptions of human rights issues between China and the EU, were manifested in the same way in the case of UAR Xinjiang.

scholarly journals Are traditional minority languages a bench marking for the rights of migrant languages in the European Union?

2018 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 40-60
Author(s):  
Christopher Houtkamp ◽  
László Marácz
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Linguistic Diversity ◽  
Comparative Approach ◽  
Minority Languages ◽  
Language Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Linguistic Rights ◽  
The Status ◽  
The One

In this paper a normative position will be defended. We will argue that minimal territorial minority language rights formulated in terms of the personality principle referring to traditional minority languages granted in the framework of the European Union (EU) are a benchmark for non-territorial linguistic rights. Although territorial minority languages should be granted collective rights this is in large parts of Europe not the case. Especially in the Central and Eastern European Member States language rights granted to territorial languages are assigned on the basis of personal language rights. Our argumentation will be elaborated on the basis of a comparative approach discussing the status of a traditional territorial language in Romania, more in particular Hungarian spoken in the Szeklerland area with the one of migrant languages in the Netherlands, more in particular Turkish. In accordance with the language hierarchy implying that territorial languages have a higher status than non-territorial languages both in the EUs and Member States’ language regimes nonterritorial linguistic rights will be realized as personal rights in the first place. Hence, the use of non-territorial minority languages is conditioned much as the use of territorial minority languages in the national Member States. So, the best possible scenario for mobile minority languages is to be recognized as a personal right and receive full support from the states where they are spoken. It is true that learning the host language would make inclusion of migrant language speakers into the host society smoother and securing a better position on the labour market. This should however be done without striving for full assimilation of the speakers of migrant languages for this would violate the linguistic rights of migrants to speak and cultivate one’s own heritage language, violate the EUs linguistic diversity policy, and is against the advantages provided by linguistic capital in the sense of BOURDIEU (1991).

scholarly journals DETERMINING INDIVIDUAL CATEGORIES OF ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES FOR PUBLIC REGISTRATION OF CIVIL STATES WITH ACCOUNTING OF LEGISLATIVE TRANSFORMATIONS

2019 ◽  
pp. 170-173
Author(s):  
O. H. Pohrebniak
Keyword(s):  
Administrative Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
Administrative Procedure ◽  
Modern Development ◽  
The Status ◽  
Civil Status ◽  
Administrative Procedures ◽  
State Registration ◽  
Administrative Proceedings ◽  
Theoretical Developments

The article defines certain peculiarities of administrative proceedings of state registration of marriage and establishment of paternity in Ukraine. It has been established that the procedures for state registration of acts of civil status are types of administrative procedures, it should first be noted that the general normative act which should define the notions and peculiarities of such procedures should be the Law of Ukraine “On the administrative procedure” 2018, which at present time is a project and submitted to the VerkhovnaRada of Ukraine for consideration. As a rule, scholars agree that the administrative procedure is directly related to the activities of the public administration and is an established algorithm for the functioning of the subjects of power. In this case, the procedures for state registration of acts of civil status are no exception. They are a kind of administrative procedures and implemented by state authorities, and in certain cases, and by local self-government bodies. At the same time having its own peculiarities regarding the procedure for implementation and the subject structure of such procedures. It has been established that the modern development of domestic administrative legislation and the practice of its application testifies that at present the administrative procedure as an independent component of administrative law has not yet been fully formed, although, given the active theoretical developments of the representatives of the administrative and legal science on the pages of scientific, journalistic and educational publications concerning the concept, features, types and structure of administrative procedures, and referring to the active legislative development of this tyranny, it is safe to say that the process of the administrative procedure in the structure of administrative law is actively continuing. Therefore, on the basis of theoretical developments and practical features, the author’s understanding of the concept of “administrative procedure of state registration of acts of civil status” is determined. In addition, given the specific features of administrative proceedings for state registration of civil status acts, as well as for a more complete clarification of the status and authority of all participants in certain administrative procedures, the necessary additional introduction of the concept of “implementation of the administrative procedure” is argued. Such category will allow to find out the place, role and authority not only of the administrative body, but also other participants in administrative proceedings. Thus, under the implementation of an administrative procedure, it should be understood as the observance, execution, use and application of procedural steps directed at the consideration and resolution of an administrative case.

scholarly journals CONSULTATIONS WITH THE PUBLIC AND STUDY OF PUBLIC OPINION AS ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES: GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS

2020 ◽  
pp. 140-150
Author(s):  
В. О. Кінзбурська
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Public Information ◽  
Public Consultation ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
Competitive Selection ◽  
The Public ◽  
Administrative Procedure ◽  
Administrative Procedures ◽  
Public Consultations ◽  
Public Monitoring

In the article the author defines the list of administrative procedures of interaction of state bodies with the public, which includes the procedures that arise in connection with: 1) public consultations (organization and conduct of public discussions of regulations); 2) the study of public opinion; 3) involvement of the public in the work of commissions established under public authorities; 4) exercising public control and supervision; 5) carrying out information activities of state bodies (publication of public information about the work of state bodies, providing answers to public requests for information); 6) activities of public councils in terms of interaction with state bodies (conducting public consultations, conducting public monitoring, holding meetings of the public council and making decisions of a recommendatory nature); 7) submission of appeals and requests for information (application of administrative procedures). The author analyzes some administrative procedures of interaction of state bodies with the public, namely: conducting public consultations and studying public opinion. The key features of the administrative procedure of public consultations are identified, which include: its dual form of implementation, as such consultations can be carried out both in person and via the Internet; availability of mandatory and optional stages; close connection with other administrative procedure related to the implementation of information activities of public authorities; obligatory documentation of the result in the form of a report, and in case of a face-to-face consultation with the public, also a protocol; the possibility of initiating this procedure by both entities government agencies and civil society institutions. It is noted that the administrative procedure for the study of public opinion is similar to the general administrative procedure for public consultation, but has its differences, in particular: it is initiated exclusively by state bodies (executive authorities); has no optional stages; provides for competitive selection among the subjects of public opinion polls, ie in fact it is a different administrative procedure for competitive selection; does not require logging, and the main document for the implementation of such a procedure is a report.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document