The Concept of Essential Use: A Novel Approach to Regulating Chemicals in the European Union

This article examines ‘essential use’ as a novel form of regulatory control. An essential use approach to the regulation of potentially hazardous chemicals has not been used extensively (if at all) in European Union (EU) regulatory law and warrants further consideration. Essential use, as initially proposed by scientists and later referred to in the EU 2020 Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability, is a radical departure from the current method of regulating hazardous substances. The purpose of this article is to contribute to legal scholarship on essential use by (i) scoping its origins in United States law and subsequently in international law; (ii) noting its limited incorporation into the EU legal order over the past 30 years; (iii) analyzing how it could be further incorporated into the EU legal order; and (iv) considering the impact of such a move on the future regulation of hazardous substances in the EU.

POLITIK HUKUM PEMERINTAHAN DESA

The State recognizes and respects regional government units that are special or special in nature which are regulated by law. Second, the State recognizes indigenous and tribal peoples' units along with their traditional rights insofar as they are alive and in accordance with the development of society and the principles of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia, which are regulated in law. Politics of village government law, it cannot be separated from 3 (three) main bases, namely philosophical, sociological and juridical basis. The politics of regulatory law above are the base for legal politics for regulations that are below, so that there should not be any universal inconsistencies. In addition, horizontally the legal politics of legislation must also be consistent.

ON THE ISSUE OF THE BLANKET METHOD OF CONSTRUCTING CRIMINAL LAW PROHIBITIONS (BASED ON PROVISIONS OF SECTION VII OF THE SPECIAL PART OF THE CRIMINAL CODE OF UKRAINE)

The article examines the blanket method for describing dispositions of criminal law prohibitions, in particular, the norms of Section VII of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. It has been established that when using blanket dispositions, the content of a criminal act is determined both by the law on criminal liability and by the norms of other branches of law; at the same time, such dispositions do not replace criminal law provisions, while performing in such cases auxiliary, clarifying function. It is determined that the blanket way of describing economic articles of criminal legislation is due to the special meaning of a criminal prohibition, which protects the economy as a regulator of relations by non-criminal legal acts. In the norms of the Criminal Code of Ukraine on economic crimes considered in the article, the domestic legislator pragmatically concretized the semantic links between the norm of the criminal and special regulatory law, which should be taken positively. It was established that in this way, firstly, the limits of the volume of unlawful behavior are clearly established, beyond which the representatives of law enforcement practice are strictly prohibited from going out during the criminal-legal assessment of the deed. At the same time, here, to a certain extent, the work of the law enforcement officer is facilitated, since normative acts of a non-criminal direction have been concretized, which should be relied upon in the investigation and further judicial proceedings. Secondly, such a normatively specific approach to the construction of criminal law prohibitions obviously contributes to the unification and simplification of approaches to socially dangerous acts in the economic sphere. It shows that the state does not need numerous laws and regulations, which are textually, chronologically and legally distorted. It has been established defined that the reform of the object and system of norms on crimes against the order of economic activity should have as its main task the careful development of specific criminal law norms in order to create the cross-sectoral mechanism of legal regulation. Key words: blanket disposition, economic crime, legal act, disposition, regulatory law.

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF EFFICIENT LEGAL TECHNOLOGY

The review analyzes some publications of foreign researchers concerning the effectiveness of new legal technologies in legal practice and the work of lawyers, the construction of AI systems administration, the ability of machine learning systems to operate with texts of regulatory, law enforcement and other legal acts as data objects, the development of AI training mechanisms and conditions for transparency of its conclusions and decisions.

Administrative Law and Democracy

This chapter focuses on important debates at the intersection of regulatory law, constitutional structure, technical competence, and public participation. It concentrates on the representative democracies that are at the heart of this volume. In such polities, delegation of policy-making authority to the executive branch is inevitable as the state confronts the social and economic problems of modern life. Statutory and constitutional language is incapable of eliminating policy discretion given the complexity of these problems and the need to respond quickly to changed circumstances. Such delegation, however, appears to violate democratic norms that view the legislature as the only source of legitimacy. Even in a system with a popularly elected president, executive-branch policy choices must confront the issue of democratic legitimacy. These choices may bear little or no relationship to promises made during the electoral campaign, and they may involve only minimal legislative involvement. Thus, although policy delegation is inevitable, it is also democratically problematic. To further the democratic credentials of executive policy-making, this chapter defends the use of administrative procedures that require transparency, citizens’ input, and public reason-giving.

PERLINDUNGAN KONSUMEN TERHADAP PERJANJIAN JUAL BELI PERUMAHAN PRESPEKTIF UNDANG-UNDNAG NOMOR 1 TAHUN 2016 TENTANG PERUMAHAN DAN KAWASAN PEMUKIMAN

The need for housting is increasing every year in Indonesia. Many events of laws and acts of laws that will accur in the business of housing, for example the sale and purchase, case this will potentially give birth to the issue of law which is great if it did not hace an umbrella law that is clearly to provide protection to kosumen of the perpetrators of the business that is not faith either in business housing.Indonesia has made a regulatory law that can be used as a handle to the consumers, is with the birth of Law Number 8 Year 1999 on Protection of Consumers, which regulate the right and obligatuins business actors as well as consumers and Law no.1 of 2011 concerning Housing and Setttlement Areas and their plementing regulations. However, from the perspective of Law no.1 of 2011 concerning Housing and Settlement Areas has not actually been able to protect consumers rights so as to harm the community as consumersKey words : legal protection ; sale and purchase ; housingAbstrakKebutuhan akan perumahan semakin meningkat setiap tahunnya di Indonesia. hal ini akan berpotensi melahirkan persoalan hukum yang besar jika tidak memiliki payung hukum yang jelas untuk memberikan perlindungan kepada kosumen dari pihak pelaku usaha yang tidak beritikad baik dalam menjalangkan bisnis perumahan. Indonesia telah membuat peraturan perundang-undangan yang dapat dijadikan pegangan terhadap konsumen, yakni dengan lahirnya Undang-undang Nomor 8 Tahun 1999 tentang Perlindungan Konsumen, yang mengatur mengenai hak dan kewajiban pelaku usaha serta konsumen dan Undang-Undang No. 1 Tahun 2011 tentang Perumahan dan Kawasan Permukiman beserta peraturan pelaksanaannya. Namun dari perspektif Undang-Undang No. 1 Tahun 2011 tentang Perumahan dan Kawasan Permukiman belum secara nyata dapat melindungi hak-hak konsumen sehingga merugikan masyarakat selaku konsumen.Kata kunci : perlindungan hukum; jual beli; perumahan

Ensuring the Reliability of Information on the Internet: Modern Legal Framework and Legal Practice

The paper presents an analysis of Russian legal practice on dissemination of unreliable socially significant information on the Internet. Based on the study of regulatory, law enforcement and linguistic sources, the author provides a legal assessment to information reliability characteristic, delimits it from related phenomena, and formulates the conditions for the realization of a legitimate interest in obtaining reliable information. Particular attention is given to an analysis of cases of bringing citizens to administrative responsibility for the dissemination of deliberately unreliable socially significant information on the Internet. The author concludes that the presumptions of unreliability of digital messages and their threat to public order and safety are widely spread in judicial practice. It is noted that unreliable socially significant information is interpreted in practice through the prism of information that does not correspond to reality, and the burden of proving the truth of messages published on the Internet is, as a rule, on their distributors.

9 Post-Crisis Regulatory Responses

This chapter looks at those rules of regulatory law that have been promulgated since - and largely because of - the 2008 global financial crisis, and which concern collateral transactions. It first examines the European Market Infrastructure Regulation (EMIR). This regulation, of which US law has a similar counterpart in the Dodd-Frank Act, has led to a massive increase in need of financial collateral. However, both legislative instruments do not seem to have direct consequences under private law. In contrast, the EU Markets in Financial Instruments Directive II and the Securities Finance Transactions Regulation of 2015 have imposed restrictions on entering into collateral transactions and contain several information requirements. These instruments may lead to consequences under private law, but not necessarily. This is different for recent EU and US rules concerning investment funds. Here, the private law consequences are obvious - and mostly unwarranted.