DOCSLIB.ORG

Assocation of European Senates

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Assocation of European Senates Association of European Senates/Association des Sénats d’Europe 15th Meeting, London/XVème Réunion, Londres Friday 15 June 2013/vendredi 15 juin 2013 The meeting opened at 9.28 am. The Relationship between Upper and Lower Chambers Baroness D’Souza, Lord Speaker of the House of Lords, United Kingdom Good morning, everyone. Thank you all so very much for being on time. In the history of these conferences, we are making history by starting two minutes early. Welcome to Westminster for this 15th meeting of our association. It is a great honour for me to be able to host this year’s meeting. In making arrangements for today, I thought that it was very important that we should meet in the Houses of Parliament and, more particularly, in this beautiful room, the Queen’s Robing Room. Let me take a few minutes to explain the significance of our location. Since the first half of the 16th century, the two Houses of Parliament—the Commons and the Lords—have met here in the Palace of Westminster, which in the times of King Henry VIII had ceased to be a royal residence. What you see now is not the original palace, because in 1834 it was seriously damaged by fire. Our Victorian predecessors were nothing if not ruthless. Much of what remained of the earlier buildings was pulled down and the new Houses of Parliament were erected in the 1840s and 1850s. The architect was Charles Barry and the interior designer was Augustus Pugin, a church architect devoted to the gothic revival style. Almost every detail of what you will see today stems from Pugin’s design. Overseeing interior design and decoration was Prince Albert, who until his death in 1861 chaired the commission set up in 1841 to mastermind the project. Victoria and Albert as portrayed by Winterhalter gaze down on us this morning and their stamp is everywhere on this building—quite literally. 1 The new Palace was our first purpose-built parliamentary building, with Committee rooms, libraries, smoking rooms—things have changed—and other facilities fit for the 19th century. What, you may ask, was the purpose of this room, the Queen’s Robing Room, and the adjoining Royal Gallery? The answer is that their purpose was largely ceremonial and royal. The Queen still uses this room to put on the crown and ceremonial robes at the annual State Opening of Parliament. These rooms remind us that, constitutionally speaking, Parliament consists of the Commons, the Lords and the Sovereign. Occasionally this room is used to receive visiting heads of state into Parliament. Yesterday, for example, Mr Stephen Harper, the Prime Minister of Canada, addressed Members of both Houses here. For a time—between 1941 and 1950—it was transformed into a parliamentary Chamber. The House of Commons Chamber had been completely destroyed by a bomb and the Commons moved into the Lords Chamber. The Lords, then a much smaller body than today, moved into this room, where they stayed for nine years. After the history lesson, let us move to some more practical matters for today’s meeting. For the morning session, I shall call speakers in the debate to speak in alphabetical order, by country, with the exception that Madame Matvienko from Russia will speak third, because she has to leave this morning. I remind you, dear colleagues, that you have eight minutes for your speeches. We will try to keep to time this morning. My colleague here on my left has a bell, which I very much hope that he will not have to use. This afternoon, we shall progress in reverse alphabetical order. A list for this morning’s debate is now available—I think that most of you have it. You can speak in both morning and afternoon debates and, if you have not already done so, please register at the documents table just outside this room. I have arranged the speaking times so that in both debates after the last speaker we shall have some time for impromptu informal discussion. We will adjourn at 12.40 and just before lunch we will have a family photograph of all participants, including staff, on the Sovereign’s 2 Steps, which are the steps that the Queen uses as she comes up to open Parliament—in fact, it will be at the Sovereign’s Entrance. Finally, in the unlikely event of a fire or any other emergency, we will be directed to leave the building by the same route as we entered it. I ask colleagues around the table to speak relatively slowly, to give our interpreters a reasonable chance at translating our words of wisdom. Let us now turn to our first debate of the day. I call Mr Edgar Mayer to speak. Mr Edgar Mayer, Speaker of the Federal Council of the Republic of Austria Thank you, Lord Speaker. I will continue in German, as it is easier for me. (Translation.) Ladies and gentlemen, distinguished colleagues, the annual meeting of the Association of European Senates is taking place today for the first time in the United Kingdom. I thank Baroness D’Souza in particular and our other British colleagues for their efforts in organising this conference. As we enjoy the privilege of meeting in this magnificent room in the Houses of Parliament in Westminster, which is one of the world’s oldest Parliaments, we should recall a statement by the Member of Parliament John Bright, who in 1865 called England the “mother of all Parliaments”. It is true that the English or rather the British Parliament served as a model for all European Parliaments: the origins of the House of Lords go back as far as the 14th century. Since that time, the Second Chambers of our Parliaments have played a central role in checking and balancing the activities of the First Chamber. It is no coincidence that we foreigners use the English term “checks and balances” to describe our function. Our Second Chambers serve to verify the quality of the legislative process and provide a framework for reflection on issues that the First Chamber did not have the time to deal with, thus assuring the quality of the political process as a whole. 3 The three fundamental principles underlying the work of Second Chambers are as essential now as they were at the inception of the bicameral system: first, checking and monitoring the First Chamber; secondly, involving the regions through the strong regional ties of its Members; and, thirdly, participating in European policy- making. I do not need to elaborate on our task of checking and monitoring the First Chamber. The Austrian Federal Council has the right to raise objections to legislative decisions of the National Council, mostly with suspensive effect. However, in certain matters the Federal Council also has an absolute veto right. We can also make legislative proposals to the First Chamber, which then pass through the entire legislative process. As the Austrian Federal Council, we are heavily anchored in our regions. We have direct and strong relations with the federal provinces. We pay a lot of attention to ensuring that local and regional interests are represented at the national level. The regional orientation of the Austrian Federal Council is in no way contradictory to the European idea, but logically derives from it. Through the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, Second Chambers in the EU have been given a new and crucial function in an integrated Europe: we check that draft legislation is in line with the interests of the people—the subsidiarity check. We ensure that EU legislation works in practice. For example, we were the ones who were able to assess whether the draft of a regulation on seeds actually made sense for our people. Also, we were able to ensure that the water proposals worked in practice. In both cases, the Austrian Federal Council expressed a negative opinion on the draft submitted by the European Commission. We gave detailed reasons for our objections to the legislation proposed and outlined why it did not meet the needs of our people. In recent years, the Austrian Federal Council has become the European Chamber of Austrian legislation. The Federal Council has the possibility of outlining a negotiating position and can even propose a voting position to be taken by the Federal Minister 4 in charge or by the Federal Chancellor. Every year, we send more than a dozen position papers to the European Commission. We should ensure that our political work becomes more founded in the grassroots. We need to make sure that our Second Chambers become more Europeanised. Our Chambers are more important than ever, so, ladies and gentlemen, let us reflect on how we can contribute together towards the creation of a legal framework to satisfy the interests of our citizens. We should make sure that European legislation meets the needs of our people and that the regions are better represented. If we, as the Senates and Second Chambers of Europe, succeed in contributing towards the achievement of this goal, we will be filling the tradition of the bicameral parliamentary system, which has its roots here in this building in which we are gathered today. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. The Lord Speaker Thank you very much indeed, Speaker Mayer. I now call Madame Zrihen from Belgium. Ms Olga Zrihen, Senator, Senate of the Kingdom of Belgium Thank you. First, let me give a few words in English. I thank Baroness D’Souza and the House of Lords for the warm welcome that they gave us last night and for the fact that our agenda today is so interesting.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Background of Pennsylvania Government
    Background of Pennsylvania Government The Pennsylvania General Assembly In 1776, the Pennsylvania Legislature was established as a lawmaking body by the first state constitution. Originally unicameral, the General Assembly became bicameral under the second constitution of 1790 and since that time has been comprised of a House of Representatives and a Senate. The General Assembly meets in two-year sessions. House and Senate legislative districts are reapportioned every 10 years after the federal census is taken. Reapportionment following the 2000 census created state House districts of approximately 59,000 people and Senate districts of about 240,000 people. There are 203 members in the House of Representatives; a number established when the state's constitution was revised in 1967. A representative must be at least 21 years of age, a resident of the commonwealth for four years and a resident of the district for at least one year. The term of office for a member of the House is two years, with all seats up for re-election at the same time. When the Senate was first established in 1790, there were only 18 senators. Following the 1874 Constitutional Convention, that number was increased to 50, where it remains today. A senator must be at least 25 years of age with the same residency requirements as members of the House. Senate terms are four years, with odd- and even-numbered district seats contested on a rotating basis. Chamber and caucus leadership The principal officers of the state Senate are the president pro tempore, the secretary and the chief clerk, all of whom are elected by the Senate.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Record—Senate S8015
    January 1, 2021 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S8015 Whereas, in February 2019, the Department (B) guarantee unfettered humanitarian ac- (C) support credible efforts to address the of State announced that it would withhold cess and assistance to the Northwest and root causes of the conflict and to achieve some security assistance to Cameroon, in- Southwest regions; sustainable peace and reconciliation, pos- cluding equipment and training, citing cred- (C) exercise restraint and ensure that po- sibly involving an independent mediator, and ible allegations of human rights violations litical protests are peaceful; and efforts to aid the economic recovery of and by state security forces and a lack of inves- (D) establish a credible process for an in- fight coronavirus in the Northwest and tigation, accountability, and transparency clusive dialogue that includes all relevant Southwest regions; by the Government of Cameroon in response; stakeholders, including from civil society, to (D) support humanitarian and development Whereas, on December 26, 2019, the United achieve a sustainable political solution that programming, including to meet immediate States terminated the designation of Cam- respects the rights and freedoms of all of the needs, advance nonviolent conflict resolu- eroon as a beneficiary under the African people of Cameroon; tion and reconciliation, promote economic Growth and Opportunity Act (19 U.S.C. 3701 (3) affirms that the United States Govern- recovery and development, support primary et seq.) because ‘‘the Government of
    [Show full text]
  • Toolkit: Citizen Participation in the Legislative Process
    This publication was made possible with financial support from the Government of Canada. About ParlAmericas ParlAmericas is the institution that promotes PARLIAMENTARY DIPLOMACY in the INTER-AMERICAN system ParlAmericas is composed of the 35 NATIONAL LEGISLATURES from North, Central and South America and the Caribbean ParlAmericas facilitates the exchange of parliamentary BEST PRACTICES and promotes COOPERATIVE POLITICAL DIALOGUE ParlAmericas mainstreams GENDER EQUALITY by advocating for women’s political empowerment and the application of a gender lens in legislative work ParlAmericas fosters OPEN PARLIAMENTS by advancing the principles of transparency, accountability, citizen participation, ethics and probity ParlAmericas promotes policies and legislative measures to mitigate and adapt to the effects ofCLIMATE CHANGE ParlAmericas works towards strengthening democracy and governance by accompanying ELECTORAL PROCESSES ParlAmericas is headquartered in OTTAWA, CANADA Table of Contents Toolkit Co-creation Plan 6 Contributors 8 Introduction 9 Objective 9 Using this Toolkit 9 Defining Citizen Participation 10 Importance of Citizen Participation 10 Participation Ladder 11 Overview of Citizen Participation in the Legislative Process 12 Developing a Citizen Participation Strategy 15 Principles of Citizen Participation 16 Resources to Support Citizen Participation 17 Educating Citizens and Promoting Participation 18 Awareness Raising Programs and Campaigns 18 Citizen Participation Offices and Communications Departments 19 Parliamentary Websites
    [Show full text]
  • KAZAKHSTAN TREND from Totalitarianism to Democratic and Legal State
    Astana, 2015 ББК 63.3(5Ка)я6 С 82 Kazakhstan trend: from Totalitarianism to Democratic and Legal State (View from the Outside) / Collection of articles. Executive editor and author of the introduction Doctor of Law, professor, Honored worker of the Republic of Kazakhstan I.I. Rogov, Astana, 2015. – 234 p. ISBN 9965-27-571-8 ББК 63.3(5Ка)я6 Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan, drafted on the initiative and under the direct supervision of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan – Leader of the Nation N.A. Nazarbayev, adopted on the nationwide referendum on 30 August 1995, has become a stable political and legal foundation of the state and society, dialectical combination of the best achievements of the world constitutional idea with Kazakhstan values, of the formation of unified constitutional and legal policy and practice, of gradual assertion of real constitutionalism. This publication includes articles, reflecting the opinions of foreign experts on the significance of the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan in the deep and comprehensive reformation of Kazakhstan, its transformation into a modern, strong, successful and prosperous state. The collection also includes analytical comparative materials on the experience of Kazakhstani law and state institutions in comparison with similar branches and institutions of other countries. Among the authors are the representatives of authoritative international organizations, famous politicians, heads of state agencies, world-known scientists from various fields of human knowledge. Publication is interesting and useful for politicians, legislators and law enforcers, academics and wide audience. ISBN 9965-27-571-8 © Constitutional Council of the Republic of Kazakhstan, 2015 CONTENT INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Influence of Austrian Voting Right of 1907 on the First Electoral Law of the Successor States (Poland, Romania [Bukovina], Czechoslovakia)
    ISSN 2411-9563 (Print) European Journal of Social Sciences May-August 2014 ISSN 2312-8429 (Online) Education and Research Volume 1, Issue 1 The influence of Austrian voting right of 1907 on the first electoral law of the successor states (Poland, Romania [Bukovina], Czechoslovakia) Dr Andrzej Dubicki Uniwersytet Łódzki Abstract As a result of collapse of the Central Powers in 1918 in Central Europe have emerged new national states e.g. Poland, Czechoslowakia, Hungaria, SHS Kingdom some of states that have existed before the Great War have changed their boundaries e.g. Romania, Bulgaria. But what is most important newly created states have a need to create their constituencies, so they needed a electoral law. There is a question in what manner they have used the solutions that have been used before the war in the elections held to the respective Parliaments (mostly to the Austrian or Hungarian parliament) and in case of Poland to the Tzarist Duma or Prussian and German Parliament. In the paper author will try to compare Electoral Laws that were used in Poland Czechoslowakia, and Romania [Bukowina]. The first object will be connected with the question in what matter the Austrian electoral law have inspired the solutions used in respective countries after the Great War. The second object will be connected with showing similarities between electoral law used in so called opening elections held mainly in 1919 in Austria-Hungary successor states. The third and final question will be connected with development of the electoral rules in respective countries and with explaining the reasons for such changes and its influence on the party system in respective country: multiparty in Czechoslovakia, hybrid in Romania.
    [Show full text]
  • Haiti: Concerns After the Presidential Assassination
    INSIGHTi Haiti: Concerns After the Presidential Assassination Updated July 19, 2021 Armed assailants assassinated Haitian President Jovenel Moïse in his private home in the capital, Port-au- Prince, early on July 7, 2021 (see Figure 1). Many details of the attack remain under investigation. Haitian police have arrested more than 20 people, including former Colombian soldiers, two Haitian Americans, and a Haitian with long-standing ties to Florida. A Pentagon spokesperson said the U.S. military helped train a “small number” of the Colombian suspects in the past. Protesters and opposition groups had been calling for Moïse to resign since 2019. The assassination’s aftermath, on top of several preexisting crises in Haiti, likely points to a period of major instability, presenting challenges for U.S. policymakers and for congressional oversight of the U.S. response and assistance. The Biden Administration requested $188 million in U.S. assistance for Haiti in FY2022. Congress has previously held hearings, and the cochair of the House Haiti Caucus made a statement on July 7 suggesting reexaminations of U.S. policy options on Haiti. Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov IN11699 CRS INSIGHT Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress Congressional Research Service 2 Figure 1. Haiti Source: CRS. Succession. Who will succeed Moïse is unclear, as is the leadership of the Haitian government. In the assassination’s immediate aftermath, interim Prime Minister Claude Joseph was in charge, recognized by U.S. and U.N. officials, and said the police and military were in control of Haitian security. Joseph became interim prime minister in April 2021.
    [Show full text]
  • The 2020 Presidential Election: Provisions of the Constitution and U.S. Code
    PREFACE The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) is proud to acknowledge its role in the Presidential election pro- cess. NARA’s Office of the Federal Register (OFR) acts as the administrator of the Electoral College and carries out the duties of the Archivist. In this role, the OFR is charged with helping the States carry out their election responsibilities, ensuring the completeness and integrity of the Electoral College documents submitted to Congress, and informing the public about the Presidential election process. The Electoral College system was established under Article II and Amendment 12 of the U.S. Constitution. In each State, the voters choose electors to select the President and Vice President of the United States, based on the results of the Novem- ber general election. Before the general election, the Archivist officially notifies each State’s governor and the Mayor of the District of Columbia of their electoral responsibilities. OFR provides instructions and resources to help the States and District of Columbia carry out those responsibilities. As the results of the popular vote are finalized in each state, election officials create Certificates of Ascertainment, which establish the credentials of their electors, that are sent to OFR. In December, the electors hold meetings in their States to vote for President and Vice President. The electors seal Certificates of Vote and send them to the OFR and Congress. In January, Congress sits in joint session to certify the election of the President and Vice President. In the year after the election, electoral documents are held at the OFR for public viewing, and then transferred to the Archives of the United States for permanent retention and access.
    [Show full text]
  • 45627 WBI DEVELOPMENT STUDIES Public Disclosure Authorized
    45627 WBI DEVELOPMENT STUDIES Public Disclosure Authorized Legislative Oversight Public Disclosure Authorized and Budgeting A World Perspective Editors Rick STAPENHURST Riccardo PELIZZO David M. OLSON Public Disclosure Authorized Lisa von TRAPP Public Disclosure Authorized Legislative Oversight and Budgeting WBI Development Studies Legislative Oversight and Budgeting A World Perspective Rick Stapenhurst, Riccardo Pelizzo, David M. Olson, and Lisa von Trapp, Editors Washington, DC © 2008 The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank 1818 H Street, NW Washington, DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000 Internet: www.worldbank.org E-mail: [email protected] All rights reserved 1 2 3 4 :: 11 10 09 08 This volume is a product of the staff of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Develop- ment / The World Bank. The fi ndings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this volume do not necessarily refl ect the views of the Executive Directors of The World Bank or the govern- ments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Rights and Permissions The material in this publication is copyrighted. Copying and/or transmitting portions or all of this work without permission may be a violation of applicable law. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank encourages dissemination of its work and will normally grant permission to reproduce portions of the work promptly.
    [Show full text]
  • Deutscher Bundestag Dor Präsident
    Deutscher Bundestag Dor Präsident Ihrer Exzellenz der Marschallin des Sejm der Republik Polen Frau Ewa Kopacz WARSCHAU REPUBLIK POLEN Berlin, 13. April 2012 Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin, Prof. Dr. Norbert Lammert, MdB Platz der Republik 1 ich danke Ihnen und Präsident Bogdan Borusewicz für den mit 11011 Berlin Schreiben vom 29. März 2012 übermittelten zweiten Kompro- Telefon: +49 30 227-72901 Fax: +49 30 227-70945 missvorschlag betreffend die Ausgestaltung der Interparlamen- [email protected] tarischen Konferenz zur Begleitung der Gemeinsamen Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik und der Gemeinsamen Sicherheits- und Verteidigungspolitik. Da wir uns bei meinem Besuch in Warschau vor acht Wochen bereits über die Frage der Delegationsgrößen ausgetauscht ha- ben, wird es Sie nicht überraschen, dass ich der von Ihnen nun vorgeschlagenen freien Teilnehmerformel ("formula of open participation") nicht zustimmen kann. Mit dem Ihnen bereits übermittelten Beschluss des Deutschen Bundestages vom Juni 2011, der nicht nur eine feste, sondern darüber hinaus auch eine nach der Größe der Mitgliedstaaten gestaffelte Zahl von Delegationsmitgliedern aus den nationalen Parlamenten for- dert, ist eine in das Ermessen der jeweiligen Parlamente gestell- te Delegationsgröße nicht vereinbar. Sie haben die bei Ihnen eingegangenen Stellungnahmen aus 32 Kammern zu Ihrem ersten Vorschlag analysiert und stellen in Ihrem Brief vom 29. März 2012 fest, dass die Zahl derer, die auf einer gleichen Delegationsgröße sowohl aus nationalen Parla- menten als auch aus dem Europäischen Parlament beharren, sich mit denen die Waage hält, die sich für Ihren Vorschlag der sechsköpfigen Delegationen aus den nationalen Parlamenten und den 16 Delegierten aus dem EP aussprechen. Eine völlige Freigabe hatte kein Mitgliedsparlament gefordert.
    [Show full text]
  • Report on the Foreign Policy of the Czech Republic 2007
    CONTENTS INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................6 I. MULTILATERAL COOPERATION ................................................................................. 14 1. The Czech Republic and the European Union ........................................................ 14 The Czech Republic and the EU Common Foreign and Security Policy ............. 33 The Czech Republic and European Security and Defence Policy ........................ 42 2. The Czech Republic and the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) ............ 48 3. The Czech Republic and Regional Cooperation ..................................................... 74 Visegrad cooperation ............................................................................................. 74 Central European Initiative (CEI) .......................................................................... 78 Regional Partnership .............................................................................................. 80 Stability Pact for South East Europe ..................................................................... 82 4. The Czech Republic and other European international organisations and forums .. 84 The Czech Republic and the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE)................................................................................................................... 84 Council of Europe .................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Federalism, Bicameralism, and Institutional Change: General Trends and One Case-Study*
    brazilianpoliticalsciencereview ARTICLE Federalism, Bicameralism, and Institutional Change: General Trends and One Case-study* Marta Arretche University of São Paulo (USP), Brazil The article distinguishes federal states from bicameralism and mechanisms of territorial representation in order to examine the association of each with institutional change in 32 countries by using constitutional amendments as a proxy. It reveals that bicameralism tends to be a better predictor of constitutional stability than federalism. All of the bicameral cases that are associated with high rates of constitutional amendment are also federal states, including Brazil, India, Austria, and Malaysia. In order to explore the mechanisms explaining this unexpected outcome, the article also examines the voting behavior of Brazilian senators constitutional amendments proposals (CAPs). It shows that the Brazilian Senate is a partisan Chamber. The article concludes that regional influence over institutional change can be substantially reduced, even under symmetrical bicameralism in which the Senate acts as a second veto arena, when party discipline prevails over the cohesion of regional representation. Keywords: Federalism; Bicameralism; Senate; Institutional change; Brazil. well-established proposition in the institutional literature argues that federal Astates tend to take a slow reform path. Among other typical federal institutions, the second legislative body (the Senate) common to federal systems (Lijphart 1999; Stepan * The Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa no Estado
    [Show full text]
  • Côte D'ivoire Country Focus
    European Asylum Support Office Côte d’Ivoire Country Focus Country of Origin Information Report June 2019 SUPPORT IS OUR MISSION European Asylum Support Office Côte d’Ivoire Country Focus Country of Origin Information Report June 2019 More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://europa.eu). ISBN: 978-92-9476-993-0 doi: 10.2847/055205 © European Asylum Support Office (EASO) 2019 Reproduction is authorised, provided the source is acknowledged, unless otherwise stated. For third-party materials reproduced in this publication, reference is made to the copyrights statements of the respective third parties. Cover photo: © Mariam Dembélé, Abidjan (December 2016) CÔTE D’IVOIRE: COUNTRY FOCUS - EASO COUNTRY OF ORIGIN INFORMATION REPORT — 3 Acknowledgements EASO acknowledges as the co-drafters of this report: Italy, Ministry of the Interior, National Commission for the Right of Asylum, International and EU Affairs, COI unit Switzerland, State Secretariat for Migration (SEM), Division Analysis The following departments reviewed this report, together with EASO: France, Office Français de Protection des Réfugiés et Apatrides (OFPRA), Division de l'Information, de la Documentation et des Recherches (DIDR) Norway, Landinfo The Netherlands, Immigration and Naturalisation Service, Office for Country of Origin Information and Language Analysis (OCILA) Dr Marie Miran-Guyon, Lecturer at the École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales (EHESS), researcher, and author of numerous publications on the country reviewed this report. It must be noted that the review carried out by the mentioned departments, experts or organisations contributes to the overall quality of the report, but does not necessarily imply their formal endorsement of the final report, which is the full responsibility of EASO.
    [Show full text]