DOCSLIB.ORG

Lista Uczestników Konferencji Korespondentów ECPRD

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Lista Uczestników Konferencji Korespondentów ECPRD List of participants Country Chamber Name Family name E-mail Parliamentary Assembly of the Horst Schade [email protected] Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly of the Yann de Buyer [email protected] Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly of the Kathleen Layle [email protected] Council of Europe European Parliament Christine Verger [email protected] European Parliament Ulrich Hueschen [email protected] European Parliament Jerry Hilbert [email protected] Parliament - Nationalrat and [email protected] Austria Elisabeth Dietrich-Schulz Bundesrat Azerbaijan National Assembly Mehman Namazov [email protected] Belgium Chambre des Représentants Alberik Goris [email protected] Belgium Sénat André Rezsohazy [email protected] Belgium Chambre des Représentants Marc Van Der Hulst [email protected] Bosnia- Parliamentary Assembly - House Sena Bajraktarevic [email protected] Herzegovina of Representatives Canada Parliament Joseph Jackson [email protected] Croatia Hrvatski Sabor Branka Martincic [email protected] Cyprus House of Representatives Evelyn Moridou [email protected] Czech Republic Chamber of Deputies Karel Sosna [email protected] Czech Republic Chamber of Deputies Robert Vyklicky [email protected] Denmark Folketinget Hanne Rasmussen [email protected] Denmark Folketinget Christina Ringvard [email protected] Estonia Riigikogu Margit Muul [email protected] Estonia Riigikogu Siiri Sillajöe [email protected] Finland Eduskunta Jan-Henrik Pursianen [email protected] France Assemblée Nationale Pensée Chappotteau [email protected] France Sénat Jean-Louis Schroedt-Girard [email protected] France Assemblée Nationale Pascale Wolff [email protected] Georgia Parliament Nino Getia [email protected] Germany Bundestag Hanspeter Blatt [email protected] Germany Bundesrat Claus Koggel [email protected] Germany Bundesrat Lena Kramer [email protected] Greece The Hellenic Parliament George Sotirelis [email protected] Hungary National Assembly Ida Kelemen [email protected] Ireland Houses of the Oireachtas Charlotte Cousins [email protected] Israel Knesset Sarah Zwebner [email protected] Italy Camera dei Deputati Paola Bonacci [email protected] Italy Camera dei Deputati Annibale Ferrari [email protected] Italy Camera dei Deputati Carlo Simonelli [email protected] Lithuania Seimas Evaldas Sinkevicius [email protected] Luxembourg Chambre des Députés Marie France Kremer [email protected] Assemblée de la Republique de Moldova Ecaterina Gamurar [email protected] Moldavie Montenegro Parliament of Montenegro Jelisaveta Blagojevic [email protected] Montenegro Parliament of Montenegro Sandra Milajic [email protected] Tweede Kamer der Staten- Netherlands Nico Bal [email protected] General Tweede Kamer der Staten- Netherlands Piet Van Rijn [email protected] General Norway Stortinget Gro Sandgrind [email protected] Palestinian Palestinian Legislative Council Anan Hamad [email protected] Territories Poland Sejm Ziemowit Cieślik [email protected] Karwowska- Poland Senat Agata [email protected] Sokołowska Danuta Poland Senat Korzeniowska [email protected] Małgorzata Marchewka- Poland Sejm Kamilla [email protected] Bartkowiak Poland Senat Ewa Nawrocka [email protected] Odrowąż- Poland Sejm Wojciech Sypniewski Poland Sejm Wiesław Staśkiewicz [email protected] Assembleia da Republica Portugal Fernando Marques Pereira [email protected] Romania Camera Deputatilor Mihaela Zecheru [email protected] Russia Council of the Federation Victor Krivov [email protected] Russia Council of the Federation Timur Semenov [email protected] Serbia National Assembly Katarina Ristic [email protected] Slovakia National Council Anna Okruhlicova [email protected] Slovenia National Assembly Tatjana Krasovec [email protected] Spain Senado Maria José Fernandez [email protected] Spain Congreso de los Deputados Maria Rosa Ripolles Serrano [email protected] Sweden Riksdag Gunnar Fors [email protected] Sweden Riksdag Robin Travis [email protected] Switzerland Bundesversammlung Jeremie Leuthold [email protected] The Former Yugoslav Republic Assembly Zlatko Atanasov [email protected] of Macedonia The Former Yugoslav Republic Assembly Ivan Petrushevski [email protected] of Macedonia Turkey The Grand National Assembly Ahmet Yildiz [email protected] Ukraine Verkhovna Rada Borys Kolisnychenko [email protected] United Kingdom UK Parliament - House of Lordsa Alexander Brocklehurst [email protected] UK Parliament - House of United Kingdom Richard Cracknell [email protected] Commons UK Parliament - House of United Kingdom Jenny Sturt [email protected] Commons.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Synopsis of the Meeting Held in Strasbourg on 21 January 2013
    BUREAU OF THE ASSEMBLY AS/Bur/CB (2013) 01 21 January 2013 TO THE MEMBERS OF THE ASSEMBLY Synopsis of the meeting held in Strasbourg on 21 January 2013 The Bureau of the Assembly, meeting on 21 January 2013 in Strasbourg, with Mr Jean-Claude Mignon, President of the Assembly, in the Chair, as regards: - First part-session of 2013 (Strasbourg, 21-25 January 2013): i. Requests for debates under urgent procedure and current affairs debates: . decided to propose to the Assembly to hold a debate under urgent procedure on “Migration and asylum: mounting tensions in the Eastern Mediterranean” on Thursday 24 January 2013 and to refer this item to the Committee on Migration, Refugees and Displaced Persons for report; . decided to propose to the Assembly to hold the debate under urgent procedure on “Recent developments in Mali and Algeria and the threat to security and human rights in the Mediterranean region” on Thursday 24 January 2013 and to refer this item to the Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy for report; . decided not to hold a current affairs debate on “The deteriorating situation in Georgia”; . took note of the decision by the UEL Group to withdraw its request for a current affairs debate on “Political developments in Turkey regarding the human rights of the Kurds and other minorities”; ii. Draft agenda: updated the draft agenda; - Progress report of the Bureau of the Assembly and of the Standing Committee (5 October 2012 – 21 January 2013): (Rapporteur: Mr Kox, Netherlands, UEL): approved the Progress report; - Election observation: i. Presidential election in Armenia (18 February 2013): took note of the press release issued by the pre-electoral mission (Yerevan, 15-18 January 2013) and approved the final composition of the ad hoc committee to observe these elections (Appendix 1); ii.
    [Show full text]
  • Serbia and Montenegro
    ATTACKS ON JUSTICE – SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO Highlights Serbia and Montenegro (the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia until February 2003) entered the process of democratic transition, the creation of a system based on the rule of law, much later than other former socialist countries. On 4 February 2003 the new state union of Serbia and Montenegro was proclaimed. Under the Constitutional Charter of the State Union of Serbia and Montenegro, there is only one instance of Serbia and Montenegro having a common judiciary – the Court of Serbia and Montenegro. Otherwise, each state – the Republic of Serbia and the Republic of Montenegro – has its own internal courts system. A set of important judicial reforms came into force on 1 March 2002 in the Republic of Serbia and in July 2002 amendments to these laws were made that violate the principle of separation of powers and the independence and impartiality of the judiciary. In Montenegro, several laws relating to the judiciary were passed or amended during 2003. On 19 March 2003, the National Assembly of the Republic of Serbia dismissed 35 judges from office, including seven Supreme Court judges, amid accusations that the judiciary had failed to take tougher measures in dealing with remnants of the former regime as well as in prosecuting organized crime. The legal system in Serbia and Montenegro is still characterized by a number of contradictory and inconsistent regulations, resulting in legal insecurity. BACKGROUND On March 2002 officials of the Republic of Serbia and the Republic of Montenegro signed a procedural agreement for the restructuring of relations between both states in Belgrade, in the presence of the high representative of the EU,.
    [Show full text]
  • 135 Ipu Assembly and Related Meetings
    135th IPU ASSEMBLY AND RELATED MEETINGS Geneva, 23 – 27.10.2016 Governing Council CL/199/5(b)-R.1 Item 5 26 September 2016 Interim report by the Secretary General on the activities of the IPU since the 198th session of the Governing Council (b) International Day of Democracy 2016 In November 2007, the United Nations General Assembly designated 15 September as the International Day of Democracy. The ninth celebration of this Day was observed in 2016 by a large number of parliaments, governments, civil society organizations, international organizations and the IPU. Democracy 2030 was the theme chosen by the IPU for the 2016 edition of the International Day of Democracy. As at 23 September 2016, a total of 17 parliaments1 reported having taken some action to celebrate the International Day of Democracy. A summary of parliamentary activities is annexed to this report. The theme of Democracy 2030 was widely used and parliaments benefited from the theme’s significant flexibility. Descriptions of parliamentary events and all the materials produced by the IPU for the Day are available at www.ipu.org/idd. The United Nations followed the IPU’s lead and adopted Democracy and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development as its theme for the International Day. Key messages on Democracy 2030 were developed in the IPU press release for the Day, which was widely shared on social media. The theme questioned the ways in which parliaments will function in the future, how they will engage and involve youth, and the importance of democracy for the 2030 Agenda. The discussion on the future of democracy was highly relevant at a time when new technologies are enhancing the ability of parliaments to engage more directly with citizens.
    [Show full text]
  • Constitutional Provisions on the Prosecution Service in Council of Europe Member States
    Strasbourg, 3 October 2008 CDL-JD(2008)003* Study No. 494/2008 Engl. only EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR DEMOCRACY THROUGH LAW (VENICE COMMISSION) CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS ON THE PROSECUTION SERVICE IN COUNCIL OF EUROPE MEMBER STATES *This document has been classified restricted on the date of issue. Unless the Venice Commission decides otherwise, it will be declassified a year after its issue according to the rules set up in Resolution CM/Res(2001)6 on access to Council of Europe documents. This document will not be distributed at the meeting. Please bring this copy. www.venice.coe.int CDL-JD(2008)003 - 2 - Table of contents I. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 5 II. Overview according to ‘legal families’............................................................................ 5 III. Conclusions............................................................................................................... 6 IV. Common Law system................................................................................................ 7 A. Appointment, incompatibilities, transfers, detachements, promotion, retirement and dissmisal ........................................................................................................................... 7 1. Cyprus................................................................................................................... 7 2. Malta ....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Who Will Save the Redheads?
    :+2:,//6$9(7+(5('+($'6"72:$5'6$1 $17,%8//<7+(25<2)-8',&,$/5(9,(:$1' 3527(&7,212)'(02&5$&< <DQLY5R]QDL Dedicated in memory of Israeli Supreme Court Justice Mishael Cheshin, a brilliant jurist; bold protector of democracy and judi- cial independence; and a redhead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³5HIRUPD&RQVWLWXFLRQDO\'HIHQVDGHOD'HPRFUDFLD´KHOGLQ2YLHGRIURPWKHWKWRWKHVW RI0D\DQGSXEOLVKHGLQ6SDQLVKLQWKHERRN³5HIRUPD&RQVWLWXFLRQDO\'HIHQVDGHOD 'HPRFUDFLD´E\WKH&HQWURGH(VWXGLRV3ROtWLFRV\&RQVWLWXFLRQDOHVDOORIZKLFKKDVEHHQSRV VLEOHWKDQNVWRWKHUHVHDUFKJUDQWRIWKH6SDQLVK0LQLVWU\RI(FRQRP\DQG&RPSHWLWLYHQHVV 0,1(&2'(53,ZLVKWRWKDQN%HQLWR$ODH]&RUUDOIRULQYLWLQJPHWRMRLQWKLV LPSRUWDQWSURMHFWRQFRQVWLWXWLRQDODPHQGPHQWVDQGWKHGHIHQVHRIGHPRFUDF\$QHDUOLHUYHUVLRQ ZDVDOVRSUHVHQWHGDWWKH&RPSDUDWLYH&RQVWLWXWLRQDO/DZ5HVHDUFK6HPLQDU &KLQHVH8QLYHUVLW\ RI+RQJ.RQJ2FWREHU &HQWHUIRU&RPSDUDWLYHDQG3XEOLF/DZ6HPLQDU
    [Show full text]
  • Israel As a Jewish State
    ISRAEL AS A JEWISH STATE Daniel J.Elazar Beyond Israel's self-definition as a Jewish state, the question remains as to what extent Israel is a continuation of Jewish political history within the context of the Jewish political tradition. This article addresses that question, first by looking at the realities of Israel as a Jewish state and at the same time one compounded of Jews of varying ideologies and per suasions, plus non-Jews; the tensions between the desire on the part of many Israeli Jews for Israel to be a state like any other and the desire on the part of others for it to manifest its Jewishness in concrete ways that will make it unique. The article explores the ways in which the tradi tional domains of authority into which power is divided in the Jewish po litical tradition are manifested in the structure of Israel's political sys tem, both structurally and politically; relations between the Jewish reli gion, state and society; the Jewish dimension of Israel's political culture and policy-making, and how both are manifested through Israel's emerging constitution and the character of its democracy. Built into the founding of every polity are certain unresolved ten sions that are balanced one against another as part of that founding to make the existence of the polity possible, but which must be resolved anew in every generation. Among the central tensions built into the founding of the State of Israel are those that revolve around Israel as a Jewish state. on Formally, Israel is built themodern European model of central ized, reified statehood.
    [Show full text]
  • Spotlight on Parliaments in Europe
    Spotlight on Parliaments in Europe Directorate for Relations with National Parliaments - Institutional Cooperation Unit Source: Comparative Requests and Answers via European Centre for Parliamentary Research and Documentation N° 28 - March 2020 Preventive and sanitary measures in Parliaments Following the COVID-19 outbreak and its consequences on the functioning of Parliaments, many national Parliaments followed the example of the European Parliament to adopt preventive and sanitary measures. Spotlight N0 28 focusses on sanitary preventive measures, changes in the work of the Parliament, travel and visitors, and the need for a statement and medical examination when entering premises. It is based on requests 4333 and 4350 submitted by the Polish Sejm on 26 February and 13 March 2020. In total 44 chambers replied to request 4333 and 39 chambers replied to request 4350. Due to the rapidly changing context of this crisis, the current situation may vary from the one outlined in this document. For updates, please contact the editor. General trends in national Parliaments Cancellation of events, suspension of visits and travel were the main trends in most national Parliaments. 37 Chambers mentioned the introduction of hand sanitizers and 30 Chambers mentioned some form of communication to staff via email, posters or intranet. Another general trend was the request to work from home, teleworking. In many Parliaments, a ‘skeleton staff’, only those who are essential for the core business, were required to go to work. Certain groups were allowed to stay at home, either because they were vulnerable to the virus (60+, medical history, pregnant) or because they had possibly contracted the virus (travelled to an affected area, in contact with a person who got affected, feeling unwell).
    [Show full text]
  • Post-Legislative Scrutiny International Principles and Oversight in Kosovo
    Post-legislative scrutiny International principles and oversight in Kosovo Pristina, September 2020 www.kas.de Post-legislative scrutiny: International principles and oversight in Kosovo Pristina, September 2020 This publication was made possible through support provided by the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung Office in Pristina. Prepared by: Copyright © 2020. Democracy Plus (D+) All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system without permission in writing from D+. The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Konrad Adenauer Stiftung. Table of contents ACRONYMS 6 1. INTRODUCTION 7 2. PRINCIPLES OF POST-LEGISLATIVE SCRUTINY 8 3. INTERNATIONAL TRENDS IN POST-LEGISLATIVE SCRUTINY BY PARLIAMENTARY COMMITTEES 11 3.1 Four Approaches (Passive, Informal, Formal, and Independent) to Parliamentary Committee Scrutiny in European Countries 11 3.2 Post-Legislative Scrutiny by European Affairs Committees in National Parliaments 12 Case Studies of EU Member States and EU Aspirant States 12 Lithuania - Role of “Seimas” (Parliament) towards EU Integration 13 Moldova - Parliamentary Challenges to EU Membership 15 Montenegro - Functionality of the European Integration Committee in the Montenegrin Parliament 17 4. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE OVERSIGHT ROLE OF THE ASSEMBLY OF KOSOVO THROUGH POST- LEGISLATIVE SCRUTINY 19 4.1 Legal Framework: 19 4.2 Application of Post-Legislative Scrutiny by the Assembly 20 4.3 Post-Legislative Scrutiny Process by the Government 22 4.4 Challenges of the Assembly in Post-Legislative Scrutiny 24 4.5 Analysis of PLS Reports 26 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Taxonomy of Minority Governments
    Indiana Journal of Constitutional Design Volume 3 Article 1 10-17-2018 Taxonomy of Minority Governments Lisa La Fornara [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/ijcd Part of the Administrative Law Commons, American Politics Commons, Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, Comparative Politics Commons, Constitutional Law Commons, International Law Commons, Law and Politics Commons, Legislation Commons, Public Law and Legal Theory Commons, Rule of Law Commons, and the State and Local Government Law Commons Recommended Citation La Fornara, Lisa (2018) "Taxonomy of Minority Governments," Indiana Journal of Constitutional Design: Vol. 3 , Article 1. Available at: https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/ijcd/vol3/iss1/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Indiana Journal of Constitutional Design by an authorized editor of Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Taxonomy of Minority Governments LISA LA FORNARA INTRODUCTION A minority government in its most basic form is a government in which the party holding the most parliamentary seats still has fewer than half the seats in parliament and therefore cannot pass legislation or advance policy without support from unaffiliated parties.1 Because seats in minority parliaments are more evenly distributed amongst multiple parties, opposition parties have greater opportunity to block legislation. A minority government must therefore negotiate with external parties and adjust its policies to garner the majority of votes required to advance its initiatives.2 This paper serves as a taxonomy of minority governments in recent history and proceeds in three parts.
    [Show full text]
  • Participants in the Interparliamentary Conference, 14-15 June 2018
    Interparliamentary Conference UPHOLDING THE FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION, INCLUDING MEDIA FREEDOM, IN THE EU AND BEYOND with Members of the European Parliament and the Pre-Accession Countries' Parliaments Organised by the European Parliament (Democracy Support and Election Co-ordination Group in cooperation with the Committees on Culture and Education and on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and on Foreign Affairs) and the Chamber of Deputies of the Parliament of the Czech Republic Prague, 14-15 June 2018 Venue : Chamber of Deputies of the Parliament of the Czech Republic Prague (Czech Republic) LIST OF PARTICIPANTS Contact: Mr Thierry Jacob [email protected] +32 2 28 42277 European Parliament, Directorate for Democracy Support, Pre-Accession Actions Unit EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT Ms Barbara SPINELLI Vice-Chair of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs Substitute Member of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (Confederal Group of the European United Left - Nordic Green Left) Ms Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ Member of the Committee on Culture and Education and of the Committee on Women's Rights and Gender Equality, Substitute Member of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs and of the Subcommittee on Human Rights (Group of the European People's Party (Christian Democrats)) Mr Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ Member of the Committees on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and on Budgetary Control (Group of the European People's Party (Christian Democrats)) Ms Eleni THEOCHAROUS Member of the Committee on Development and
    [Show full text]
  • Government of Montenegro
    Government of Montenegro Ministry of European Integration Questionnaire Information requested by the European Commission to the Government of Montenegro for the preparation of the Opinion on the application of Montenegro for membership of the European Union I Democracy and the rule of law Minister: Gordana Djurovic Podgorica, December 2009 I Democracy and the rule of law 2 I Democracy and the rule of law TABLE OF CONTENTS POLITICAL CRITERIA....................................................................................................................5 I Democracy and the rule of law.....................................................................................................6 3 I Democracy and the rule of law 4 I Democracy and the rule of law POLITICAL CRITERIA 5 I Democracy and the rule of law I Democracy and the rule of law Constitution 1. Please provide a brief description of the constitutional and institutional situation in Montenegro. Montenegro, as the youngest member state of UN and other international, political, economic and other associations and integrations, adopted the new Constitution of Montenegro on 22 October 2007. Montenegro is an independent and sovereign state, with the republican form of government. Montenegro is a civil, democratic, ecological and the state of social justice, based on the rule of law. Bearer of sovereignty is the citizen with Montenegrin citizenship. The citizen shall exercise power directly and through the freely elected representatives. The power not stemming from the freely expressed will of the citizens in democratic election in accordance with the law, can neither be established nor recognised. The Constitution stipulates that the power shall be regulated following the principle of the division of powers into the legislative, executive and judicial. The legislative power shall be exercised by the Parliament, the executive power by the Government and the judicial by courts.
    [Show full text]
  • Minutes of the 13Th EU-Montenegro Stabilisation
    European Parliament 2014-2019 Delegation to the EU-Montenegro Stabilisation and Association Parliamentary Committee DRAFT MINUTES of the 13th meeting of the EU-MONTENEGRO STABILISATION AND ASSOCIATION PARLIAMENTARY COMMITTEE Strasbourg, 14 June 2017 The meeting began on 14 June, at 15:35 with the opening remarks by Mr Peter KOUROUMBASHEV, Vice-Chairman of the EP's Delegation to the EU-Montenegro SAPC. Mr KOUROUMBASHEV welcomed distinguished guests: Mr Ivan BRAJOVIĆ, President of the Parliament of Montenegro, Chairman of the Montenegrin Delegation to the EU-Montenegro SAPC, Mr Zoran PAŽIN, Deputy Prime Minister for Political System, Interior and Foreign Policy representing the Government of Montenegro, H.E. Ms Marlene BONNICI, Permanent Representation of Malta to the European Union, on behalf of the Presidency-in-Office of the Council of the EU and Ms Genoveva RUIZ CALAVERA, Director for Western Balkans, DG NEAR, on behalf of the European Commission. Mr KOUROUMBASHEV congratulated Ms Anneliese DODDS, the former Chairwoman of the EP Delegation to the EU-Montenegro SAPC for her recent election to the House of Commons. He informed that the EP Delegation would elect a new chairperson in following weeks. In his opening speech, Mr KOUROUMBASHEV noticed the progress of Montenegro in its negotiations for membership in the European Union. Mr KOUROUMBASHEV believed that due to the progress the process would be fast. He noted the scepticism of EU citizens towards further enlargement of the Union and expressed the need to inform EU citizens of the benefits of the enlargement process. Mr KOUROUMBASHEV noted the President of the Commission’s speech on state of the Union, which was presented on the same day.
    [Show full text]