DOCSLIB.ORG

20 Years Anniversary of the Tampere Programme

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
20 Years Anniversary of the Tampere Programme © European University Institute, 2020 Editorial matter and selection © Sergio Carrera, Deirdre Curtin and Andrew Geddes, 2020 Chapters © authors individually 2020. This text may be downloaded only for personal research purposes. Any additional reproduction for other purposes, whether in hard copies or electronically, requires the consent of the Migration Policy Centre. If cited or quoted, reference should be made to the full name of the author(s), editor(s), the title, the year and the publisher. Views expressed in this publication reflect the opinion of individual authors and not those of the European University Institute. Published by European University Institute (EUI) Via dei Roccettini 9, I-50014 San Domenico di Fiesole (FI) Italy ISBN:978-92-9084-882-0 doi:10.2870/66646 QM-04-20-173-EN-N 20 YEAR ANNIVERSARY OF THE TAMPERE PROGRAMME Europeanisation Dynamics of the EU Area of Freedom, Security and Justice EDITED BY Sergio Carrera Deirdre Curtin Andrew Geddes European University Institute, Florence, Italy iv V Table of Contents Preface - European AFSJ. Common Values as the Gateway for Future Development ix Malin Brännkärr Introduction - Setting the Scene 1 Sergio Carrera, Deirdre Curtin and Andrew Geddes PART I - The Lisbonisation of EU AFSJ Policies 5 1. Tampere and the Politics of Migration and Asylum in the EU: Looking Back to Look Forwards 7 Andrew Geddes 2. The Appeal to Tampere’s Politics of Consciousness for The EU’s AFSJ 19 Dora Kostakopoulou 3. The AFSJ Two Decades After Tampere: Institutional Balance, Relation to Citizens and Solidarity 27 Jörg Monar 4. Twenty Years Later: The Legacy of the Tampere Conclusions 39 Kimmo Nuotio 5. Tampere Programme 20 Years on: Putting EU Principles and Individuals First 51 Sergio Carrera PART II - Borders and Asylum 65 6. The European Border and Coast Guard in the New Regulation: Towards Centralisation in Border Management 67 Juan Santos Vara 7. Reinstatement of Internal Border Controls in the Schengen Area. Conflict, Symbolism and Institutional Dynamics 81 Galina Cornelisse 8. Normalising 'the Hotspot Approach?' An Analysis of the Commission's Most Recent Proposals 93 Giuseppe Campesi 9. EU Asylum Policies Through the Lenses of the UN Global Compact on Refugees 105 Sergio Carrera and Roberto Cortinovis VI 10. Search and Rescue at Sea, Non-Governmental Organisations and the Principles of The EUs External Action 123 Paolo Cuttitta PART III - Irregular and Regular Immigration 145 11. 20 Years After Tampere’s Agenda on “Illegal Migration”: Policy Continuity in Spite of Uninteded Consequences 147 Virginie Guiraudon 12. Micro-Harmonisation of The Fundamental Right to an Effective Judicial Remedy in the Proposed Return Directive and Beyond: a Dangerous Path? 157 Elise Muir and Caterina Molinari 13. 20 Years of ‘Partnership with Countries of Origin and Transit’ 173 Michael Collyer 14. Who Is a Smuggler? 183 Gabriella Sanchez 15. EU Legal Migration Policies Since Tampere, and Their Relationship with International Standards and the UN Global Compact for Migration 197 Ryszard Cholewinski PART IV - EU Criminal Justice Cooperation 217 16. 20 Years From Tampere. The Constitutionalisation of Europe’s Area of Criminal Justice 219 Valsamis Mitsilegas 17. European Criminal Justice – From Mutual Recognition to Coherence 225 Dominik Brodowski 18. ‘Scenes From a Marriage’: Trust, Distrust and (Re)Assurances in the Execution of a European Arrest Warrant 239 Pedro Caeiro 19. The Dynamic Evolution of EU Criminal Law and Justice 251 Maria Bergström VII PART V - Police Cooperation 265 20. Internal Security in the EU and Police Cooperation: Operational Police Cooperation 267 Saskia Hufnagel 21. From Tampere Over Stockholm to Luxembourg and Brussels: Where Are We Now? The Evolution of AFSJ Databases – Meandering Between Security and Data Protection 279 Teresa Quintel 22. Targeted Surveillance: Can Privacy and Surveillance Be Reconciled? 295 Edoardo Celeste and Federico Fabbrini Contributors List 309 VIII IX PREFACE EUROPEAN AREA OF FREEDOM, SECURITY AND JUSTICE – COMMON VALUES AS THE GATEWAY FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT Malin Brännkärr Twenty years ago, Finland, a relatively new member state of the European Union, held the Presidency of the Council of the Euro- pean Union for the first time. At the time, European integration had reached a new stage and the Tampere European Council held an important meeting in which a groundbreaking decision was made. This decision profoundly changed the European Union and subsequently created a Union of Freedom, Security and Justice. In 2019, the Finnish Presidency coincides with the 20th anni- versary of the adoption of the Tampere Milestones in the European Council Conclusions of October 1999. Since the very beginning, it was clear that the European area of freedom, security and jus- tice could only be built based on a shared commitment to human rights, democracy and the rule of law. Furthermore, the same basis serves as the foundation for any future development of EU Justice and Home Affairs. After Tampere, Justice and Home Affairs soon became the fastest developing policy field in the union, and fundamental rights, stable institutions and well-functioning justice systems became more and more important during any ongoing accession Table of Contents X PREFACE process. For two decades now, the area of freedom, security and justice has been built with remarkable achievements. Simultane- ously, the European Union has expanded by way of the accession of new Member States. In the multi-annual programmes of Tam- pere, The Hague and Stockholm, the European Council has guided further steps to be taken in the field of Justice and Home Affairs. Once again, we are at a crossroads, and I thank CEPS and the European University Institute (EUI) for taking this opportunity to jointly discuss new milestones and paths to follow. The Finnish Presidency in 2019 also coincides with a new insti- tutional set up. We decided to use the opportunity to invite EU Justice and Home Affairs ministers to identify and explore key issues for future development, based on the new Strategic Agenda adopted by the June 2019 European Council. Moreover, the new European parliament started its work and the President-Elect of the new Commission has published her political guidelines for the future. I myself approach the future from the perspective of common European values. For the development of Justice and Home Affairs, a strong foundation of our common values is per- haps more important today than ever before. Therefore, the first priority of the Finnish Presidency was to strengthen the toolbox that contributes to strengthening the protection of fundamental rights, democracy and the rule of law in the Union. With a view to the new strategic agenda and the political guide- lines of Ms Ursula von der Leyen, it seems clear that European leaders have also recognised the particular importance of our core values. Common values are the basis for mutual trust and confi- dence between Member States, and European cooperation in the field of Justice and Home Affairs relies heavily on mutual trust between Member States. The Tampere European Council endorsed the principle of mutual recognition to become the cornerstone of judicial coop- eration meaning that our focus has been, and still is, on smooth, direct and effective cooperation between authorities within the EU. There is no need for cross-checking human rights compliance due EUROPEAN AREA OF FREEDOM, SECURITY AND JUSTICE - M. Brännkärr XI to the fact that we have trust in one another. For the past decade, EU-legislators have established an impressive set of common min- imum standards for criminal procedural rights in order to further strengthen trust between Member States. This has truly been a remarkable achievement. The importance, as well as the effects, of mutual trust and common values reaches far beyond just the area of Justice and criminal law. Mutual confidence and the presumption of compliance, by other Member States, with EU law and fundamental rights has also been, for instance, at the core of all efforts to build a Common European Asylum System. At the same time over the years, in the field of civil law, the EU has taken decisive steps towards abolishing the exequatur, thus abol- ishing barriers hampering mutual recognition. However, in recent years, the European Court of Justice has been asked, on a number of occasions, to interpret the bounda- ries of mutual confidence and mutual recognition. For the future development of the area of freedom, security and justice, it is cru- cial that the aforementioned balance between mutual confidence and mutual recognition is maintained. The Court has repeatedly confirmed that the rebuttal of the principle of mutual trust should only occur in exceptional circumstances. In reality, today, mutual trust between Member States has been challenged in many ways. In the area of Justice, the Court has identified important issues that entail the potential to challenge mutual trust and mutual rec- ognition – we have to keep a close eye on these warning signs. For instance, poor prison conditions can become an obstacle for mutual recognition, and thus, weaken cooperation between Member States. During the Finnish Presidency, discussions have continued on ways to tackle the aforementioned problem. The EU can be an important forum for sharing best practices in this field, both in regards to detention as well as to its alternatives. This ini- tiative has received a positive response in the Council and there seems to be genuine support within the Member States in further discussing the increased use of alternative measures. XII PREFACE One important manifestation of our common values is the Charter of Fundamental Rights. The Charter’s influence has been significant in the field of Justice and Home Affairs and the evolving case law of the Court of Justice has been of great relevance to fur- ther development, for instance as regards any initiative affecting everyone’s right to the protection of personal data.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Success Story Or a Failure? : Representing the European Integration in the Curricula and Textbooks of Five Countries
    I Inari Sakki A Success Story or a Failure? Representing the European Integration in the Curricula and Textbooks of Five Countries II Social psychological studies 25 Publisher: Social Psychology, Department of Social Research, University of Helsinki Editorial Board: Klaus Helkama, Chair Inga Jasinskaja-Lahti, Editor Karmela Liebkind Anna-Maija Pirttilä-Backman Kari Mikko Vesala Maaret Wager Jukka Lipponen Copyright: Inari Sakki and Unit of Social Psychology University of Helsinki P.O. Box 4 FIN-00014 University of Helsinki I wish to thank the many publishers who have kindly given the permission to use visual material from their textbooks as illustrations of the analysis. All efforts were made to find the copyright holders, but sometimes without success. Thus, I want to apologise for any omissions. ISBN 978-952-10-6423-4 (Print) ISBN 978-952-10-6424-1 (PDF) ISSN 1457-0475 Cover design: Mari Soini Yliopistopaino, Helsinki, 2010 III ABSTRAKTI Euroopan yhdentymisprosessin edetessä ja syventyessä kasvavat myös vaatimukset sen oikeutuksesta. Tästä osoituksena ovat muun muassa viimeaikaiset mediassa käydyt keskustelut EU:n perustuslakiäänestysten seurauksista, kansalaisten EU:ta ja euroa kohtaan osoittamasta ja tuntemasta epäluottamuksesta ja Turkin EU-jäsenyydestä. Taloudelliset ja poliittiset argumentit tiiviimmän yhteistyön puolesta eivät aina riitä kansalaisten tuen saamiseen ja yhdeksi ratkaisuksi on esitetty yhteisen identiteetin etsimistä. Eurooppalaisen identiteetin sanotaan voivan parhaiten muodostua silloin, kun perheen, koulutuksen
    [Show full text]
  • The Hollowing of Summit Diplomacy in a Socially Distanced World
    The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 15 (2020) 583-598 brill.com/hjd All That’s Lost: The Hollowing of Summit Diplomacy in a Socially Distanced World Tristen Naylor London School of Economics, London, United Kingdom [email protected] Received: 15 June 2020; revised: 30 August 2020; accepted: 21 September 2020 Summary This essay considers the implications of virtual summits replacing in-person multilat- eral gatherings of political leaders. Focusing on the loss of physicality, it argues that two critical dimensions of summitry are eliminated in this shift: sublime governance and inter-moments. Drawing on illustrative examples from the Group of 20, it demon- strates that while moving online maintains the formal, procedural interactions around which summits are built, doing so loses these critical elements of summitry which render it a valuable and unique practice in within the overall institution of diplomacy. This move also undercuts the effects of these elements, in the immediate context of a particular summit and more broadly within the international system itself. The elimi- nation of summitry’s performative and interpersonal dimensions fundamentally ren- ders online meetings unable to achieve what in-person summits can. This has acute consequences in the immediate wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, and also more gener- ally as diplomacy moves online. Keywords sublime governance – inter-moments – summits – performativity – practices – face-to-face interaction – diplomacy – psychology © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2020 | doi:10.1163/1871191X-bja10041Downloaded from Brill.com09/24/2021 11:53:45PM via free access 584 Naylor 1 Introduction On 26 March 2020, the Group of 20 (G20) held an online ‘virtual’ summit to discuss the COVID-19 pandemic and the global economic crisis it ushered in.
    [Show full text]
  • The Europeanisation of Consular Affairs: the Case of Visa Policy
    DISCUSSION PAPERS IN DIPLOMACY The Europeanisation of Consular Affairs: The Case of Visa Policy Ana Mar Fernández Netherlands Institute of International Relations ‘Clingendael’ ISSN 1569-2981 DISCUSSION PAPERS IN DIPLOMACY Editor: Dominic Kelly, University of Warwick Managing Editor: Jan Melissen, Netherlands Institute of International Relations ‘Clingendael’ and Antwerp University Desk top publishing: Desiree Davidse Editorial Board Karin Aggestam, Lund University Geoff Berridge, University of Leicester Rik Coolsaet, University of Ghent Erik Goldstein, Boston University Alan Henrikson, Tufts University Donna Lee, Birmingham University Spencer Mawby, University of Nottingham Paul Sharp, University of Minnesota Duluth Copyright Notice © Ana Mar Fernández 2006 All rights reserved. No reproduction, copy, or transmission of this publication, or part thereof in excess of one paragraph (other than as a PDF file at the discretion of the Netherlands Institute of International Relations Clingendael) may be made without the written permission of the author. EUROPEANISATION OF THE CONSULAR FUNCTION: THE VISA POLICY Ana Mar Fernández 1 INTRODUCTION The process of European integration challenges the concept of sovereignty. Since 1950, when six states decided to integrate economically and unite politically, an alternative to the traditional political order has developed. The Westphalian model of authority and representation controlling all functions of government over a given territory has been progressively substituted by a system that is more diffuse and multilateral, while at the same time communitarian and co-operative, supranational and intergovernmental. The process of European integration transforms the exercise of power. It conditions the autonomy of member states, forcing them to adapt the functioning of their institutional structures, the design and implementation of their policies, the identification of their values and the formulation of their interests.
    [Show full text]
  • Judicial Cooperation in Civil Matters’ (Eustitia): the Politics of Civil Justice Under the EU's Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ)
    DRAFT (March 2015) PLEASE CONTACT AUTHOR BEFORE CITING ‘Judicial Cooperation in Civil Matters’ (EUstitia): The Politics of Civil Justice under the EU's Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ) Professor Helen E. Hartnell Paper presented at EUSA Fourteenth Biennial Conference Panel 3 C: The EU and Criminal Justice Boston – 5-7 March 2015 This paper maps the EU’s civil justice policy field, and offers some ideas about the broader significance of these developments. Since 1999, when the Amsterdam Treaty communitarized “judicial cooperation in civil matters” and the European Council laid out a five-year plan at its Tampere Summit, the EU's efforts to create a “genuine area of justice” (Tampere Milestones, ¶¶ I.3.5 & I.3.7) have been rapid and dramatic. The AFSJ field was “transformed ... into a huge ‘building site’ ” (Weyembergh 2000). More than a dozen substantial – and in some cases highly ambitious and controversial – legislative and other civil justice measures have been adopted, and more are in the pipeline.1 These measures permeate the legal infrastructure upon which the EU’s legal order is built. Some of them surpass even the broadest reading of the formal Treaty language on “judicial cooperation”. The scope and pace of these developments have been so dramatic that even experts in the affected fields were initially caught by surprise.2 Together, Amsterdam (1997) and Tampere (1999) breached the crumbling wall of national legal sovereignty, and unleashed a deluge of legal and other institutional measures in the civil justice field. The movement towards harmonization in this field is not, however,“a triumphal parade: it looks more like a [conquest], house by house, of the fortified town of national self-determination” (Biavati 2001: 90).
    [Show full text]
  • Britain, Ireland and Schengen: Time for a Smarter Bargain on Visas Michael Emerson No
    Britain, Ireland and Schengen: Time for a smarter bargain on visas Michael Emerson No. 249, August 2011 Given Britain’s desire to maintain its own border controls, it will not join the EU’s passport-free ‘Schengen’ area in the foreseeable future. Ireland also has to stay out because it shares a common travel area with the UK. But there is now mounting evidence that this situation hurts tourism and businesses in Britain and Ireland. Non- European travellers can move freely between Schengen countries with a single visa, and many skip the further hassle of getting visas to visit Britain or Ireland. Already the Schengen area has an agreement to facilitate Chinese group tourism, which is growing fast, and from which the UK and Ireland are excluded. This problem could be overcome if Britain, Ireland and the Schengen countries would agree on ‘mutual recognition’ of the visas they issue, without the UK or Ireland having to scrap their border controls. or the present UK government, full A case of simple economics for Britain accession to the Schengen area, a passport- and Ireland free travel area covering most of Europe, is F For many people, the cost and hassle of obtaining a red line that it will not cross. Ireland shares a common travel area and land border with the UK visas for business purposes or to go on holiday and is also bound by this decision. However, it is act as a deterrent. One of the achievements of the becoming increasingly clear that the UK, along EU internal market, with free movement of with Ireland, is suffering serious economic and goods, services, capital and people, is that visitors reputational costs as a result of its separate visa from the rest of the world view the Union as a and border management policies.
    [Show full text]
  • Barbados High Commission
    H.E. Mr. Guy Hewitt High Commissioner for Barbados to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland Mr Tom Tugendhat, MP Chair Foreign Affairs Select Committee House of Commons London, SW1A 0AA 09 April 2018 Dear Chair, I write to request an opportunity for the victims, migration and human rights advocates, High Commissioners, and other concerned groups to have an interaction with members of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee on the situation facing some elderly Commonwealth-born residents in the UK. I write in part as a product of the Commonwealth as I was born in the UK to parents from India and Barbados. The situation is that these migrants from the Caribbean, and other Commonwealth countries, many of whom have been here since childhood, now, due to their irregular status, face the possibility of destitution, detention, and deportation. Based on information received from Migration Observatory at Oxford University we estimate there could be up to 50,000 Commonwealth-born persons in the UK who arrived before 1971 but do not have regularised status. The situation started with the call from Britain in the 1950s and 1960s to journey here to address labour shortages. Having left the Caribbean for the “Mother Country” as British Subjects, as the islands were still colonies, and having secured leave to remain and subsequently being educated, skilled, worked, taxed and levied in the UK, it never occurred to them that they were not legally British. The situation changed markedly in 2012, when the Home Office began systematic immigration checks. The real issue is that these long-term undocumented UK residents are not treated as anomalies to be regularised, but as “illegal immigrants” and barred from working and refused access to government services: the denial of NHS treatment, and loss of welfare benefits including housing benefits.
    [Show full text]
  • Uva-DARE (Digital Academic Repository)
    UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository) Eurosphere(s)? Fragmented and stratified or integrated and fair? A conceptual and pre-theoretical mapping exercise Bader, V. Publication date 2008 Link to publication Citation for published version (APA): Bader, V. (2008). Eurosphere(s)? Fragmented and stratified or integrated and fair? A conceptual and pre-theoretical mapping exercise. (Eurosphere online working paper; No. 09). Eurosphere. http://eurospheres.org/files/2010/08/Eurosphere_Working_Paper_9_Bader.pdf General rights It is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), other than for strictly personal, individual use, unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). Disclaimer/Complaints regulations If you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Ask the Library: https://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible. UvA-DARE is a service provided by the library of the University of Amsterdam (https://dare.uva.nl) Download date:28 Sep 2021 EUROSPHERE WORKING PAPER SERIES Online W orking Paper No. 09, 2008 Eurospheres? Fragmented and Stratified or Integrated
    [Show full text]
  • EUROSPHERE Comparative Report WP 6.1/2 Van De BEEK, VERMEULEN & LAGERSPETZ
    EUROSPHERE Comparative Report WP 6.1/2 van de BEEK, VERMEULEN & LAGERSPETZ EUROSPHERE COMPARATIVE STUDIES Work Package 6.1/2 Report, 2011 Minorities, the European Polity and a nascent European Public Sphere & Nationalizing spaces Jan H. van de Beek Floris Vermeulen Mikko Lagerspetz This paper can be downloaded without charge from: http://eurospheres.org/publications/workpackage-reports/ ISSN 1890-5986 EUROSPHERE Comparative Report WP 6.1/2 van de BEEK, VERMEULEN & LAGERSPETZ EUROSPHERE ONLINE WORKING PAPER SERIES Title: WP6.1/2 – Minorities, the European Polity and a nascent European Public Sphere & Nationalizing spaces Authors: Jan H. van de Beek Floris Vermeulen Mikko Lagerspetz This version: October 2011 Webpage: http://eurospheres.org/publications/workpackage-reports/ © EUROSPHERE, 2011 http://eurospheres.org © 2011 by authors All rights reserved. Short sections of text, not to exceed two paragraphs, may be quoted without explicit permission provided that full credit, including notice, is given to the source. The views expressed in this paper do not necessarily reflect those of the EUROSPHERE Project. The statement of purpose for the EUROSPHERE Online Working Paper Series is available from the EUROSPHERE working papers website, http://eurospheres.org/publications/workpackage-reports/ Author Contact Information: Jan H. van de Beek University of Amsterdam the Netherlands [email protected] Floris Vermeulen University of Amsterdam the Netherlands [email protected] Mikko Lagerspetz Tallinn University Estonia [email protected] ISSN 1890-5986 (online) EUROSPHERE Comparative Report WP 6.1/2 van de BEEK, VERMEULEN & LAGERSPETZ Table of Contents 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1 2 Actor selection and a priori categorization ............................................................................. 4 2.1 Introduction: three categories of ethnic groups...............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • EUROPEANIZATION and POLITICAL PARTIES Towards a Framework for Analysis
    01 Ladrech (JG/d) 28/5/02 11:38 am Page 389 PARTY POLITICS VOL 8. No.4 pp. 389–403 Copyright © 2002 SAGE Publications London Thousand Oaks New Delhi EUROPEANIZATION AND POLITICAL PARTIES Towards a Framework for Analysis Robert Ladrech ABSTRACT Europeanization is a term used to describe the effects of European integration on the politics and policies of its member states as well as the process of enhancing European-level political institutions. Within this growing literature there is no systematic effort to incorporate the role of political parties. However, party analysis has only recently begun to acknowledge the EU as an environment that holds potentially signifi- cant consequences for parties. In this article, I attempt to begin system- atic research on Europeanization and political parties by presenting a basic framework for analysis. Five areas are singled out: (1) policy/programmatic content; (2) organization; (3) patterns of party competition; (4) party-government relations; and (5) relations beyond the national party system. KEY WORDS Ⅲ Europeanization organizational adaptation political parties Introduction Europeanization is a term that has insidiously crept into the literature on European Union policy-making. In its broadest meaning, it refers to responses by actors – institutional and otherwise – to the impact of European integration. The responses may themselves influence the direction of European integration. Although more precise meanings vary (see below), a common denominator in most uses of the term is the identification of a national-supranational nexus regarding authoritative policy decisions. Consequently, most efforts involve the identification of appropriate levels of analysis, key institutional actors and policy competence ownership; employ- ing network analogies, etc., all as part of the attempt to label a process of 1354-0688(200207)8:4;389–403;024533 01 Ladrech (JG/d) 28/5/02 11:38 am Page 390 PARTY POLITICS 8(4) change and adaptation which is understood to be a consequence of the development of the European Union.
    [Show full text]
  • Annotated Agenda of the Inter-American Juridical Committee
    ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES INTER-AMERICAN JURIDICAL COMMITTEE CJI OEA/Sec.General DDI/doc. 6/2021 May 5, 2021 Original: English/Spanish ANNOTATED AGENDA OF THE INTER-AMERICAN JURIDICAL COMMITTEE 99th REGULAR SESSION Virtual session August 2-11, 2021 (Document prepared by the Department of International Law) General Secretariat Organization of American States www.oas.org/en/sla/iajc 2 3 EXPLANATORY NOTE The Department of International Law of the OAS Secretariat for Legal Affairs of the General Secretariat has prepared this document, which includes background information to facilitate consideration of the various topics on the agenda that the Inter-American Juridical Committee will take up at its 99th Regular Session, in light of the agenda adopted on April 9, 2021, document CJI/RES. 267 (XCVIII/21). * * * 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page EXPLANATORY NOTE 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS 4 THEMES UNDER CONSIDERATION 5 1. GUIDE FOR THE APPLICATION OF THE PRINCIPLE OF CONVENTIONALITY 5 2. VALIDITY OF FOREIGN JUDICIAL DECISIONS IN LIGHT OF THE INTER-AMERICAN CONVENTION ON EXTRATERRITORIAL VALIDITY OF FOREIGN JUDGMENTS AND ARBITRAL AWARDS 18 3. ELECTRONIC WAREHOUSE RECEIPTS FOR AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS 26 4. INTERNATIONAL LAW APPLICABLE TO CYBERSPACE (CYBER-SECURITY) 30 5. LEGAL ASPECTS OF FOREIGN DEBT 38 6. INTERNATIONAL CUSTOMARY LAW IN THE CONTEXT OF THE AMERICAN CONTINENT 38 7. ELECTORAL FRAUD VIS-À-VIS THE INTER-AMERICAN DEMOCRATIC CHARTER 42 8. MODEL LAW ON THE USE OF FIREWORKS, FOR EITHER PERSONAL USE OR IN MASS FIREWORK DISPLAYS 45 9. GUIDE ON THE LAW APPLICABLE TO FOREIGN INVESTMENTS 50 10. INCORPORATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS GUIDING PRINCIPLES ON BUSINESS AND HUMAN RIGHTS 50 11.
    [Show full text]
  • CEPS Wider Europe Matrix E-Version
    THE WIDER EUROPE MATRIX THE WIDER EUROPE MATRIX MICHAEL EMERSON PREFACE BY GÜNTER VERHEUGEN CENTRE FOR EUROPEAN POLICY STUDIES BRUSSELS The Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS) is an independent policy research institute in Brussels. Its mission is to produce sound policy research leading to constructive solutions to the challenges facing Europe. The views expressed are entirely those of the authors. CEPS Paperbacks present analysis and views by leading experts on important questions in the arena of European public policy. They are written in a style geared to an informed but generalist readership of policy-makers, government officials and corporate executives. This book was prepared at the invitation of Aspen Italia, in the context of the Italian Presidency of the European Union in the second half of 2003. Financial support from the Compagnia di San Paolo, Torino, is gratefully acknowledged. The paper also draws on a current project supported by the Science Policy Office of the Belgian federal government on conflict management in the divided states of the European periphery, undertaken by CEPS in collaboration with the Free University of Brussels (VUB); and on a recent project on the Middle East supported by the UK Department for International Development (DFID). The text was finalised on 17 December 2003. Graphic designs by 6A Architects, London (www.6a.co.uk). ISBN 92-9079-469-0 © Copyright 2004, Centre for European Policy Studies. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means – electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise – without the prior permission of the Centre for European Policy Studies.
    [Show full text]
  • A Short Guide to the Foreign & Commonwealth Office
    A Short Guide to the Foreign & Commonwealth Office June 2015 Overview Britain’s Britain’s Supporting British Supporting, enabling national security prosperity citizens overseas and influencing | About this guide This Short Guide summarises what the | Contact details Foreign & Commonwealth Office does, how much it costs, recent and planned changes and what to look out for across its main business areas and services. If you would like to know more about the NAO’s work on the Foreign & Commonwealth Office, please contact: Chris Bedford Director, FCO financial audit [email protected] 020 7798 7281 Tom McDonald Director, FCO value for money audit [email protected] 020 7798 7706 If you are interested in the NAO’s work and support The National Audit Office scrutinises public spending for Parliament and is independent of government. The Comptroller and Auditor General for Parliament more widely, please contact: (C&AG), Sir Amyas Morse KCB, is an Officer of the House of Commons and leads the NAO, which employs some 810 people. The C&AG Adrian Jenner certifies the accounts of all government departments and many other Director of Parliamentary Relations public sector bodies. He has statutory authority to examine and report [email protected] to Parliament on whether departments and the bodies they fund have used their resources efficiently, effectively, and with economy. Our 020 7798 7461 studies evaluate the value for money of public spending, nationally and locally. Our recommendations and reports on good practice For full iPad interactivity, please view this PDF help government improve public services, and our work led to Interactive in iBooks or GoodReader audited savings of £1.15 billion in 2014.
    [Show full text]