892 resultados para National Security Council (U.S.)
Resumo:
"February 1995."
Resumo:
"For release ... March 9, 1989."
Resumo:
"B-244914"--p.1.
Resumo:
"May 2001."
Resumo:
Shipping list no.: 2000-0165-P.
Resumo:
Hearings held Jan. 30-31, 1968.
Resumo:
"B-254791"--P. [1].
Resumo:
"No. 110."
Resumo:
Reuse of record except for individual research requires license from Congressional Information Service, Inc.
Resumo:
"B-238025"--p.1.
Resumo:
The paper reviews the provisions of the White Book on National Security of the Republic of Poland. It states that the issue of health security is not given adequate significance there. The accessibility of health services is considered, in general, solely in terms of their availability. The assumptions concerning the concept of providing the number of beds required in a state of threat to national security and in time of war do not take into account the current socio-economic conditions and need to be reviewed. The conclusions emphasize the dilemmas that emerge as a result of the unilateral promotion of a single category of national security, that is military security, in the context of ensuring health security.
Resumo:
This article challenges those perspectives which assert first, that the Security Council’s engagement with the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) during the Arab Spring evidences a generally positive trend, and second, that the response to the Arab Spring, particularly Syria, highlights the need for veto restraint. With respect to the first point, the evidence presented in this article suggests that the manner in which R2P has been employed by the Security Council during this period evidences three key trends: first, a willingness to invoke R2P only in the context of Pillar I; second, a pronounced lack of consensus surrounding Pillar III; and third, the persistent prioritisation of national interests over humanitarian concerns. With respect to veto restraint, this article argues that there is no evidence that this idea will have any significant impact on decision-making at the Security Council; the Council’s response to the Arab Spring suggests that national interests continue to trump humanitarian need.
Resumo:
This study provides a comparative analysis of the national legal regimes and practices governing the use of intelligence information as evidence in the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Spain, Italy, the Netherlands and Sweden. It explores notably how national security can be invoked to determine the classification of information and evidence as 'state secrets' in court proceedings and whether such laws and practices are fundamental rights- and rule of law-compliant. The study finds that, in the majority of Member States under investigation, the judiciary is significantly hindered in effectively adjudicating justice and guaranteeing the rights of the defence in ‘national security’ cases. The research also illustrates that the very term ‘national security’ is nebulously defined across the Member States analysed, with no national definition meeting legal certainty and “in accordance with the law” standards and a clear risk that the executive and secret services may act arbitrarily. The study argues that national and transnational intelligence community practices and cooperation need to be subject to more independent and effective judicial accountability and be brought into line with EU 'rule of law' standards.