The autonomy of the EU legal order and the law-making activities of international organizations. Some examples regarding the Council most recent practice. Research Papers in Law 03/2012

[Introduction.] It is generally believed that while the principle of the autonomy of the EU legal order, in the sense of constitutional and institutional autonomy that is to say what concerns the autonomous decision-making of the EU, has been clearly strengthened by the most recent jurisprudence of the Court of Justice (eg. Moxplant3, Intertanko or the Kadi/Al Baraakat judgements or the Opinion 1/2009 of the CJEU etc.) as well as, in my opinion, in many aspects by the Treaty of Lisbon, it is still valid to add that the principle of a favourable approach, stemming from the Court jurisprudence, for the enhanced openness of the EU legal order to international law has remained equally important for the EU4. On the other hand, it should be also seen that in a globalized world, and following the increased role of the EU as an international actor, its indispensable and crucial role concerning the creation of world (legal) order in many policy fields ( for example let's think about the G20 issues, the global economic and financial crisis, the role of the EU in promoting and protecting human rights worldwide, the implementation of the multilateral or regional conventional law, developed in the framework the UN (e.g. in the field of agriculture or environment etc) or what concerns the Kyoto process on climate change or the conservation of marine biological resources at international level etc), it seems reasonable and justified to submit that the influence, for example, of the law-making activities of the main stakeholder international organizations in the mentioned policy-areas on the EU (especially on the development of its constantly evolving legal order) or vice-versa the influence of the EU law-making practice on these international organizations is significant, in many aspects mutually interdependent and more and more remarkable. This tendency of the 21st century doesn't mean, however, in my view, that the notion of the autonomy of the EU legal order would have been weakened by this increasing interaction between international law and EU law over the passed years. This contribution is going to demonstrate and prove these departuring points by giving some concrete examples from the most recent practice of the Council (all occuring either in the second half of 2009 or after the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty), and which relate to two very important policy areas in the EU, namely the protection of human rights and the Common Fishery Policy.

The Europeanisation of Criminal Law and the Criminal Law Dimension of European Integration. Research Papers in Law, 3/2005

From the Introduction. In the academic year 1991-1992, Utrecht University, on my initiative, started to offer courses in European criminal law. This initiative came at a symbolic moment, just prior to the entry into force of the EU Treaty of Maastricht1 and the outlining of European policy in the areas of Justice and Home Affairs (JHA). The Director of the Legal Department, Paul DEMARET, was aware of the significance of this development and I have been given the opportunity to teach this subject at the College of Europe since 1995. Since then, JHA has evolved into one of the main areas of EU legislation. Now we are again on the threshold of an important historical feat. In June 2003, the European Convention reached agreement concerning a draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe.2 The use of the term “Constitution” for the future EU Treaty is not simply cosmetic. The realisation has dawned that EU integration must be embedded in a treaty document which also regulates the rights and duties of citizens, not just with respect to European citizenship, but also with respect to, for example, Justice. Where JHA is concerned, this result acknowledges that the harmonisation of criminal law and criminal procedure and transnational cooperation cannot preclude the harmonisation of principles of due law and fair trial. Despite the substantial Europeanisation of criminal law, many criminal lawyers are defending the achievements and typicalities of their national criminal law like never before. EU initiatives are assessed from the perspective of the national agenda and national achievements. We are still too far removed from a European criminal law policy that is both European and enjoys national support. The core issue is therefore not how to keep our criminal (procedural) law national and free from European influences, but rather how to ensure democratic decision making, the quality of the constitutional state and the guarantees of criminal law in a national administrative model which has to operate increasingly interactively within a European and international context. In this contribution, the contours of the Europeanisation of criminal law are outlined and analysed. First, attention will be paid to the EC and, second, to the JHA. Following this, an evaluation and a look ahead at the current IGC are indicated.

With or without you...judging politically in the field of Area of Freedom, Security and Justice? Research Papers in Law, 3/2007

From the Introduction. The study of the European Court of Justice’s (ECJ) case law of the regarding the Area of Freedom Security and Justice (AFSJ) is fascinating in many ways.1 First, almost the totality of the relevant case law is extremely recent, thereby marking the first ‘foundational’ steps in this field of law. This is the result of the fact that the AFSJ was set up by the Treaty of Amsterdam in 1997 and only entered into force in May 1999.2 Second, as the AFSJ is a new field of EU competence, it sets afresh all the fundamental questions – both political and legal – triggered by European integration, namely in terms of: a) distribution of powers between the Union and its member states, b) attribution of competences between the various EU Institutions, c) direct effect and supremacy of EU rules, d) scope of competence of the ECJ, and e) measure of the protection given to fundamental rights. The above questions beg for answers which should take into account both the extremely sensible fields of law upon which the AFSJ is anchored, and the EU’s highly inconvenient three-pillar institutional framework.3 Third, and as a consequence of the above, the vast majority of the ECJ’s judgments relating to the AFSJ are a) delivered by the Full Court or, at least, the Grand Chamber, b) with the intervention of great many member states and c) often obscure in content. This is due to the fact that the Court is called upon to set the foundational rules in a new field of EU law, often trying to accommodate divergent considerations, not all of which are strictly legal.4 Fourth, the case law of the Court relating to the AFSJ, touches upon a vast variety of topics which are not necessarily related to one another. This is why it is essential to limit the scope of this study. The content of, and steering for, the AFSJ were given by the Tampere European Council, in October 1999. According to the Tampere Conclusions, the AFSJ should consist of four key elements: a) a common immigration and asylum policy, b) judicial cooperation in both civil and penal matters, c) action against criminality and d) external action of the EU in all the above fields. Moreover, the AFSJ is to a large extent based on the Schengen acquis. The latter has been ‘communautarised’5 by the Treaty of Amsterdam and further ‘ventilated’ between the first and third pillars by decisions 1999/435 and 1999/436.6 Judicial cooperation in civil matters, mainly by means of international conventions (such as the Rome Convention of 1981 on the law applicable to contractual obligations) and regulations (such as (EC) 44/20017 and (EC) 1348/20008) also form part of the AFSJ. However, the relevant case law of the ECJ will not be examined in the present contribution.9 Similarly, the judgments of the Court delivered in the course of Article 226 EC proceedings against member states, will be omitted.10 Even after setting aside the above case law and notwithstanding the fact that the AFSJ only dates as far back as May 1999, the judgments of the ECJ are numerous. A simple (if not simplistic) categorisation may be between, on the one hand, judgments which concern the institutional setting of the AFSJ (para. 2) and, on the other, judgments which are related to some substantive AFSJ policy (para. 3).

Second International Conference of American States : Message from the President of the United States, transmitting a communication from the Secretary of State, submitting the report, with accompanying papers, of the delegates of the United States to the Second International Conference of American States, held at the City of Mexico from October 22, 1901, to January 22, 1902.

Mode of access: Internet.

A treatise of the law of waters; including the law relating to rights in the sea, and rights concerning rivers, canals, dock companies, fisheries, mills, water-courses, &c. with a note concerning the rights of the Crown to the land between high and low water mark.

"The law of sewers has been separately published in a second edition, and is, therefore, withdrawn from this second edition of the Law of waters."--2d prelim. leaf.

Proceedings of the second Pan American scientific congress, Washington, U. S. A., Monday, December 27, 1915 to Saturday, January 8, 1916.

Contributions in English, Spanish, Portuguese or French.

Reports of cases, argued and determined in the Supreme Court of Errors of the State of Connecticut / prepared and published in pursuance of a statute law of the State. By Thomas Day.

"A second editon of Vols. 1 to 6, by the reporter, was published in 1848-49; and a second edition of Vols. 7 to 21 inclusive, with notes by Thomas M. Day, appeared in 1853-56. The notes to this second edition are numerous, and contain references, not only to the Connecticut series, but also to the Mass. and New York reports." -- Soule, the Lawyer's reference manual.

Reports of criminal law cases : decided at the City-hall of the City of New York : with notes and references /

"The second and third volumes contain a large number of cases decided in United States circuit and district courts." --Soule, Lawyer's ref. manual, 1884.

Compilation of the public school laws of New Mexico, 1914; extracts from the state constitution, comp. laws of 1897 and subsequent territorial session laws, together with all school laws passed by the first and second sessions of the state Legislature, relative to education and the forms used in school administration and a directors' guide.

Mode of access: Internet.

The law of aviation /

"First printing June 1945. Second printing January 1946."

Sketch of an argument delivered before the District Court of the U. States, at the second session, held at St. Louis on the fourth Monday in November 1824. Together with various remarks on certain Spanish laws and ordinances, obtained since that time, which have been submitted in writing to the judge of the same court.

An argument on the case of Antoine Soulard, complainant, against the United States before the U.S. District Court for Missouri, regarding a grant of land based on Spanish law.

The reports of the most learned Sir Edmund Saunders, knt. of several pleadings and cases in the Court of King's Bench, in the time of the reign of His Most Excellent Majesty King Charles the Second. [1666-1672]

Includes index.

The lives and opinions of Benj'n Franklin Butler, United States district attorney for the southern district of New York; and Jesse Hoyt, counsellor at law, formerly collector of customs for the port of New York; with anecdotes or biographical sketches of Stephen Allen; George P. Barker [etc] ...

Another edition, practically identical, was issued the same year with the author's name corrected.

Reports of criminal law cases decided at the City-Hall of the City of New-York : with notes and references /

"The second and third volumes contain a large number of cases decided in United States Circuit and District courts"--Soule, Lawyer's ref. manual, 1884.