Search results

Multilingualism, one of the major problems in the new reality, is considered to be of crucial importance for the European Union, as multilingualism can be identified as the phenomenon leading to the cultural diversity and protects the disappearance of certain languages, mostly regional and minority languages.
The treaties and the decrees within the European Union aim at preservation of cultural and linguistic identities of every country. At the same time, the European Union gives the right to every citizen to have the dialogues with the European institutions in his own language. But, in practice, the things are not like in theory. So, we come across the questions: it is really possible to preserve the linguistic identity within the European Union environment? Or, is the application of multilingualism still a problem without solution?
Even if the European Union tries to preserve the multilingual reality, from the practical point of view the reality is considered to be much more complicated. In this case, the multilingualism, within the European Union, is the problem still expecting solutions.

This article addresses the problems associated with aircraft noise with or without pilots. It asks whether the administrative measures taken by France and the United Arab Emirates are sufficient and efficient to combat noise pollution. It examines the aeronautical preventive measures, as well as those related to urbanism, before discussing remedial measures for aircraft noise. This article finds that the administrative measures taken by the UAE, in comparison to those of France, are insufficient and ineffective. One of the reasons is that the preventative and suppressive measures reflect the transversal nature of noise: they are both national and international regulations, but they are not homogenous, unitary and structured.
Legislative policies, taking into account expert suggestions and opinions, must emerge in the UAE by following the recommendations on the protection of the environment of international institutions, such as ICAO. Thus, the mitigation measures would be used to redistribute aircraft noise to diminish its impact on the most sensitive areas. This article recommends measures such as modifying runways, as well as routes, and special manoeuvres to reduce noise during take-off and approach.

Le problème que je pose dans ce cadre consiste à voir quel sont les pratiques des médias de service public à l'égard des représentations de la diversité religieuse et, plus précisément, à l'égard des représentations de transmission et communication de la foi dans deux pays européens dont l'un fort religieux et l'autre fort laïc, la Roumanie et la France. Il est question de voir en quoi le discours des médias publics sur la diversité n'altère pas le principe de la laïcité, la neutralité, le respect du pluralisme et l'intégralité des consciences. Pour ce faire, je vais retenir deux cas de figure, deux émissions télévisées diffusées sur les chaînes publiques de télévision en France et en Roumanie: l'émission "Le jour du Seigneur", avec ses déclinaisons d'intitulé au fil du temps "Programme du dimanche" et "Les chemins de la foi", diffusée sur France 2 et "Universul credintei" ("l'Univers de la foi") diffusée sur TVR1. En considérant ces deux programmes de télévision, je vais tenter de répondre globalement aux questionnements suivants: est-ce que tous les mouvements religieux sont-ils présents dans les médias audiovisuels publics autant que les acteurs des confessions religieuses traditionnellement implantées? Oui, c'est une réalité, certains mouvements disposent de leurs propres chaînes, mais leur présence sur leurs chaînes privées ne remplace pas un droit par un autre. S'agit-t-il alors d'une situation de monopole et de visibilité maximale des courants religieux dominants dans l'espace public au travers des médias publics? Plus de normalisation garantit plus d'accès compte tenu que le principe de laïcité prévoit l'égalité et l'absence de hiérarchie entre les différentes croyances et cultes?

The Gnassingbé clan has ruled the country since 1967. The demand for political alternance, constituted the major contentious issue between the government and the challengers of the Gnassingbé regime throughout the survey period. The first local elections since more than 30 years took finally place on 30 June 2019 and resulted in the victory of the ruling party. Shortly afterwards, in February 2020, the President won also the disputed presidential elections and thus consolidated his power, assisted by the loyal army and security services. The outbreak of the Corona epidemic in Togo in April 2020 and the subsequent economic recession may have contributed to limit popular protest against the Gnassingbé regime. The human rights record of the government has improved but remains poor. Despite undeniable improvements to the framework and appearance of the regime's key institutions during the review period, democracy remains far from complete. However, the international community, notably Togo's African peers, the AU and ECOWAS, followed a 'laissez-faire' approach in the interests of regional stability and their national interests in dealing with Togo. Economic growth remained stable at about 5% per annum (before Corona). Public investment in infrastructure and increases in agricultural productivity, notably of export crops, had been the key drivers of economic growth. However, growth remains vulnerable to external shocks and the climate and has not been inclusive. Moreover, it was overshadowed by increasing inter-personal and regional inequality as well as an increase in extreme poverty. Money-laundering, illegal money transfers and trafficking grew alarmingly. Nevertheless, the business climate improved considerably.