Suchergebnisse

Since the Treaty of Maastricht (1992) all nationals of EU member states hold EU citizenship too. EU citizens hold EU citizenship rights in addition to their national rights. These rights include civil, social, economic and political rights. Holding these rights does not guarantee actual participation: there are, for instance, increasingly concerns about (too) low voter turnout and a (too) low number of citizens participating in other activities related to political decision making. Therefore, there seems to be a quest for a European civic culture. Citizenship education, and more specifically European citizenship education, is seen as an important instrument to stimulate the development of a European civic culture. This study shows that (governmental) policies and practices of citizenship education differ widely between the seven examined countries (the Netherlands, Croatia, France, Germany, Ireland, Spain and Hungary). Citizenship education practices are, for instance, deeply related to the type of the democratic development, type of the democratic regime and social issues within the polity. Furthermore, the education practices show great variety of available teaching modules both in formal and informal way. There also seems to be a certain paradox between acknowledging the importance that civic education has for society, and political readiness to acknowledge that specific training is needed for teachers to be eligible to qualitatively educate and prepare students for their roles as active citizens. However, all countries share a very similar approach regarding to the European dimension of citizenship: it is a highly neglected area within the national curriculum. The focus is dominantly on the factual and theoretical knowledge on the EU and especially its institutions rather than the promotion of values and the training of skills needed to exercise EU citizenship rights and needed for development of active, participating EU citizens. Hence, European citizenship education within the member states seems to be in ...

This policy brief deals with loss of citizenship of the European Union (EU) due to the loss of nationality of a Member State. To hold nationality of an EU Member State is the master key to European citizenship. Only the nationals of a Member State possess European citizenship. Consequently, the loss of nationality of a Member State also implies the loss of European citizenship. Due to the fact that Member States are in principle autonomous in nationality matters, their rules on loss of nationality, and implicitly loss of the citizenship of the European Union, differ considerably. However, Member States have to respect international law and general principles of European law when dealing with loss of nationality.

This article makes a contribution to the debate on the 'cooperative, competitive citizen' by detailing the outcomes of a recent study on the theory, policy and practices of participatory citizenship in Europe, commissioned by the European Commission (EC). It underlines the
discussion of how to balance citizen collaboration and competition needs to include the concept of participatory citizenship along with a European dimension. It provides strong evidence that the current economic crisis is distorting the interrelationship between participatory citizenship,
social cohesion and economic competitiveness in policy-making in EU member states with increasing emphasis on the latter (the competitive citizen) at the expense of the former (the collaborative citizen). It details how the impact of this policy shift is already clearly visible through evidence
of major funding cuts on projects and programmes that promote participatory citizenship. It also provides evidence that the current economic crisis has shaken the trust and confidence of citizens across Europe, including young people, in politicians and political institutions. Though people
continue to have a strong belief in the principle of democracy and in the values that underpin participatory citizenship, they increasingly lack trust in current politicians and political institutions. However, it also highlights a number of strategies, based on evidence, for strengthening
policy, practices and citizen engagement in participatory citizenship in Europe and also evidence of the value of promoting participatory citizenship in society. It shows how the key role of learning and education in building civic competence among people, particularly young people, and also
that involvement with volunteering enhances political engagement. Finally, in the context of a growth strategy (such as EU 2020) to alleviate the economic crisis, the Study also highlights that participatory citizenship, economic competitiveness and social cohesion are interrelated and mutually
reinforcing. Thus, countries with characteristics of being highly competitive also tend to be highly participatory with high levels of social cohesion, for example, the Nordic countries.

Social rights are essential for fully realising European Union (EU) citizenship and reaching the EU's targets in reducing poverty and social exclusion. This paper lays the empirical groundwork to investigate the development of European social citizenship from 1985 to the present. It does so by drawing on a newly-compiled database, the Comparative Social Citizenship Dataset (CSCD), that brings together existing country-year macro data on policies, regulations, laws, social, economic and political conditions relevant to social rights. This dataset's key measures concern three categories central to the EUSOCIALCIT's resource-based conception of social rights: (1) policy outputs, including spending and policy-effort measures of policies seeking to foster social rights; (2) outcomes, societal conditions like poverty and inequality relevant to the societal value-added of social rights; and 3) resources on which citizens and policymakers draw that drive and give policy force to social rights. Based on analyses of the CSCD macro-level measures of such conditions, the paper develops two sets of insights into a resource-based conception of social rights in Europe.

Αυτή η διατριβή εξετάζει εάν τα συστήματα χορήγησης ιθαγένειας σε επενδυτές που είναι γνωστά ως «χρυσά διαβατήρια» είναι συμβατά με το δίκαιο της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης (ΕΕ) εξετάζοντας συστήματα διαφορετικών κρατών μελών, ιδίως της Βουλγαρίας, Μάλτας και Κύπρου. Πρώτον, η παρούσα διατριβή αναλύει την έννοια της ιθαγένειας της ΕΕ και την σχέση της με την ιθαγένεια των κρατών μελών. Συζητά επίσης τους περιορισμούς που επιβάλλονται στα κράτη σχετικά με την απόκτηση και την απώλεια της ιθαγένειας από την οπτική της ΕΕ. Επιπλέον παρουσιάζει τους διαφορετικούς τρόπους απόκτησης της ιθαγένειας. Η παρούσα διατριβή αναλύει την ιστορική εξέλιξη των συνθηκών που απαιτούνται από τα τρία κράτη μέλη (Βουλγαρία, Μάλτα και Κύπρο), για την απονομή της ιθαγένειας της ΕΕ. Τέλος, η παρούσα διατριβή εξετάζει τις παραβιάσεις που έγιναν μέσω της λειτουργίας του εν λόγω συστήματος απόκτησης ιθαγένειας. Ιδιαίτερη έμφαση δίνεται στην πολιτογράφηση επενδυτών στο πλαίσιο του κυπριακού συστήματος. Παρουσιάζει επίσης τη θέση της ΕΕ και ειδικότερα τον τρόπο αντίδρασης στις παραβάσεις. Η παρούσα διατριβή υπογραμμίζει τη σημασία της εισαγωγής αυστηρών ελέγχων στους αιτούντες από τα κράτη μέλη για να διασφαλιστεί ότι τα συστήματα λειτουργούν με τα υψηλότερα πρότυπα διαφάνειας και ακεραιότητας και ότι η αρχή της ειλικρινούς συνεργασίας, όπως ορίζεται στο άρθρο 4(3) της Συνθήκης για ΕΕ, είναι απολύτως σεβαστή. ; This dissertation examines whether the Investor Citizenship Schemes ('ICS') known as "golden passports" are compatible with the European Union ('EU') law by asserting different Member States' schemes, in particular of Bulgaria,Malta and Cyprus. Firstly, this dissertation analyses the concept of the EU citizenship and its relations with the nationality of Member States. It also discusses the restriction imposed on Member States regarding the acquisition and loss of nationality from the EU perspective. Furthermore, it presenta the different modes of acquisition citizenship. This dissertation analyses the historical evolution of conditions ...

Cyberspace has introduced new habits and relationships into traditional forms of social intercourse and modern symbolic practices and representations. The formation of a new telepolis constitutes the main challenge to be overcome by communication researchers. The breaking up of the internal and external boundaries of cities and territories, and the merging together and confusion of public and private spaces, which have always been traditionally separated in modern political discourse and communication, indicates not only new cultural trends in human organization and socialization, but also, through the various electronic forms of interaction and information exchange, the constitution of a new space for political identity and participation. Therefore, the dynamics of capitalist globalization have contributed to the creation of an urban spatiality depending on networks that have no defined territory, borders, or territorial locations with an intense concentration of resources. These dynamics, in fact, are not totally new. The difference today is, without doubt, the intensity, complexity and global reach of these networks, as well as their use and ownership by local governments, social movements and active citizenship. As a result, in the current process of capitalist globalization, the new configurations generated in the economic and technological sphere affect the political level and the issue of governance. In this context, information and communication technologies are presented as little explored tools of governance, and economic and cultural development, for the construction of new models of partnership and participatory citizenship. Concepts like digital governance refer to new ways of interaction between citizens and governments, and new concepts of urban policy using electronic means. As the main future challen ge for the social and economic development of the common space of the European Union, this is how the European Commission identifies the articulation of participation based local politics geared to a new governance that has a favourabl e impacton communitarian development processes, from a firm standpoint of participatory and plural democracy in the cultural era, as a resource that anticipates innovative ways of citizenship. The general aim is to study how these new cultural practices are materializing and the local development processes that define the current rationales of public space construction through new information and communication technologies. In this artcle, several innovative experiences in Southern EU Member States are analyzed, presenting the preliminary discussion about the conceptual basis of a new strategic vision for social movements that tries to explore new local forms of cultural autonomy for citizens through the appropriation of new information technologies, in a social research applied to ICTs and citizen participation. This study points to a more efficient use of this potential by social movements versus its underutilization by local administrations and third sector organizations.

Cette présentation a pour objet de situer de manière critique les récentes interventions du législateur belge en matière de déchéance de la nationalité belge, en montrant quelles sont les limites internationales à l'action du législateur national. Le cadre législatif en vigueur en Belgiqe est analysé en particulier à la lumière de l'interdiction de discrimination

In this essay the development, since 1992, of the concept of European citizenship is traced, alongside the changing attitude of the author towards this novel status. The blurred edges of the concept are explored. Connecting factor to European citizenship is the possession of the nationality of a member state. Is nationality identical with 'peoples' in the Treaties? And: are member states the masters of definition of who are their nationals? And is the status of European citizen really dependent on the nationality of member states, or is it gradually the other way round, given the view of the ECJ that the first is 'intended to be the fundamental status'? Although there is no transfer of competence of nationality law, nevertheless domestic laws should have 'due regard to European law.' In Rottmann a decision by national authorities was subjected to the European principle of proportionality, in Tjebbes a whole legal provision in the national law of the Netherlands was, according to the AG, not in line with Union law. This is a constitutional battle, as the definition of its nationals is a constituent part of being a (member) state. Brexit sheds a new light on the importance of Union citizenship, primarily as its entrance to the freedom of movement. Finally, a number of loose ends are identified and questions formulated.