Suchergebnisse

The article deals with the regulation of maritime zones in the Baltic Sea States and in this context the regulation in lithuania is being assessed. Attention in being drawn to the commonness of the problems and challenges of the Baltic Sea States as bordering a semi-enclosed sea, as well as importance of their cooperation and possible similarities of the regula­tion in national levels. the legal analysis allows the author to identify twofold regulation: "zone-based", where each maritime zone is defined and its legal regime established in separate specific laws, and "field-based" ("topic-based"), where the provisions on the different aspects of the legal regime of maritime zones are incorporated in the laws of others fields. Notice is taken to the fact that nearly all Baltic Sea States, except Lithuania, have chosen zone-based regulation of maritime zones, although in some of them there are also marks of field-based regulation. Zone-based regulation provides for a greater oppor­tunity to ensure a systematic, integrated, exhaustive and detail regulation of the legal regime of maritime zones. As in Lithuania there are no special laws designated for different maritime zones, separate provisions on the legal regime of maritime zones are incorporated in the legal acts of other fields. Such regulation is considered by the author as not exhaustive and therefore she expresses opinion suggesting considering a need of enacting a separate underlying law that would concretize the legal regime of the Lithuanian maritime zones and fill in gaps or a possibility of otherwise improving current regulation by supplementing or revising existing legislation.

Then the process of Enlargement has started, it was expected that Accession of much more agrarian and less developed countries from Eastern and Central Europe, compared to the Member States at that time, should encourage the radical reforms of the EU redistributive policies – Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and Cohesion Policy. Some researchers provided with numbers proving that Enlargement without reforming the EU redistributive policies would substantially increase the funding for implementation of these policies. While the other group of scientists noticed that the Enlargement process is getting momentum, whereas the internal EU reforms are postponing. The decision on the CAP reform was taken in 2003 by the Agricultural Council, while the Cohesion Policy reform was agreed in the Brussels European Council of 2005. In the Commission's reform proposals as well as during Member States' negotiations much attention was paid, especially in the case of the Cohesion Policy reform, to the challenges of Enlargement. In this paper the aforementioned last reforms of the EU redistributive policies are analysed: the CAP reform of 2002–2003 and the Cohesion Policy reform of 2004–2006 aiming to evaluate the impact of Enlargement on the Commission's reform proposals and the reform results. It is argued that the factor of Enlargement, although in the Commission's reform proposals was emphasised as encouraging to reform the CAP and the Cohesion Policy radically, in reality for the EU redistributive policy reforms had a minor impact. It is shown that Enlargement did not encourage radical reforms of the EU redistributive policies, because higher influence on the reform results was made by the financial interests of the Member States.

Then the process of Enlargement has started, it was expected that Accession of much more agrarian and less developed countries from Eastern and Central Europe, compared to the Member States at that time, should encourage the radical reforms of the EU redistributive policies – Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and Cohesion Policy. Some researchers provided with numbers proving that Enlargement without reforming the EU redistributive policies would substantially increase the funding for implementation of these policies. While the other group of scientists noticed that the Enlargement process is getting momentum, whereas the internal EU reforms are postponing. The decision on the CAP reform was taken in 2003 by the Agricultural Council, while the Cohesion Policy reform was agreed in the Brussels European Council of 2005. In the Commission's reform proposals as well as during Member States' negotiations much attention was paid, especially in the case of the Cohesion Policy reform, to the challenges of Enlargement. In this paper the aforementioned last reforms of the EU redistributive policies are analysed: the CAP reform of 2002–2003 and the Cohesion Policy reform of 2004–2006 aiming to evaluate the impact of Enlargement on the Commission's reform proposals and the reform results. It is argued that the factor of Enlargement, although in the Commission's reform proposals was emphasised as encouraging to reform the CAP and the Cohesion Policy radically, in reality for the EU redistributive policy reforms had a minor impact. It is shown that Enlargement did not encourage radical reforms of the EU redistributive policies, because higher influence on the reform results was made by the financial interests of the Member States.

Given the public's fear and anxiety regarding sex offenders, especially those who target children, society is predisposed to lock them up and throw away the key. To avoid reproach, however, our society must trust in our judicial processes and involuntarily commit only those who are found to be sexually violent predators beyond a reasonable doubt. Furthermore, the judicial system must unconditionally release sexually violent predators when they are deemed to no longer pose a danger to themselves or to others. The methods by which our society commits and holds such individuals implicate not only their behavior but also our own, for "[t]he degree of civilization in a society can be judged by entering its prisons." Part II of this article discusses the facts and holding of In re Van Orden, the case at bar. The legal background, Part III, addresses relevant case law from the Supreme Court of the United States, as well as the reasons courts have always deemed SVP laws civil statutes rather than criminal. Part III proceeds to discuss Missouri's SVP Act and the pertinent 2006 amendments. After addressing Addington v. Texas, the seminal Supreme Court case on which Van Orden based its holding, Part IV analyzes the Van Orden decision itself. Finally, in Part V, this article concludes that In re Van Orden constituted a blemish on the Missouri legislature and judiciary alike. Missouri, along with other states, must recognize that SVP proceedings are akin to criminal trials and that their result-indefinite and involuntary confinement-resembles criminal punishment. States, therefore, should require proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

K-12 institutions find themselves under the realm of No Child Left Behind. A central question is, "What does this really mean in terms of the educational world?" State legislatures are more and more influencing the organization and operation of institutions of higher education. It seems that the roles assumed by individuals in education and the roles assumed by individuals in politics have taken drastic, if not cataclysmic changes. No Child Left Behind and state-mandated funding formulas (to mention only a few) are not the only times in which educators and institutions have found themselves inundated by politics. The days of the small, one-roomed, red-bricked school house have definitely come and gone. In its place have arisen the multi-leveled acropolises we now call "P.S. something or other." Gone are the days of small agricultural colleges. These small A&M institutes are now supplanted by the million-student universities. Cities have grown and with this growth have come more and more students for fewer and fewer teachers. Something or someone had to step in. The question is, "Were the politicians or the politics (the laws, the court cases) the right choice?" The paper to follow will delve into the role of politics in education historically, currently, and in the future by looking at Supreme Court decisions, State and Federal laws, as well as teacher opinions using one of the basest cornerstones of education, the ABCs (some letters omitted or "left behind"). Simple overviews of incidents of politics and education meeting will be displayed with author conclusions and opinions reserved until the end.

Then the process of Enlargement has started, it was expected that Accession of much more agrarian and less developed countries from Eastern and Central Europe, compared to the Member States at that time, should encourage the radical reforms of the EU redistributive policies – Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and Cohesion Policy. Some researchers provided with numbers proving that Enlargement without reforming the EU redistributive policies would substantially increase the funding for implementation of these policies. While the other group of scientists noticed that the Enlargement process is getting momentum, whereas the internal EU reforms are postponing. The decision on the CAP reform was taken in 2003 by the Agricultural Council, while the Cohesion Policy reform was agreed in the Brussels European Council of 2005. In the Commission's reform proposals as well as during Member States' negotiations much attention was paid, especially in the case of the Cohesion Policy reform, to the challenges of Enlargement. In this paper the aforementioned last reforms of the EU redistributive policies are analysed: the CAP reform of 2002–2003 and the Cohesion Policy reform of 2004–2006 aiming to evaluate the impact of Enlargement on the Commission's reform proposals and the reform results. It is argued that the factor of Enlargement, although in the Commission's reform proposals was emphasised as encouraging to reform the CAP and the Cohesion Policy radically, in reality for the EU redistributive policy reforms had a minor impact. It is shown that Enlargement did not encourage radical reforms of the EU redistributive policies, because higher influence on the reform results was made by the financial interests of the Member States.

Then the process of Enlargement has started, it was expected that Accession of much more agrarian and less developed countries from Eastern and Central Europe, compared to the Member States at that time, should encourage the radical reforms of the EU redistributive policies – Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and Cohesion Policy. Some researchers provided with numbers proving that Enlargement without reforming the EU redistributive policies would substantially increase the funding for implementation of these policies. While the other group of scientists noticed that the Enlargement process is getting momentum, whereas the internal EU reforms are postponing. The decision on the CAP reform was taken in 2003 by the Agricultural Council, while the Cohesion Policy reform was agreed in the Brussels European Council of 2005. In the Commission's reform proposals as well as during Member States' negotiations much attention was paid, especially in the case of the Cohesion Policy reform, to the challenges of Enlargement. In this paper the aforementioned last reforms of the EU redistributive policies are analysed: the CAP reform of 2002–2003 and the Cohesion Policy reform of 2004–2006 aiming to evaluate the impact of Enlargement on the Commission's reform proposals and the reform results. It is argued that the factor of Enlargement, although in the Commission's reform proposals was emphasised as encouraging to reform the CAP and the Cohesion Policy radically, in reality for the EU redistributive policy reforms had a minor impact. It is shown that Enlargement did not encourage radical reforms of the EU redistributive policies, because higher influence on the reform results was made by the financial interests of the Member States.

Then the process of Enlargement has started, it was expected that Accession of much more agrarian and less developed countries from Eastern and Central Europe, compared to the Member States at that time, should encourage the radical reforms of the EU redistributive policies – Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and Cohesion Policy. Some researchers provided with numbers proving that Enlargement without reforming the EU redistributive policies would substantially increase the funding for implementation of these policies. While the other group of scientists noticed that the Enlargement process is getting momentum, whereas the internal EU reforms are postponing. The decision on the CAP reform was taken in 2003 by the Agricultural Council, while the Cohesion Policy reform was agreed in the Brussels European Council of 2005. In the Commission's reform proposals as well as during Member States' negotiations much attention was paid, especially in the case of the Cohesion Policy reform, to the challenges of Enlargement. In this paper the aforementioned last reforms of the EU redistributive policies are analysed: the CAP reform of 2002–2003 and the Cohesion Policy reform of 2004–2006 aiming to evaluate the impact of Enlargement on the Commission's reform proposals and the reform results. It is argued that the factor of Enlargement, although in the Commission's reform proposals was emphasised as encouraging to reform the CAP and the Cohesion Policy radically, in reality for the EU redistributive policy reforms had a minor impact. It is shown that Enlargement did not encourage radical reforms of the EU redistributive policies, because higher influence on the reform results was made by the financial interests of the Member States.

RESUMEN: El autor aborda el tema de la seguridad estatal en Colombia y las Políticas Públicas de Seguridad Interna del Estado. Señala y analiza los dispositivos estatales de seguridad: Las Fuerzas Armadas, la Doctrina de la Seguridad Nacional, las Normas Legales de excepción al Estado de Derecho y el Paramilitarismo. Establece, siguiendo a Stepan, la existencia de rasgos de relativa autonomía militar junto a otros aspectos de subordinación y concluye que la pretendida disfuncionalidad del aparato militar no explica sus acciones encubiertas. La Doctrina de Seguridad Nacional constituye la base de argumentación legal de las políticas de seguridad de estatal. Pasa revista a los distintos dispositivos normativos de seguridad interna y señala que el paramilitarismo responde a la actuación de una estructura militar de acción ilegal del EstadoABSTRACT: The author deals with the topic o National Security and public policies of intern security of the State in Colombian case. He points out and analyses the security mechanisms of the State such as Armed Forces, National Security Doctrine, the legal roles of emergency of the State and Paramilitarism. On the other hand, the author establishes, following Stepan, the existence of features of relative militar authority along with other aspects of subordination. He concludes that the pretending dysfunction of the militar machine does not explain the hilen actions. The National Security Doctrine constitutes the base of the legal line of argument of the National Security policies. Also, the author revises the different legal devises of the intern security and points out that paramilitarism is the result of the action of a militar structure of illegal actions.

The article deals with the regulation of maritime zones in the Baltic Sea States and in this context the regulation in lithuania is being assessed. Attention in being drawn to the commonness of the problems and challenges of the Baltic Sea States as bordering a semi-enclosed sea, as well as importance of their cooperation and possible similarities of the regula­tion in national levels. the legal analysis allows the author to identify twofold regulation: "zone-based", where each maritime zone is defined and its legal regime established in separate specific laws, and "field-based" ("topic-based"), where the provisions on the different aspects of the legal regime of maritime zones are incorporated in the laws of others fields. Notice is taken to the fact that nearly all Baltic Sea States, except Lithuania, have chosen zone-based regulation of maritime zones, although in some of them there are also marks of field-based regulation. Zone-based regulation provides for a greater oppor­tunity to ensure a systematic, integrated, exhaustive and detail regulation of the legal regime of maritime zones. As in Lithuania there are no special laws designated for different maritime zones, separate provisions on the legal regime of maritime zones are incorporated in the legal acts of other fields. Such regulation is considered by the author as not exhaustive and therefore she expresses opinion suggesting considering a need of enacting a separate underlying law that would concretize the legal regime of the Lithuanian maritime zones and fill in gaps or a possibility of otherwise improving current regulation by supplementing or revising existing legislation.

Given the public's fear and anxiety regarding sex offenders, especially those who target children, society is predisposed to lock them up and throw away the key. To avoid reproach, however, our society must trust in our judicial processes and involuntarily commit only those who are found to be sexually violent predators beyond a reasonable doubt. Furthermore, the judicial system must unconditionally release sexually violent predators when they are deemed to no longer pose a danger to themselves or to others. The methods by which our society commits and holds such individuals implicate not only their behavior but also our own, for "[t]he degree of civilization in a society can be judged by entering its prisons." Part II of this article discusses the facts and holding of In re Van Orden, the case at bar. The legal background, Part III, addresses relevant case law from the Supreme Court of the United States, as well as the reasons courts have always deemed SVP laws civil statutes rather than criminal. Part III proceeds to discuss Missouri's SVP Act and the pertinent 2006 amendments. After addressing Addington v. Texas, the seminal Supreme Court case on which Van Orden based its holding, Part IV analyzes the Van Orden decision itself. Finally, in Part V, this article concludes that In re Van Orden constituted a blemish on the Missouri legislature and judiciary alike. Missouri, along with other states, must recognize that SVP proceedings are akin to criminal trials and that their result-indefinite and involuntary confinement-resembles criminal punishment. States, therefore, should require proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

The article discusses the impact of European Union membership on the economy, politics and policies of the new member's states, in particular, Lithuania. It first presents the forecasts and arguments regarding the impact of EU enlargement that were discussed before the enlargement in 2004/2007. Afterwards it evaluates the experience so far, by discussing the studies which have been made on the impact of EU and concludes that, the enlargement has been a positive sum game for the economies of new member states (as well the whole EU), increasing trade and investments flows and contributing to the catching up with the rest of the EU. However, it argues that the impact of the EU membership is mediated by domestic policies of each member state, and that Lithuania has not attempted to strengthen the positive impulses coming from the EU accession, in particular by postponing the structural reforms in the country. So far most evidence shows that new members have not changed radically the functioning of the EU, and the implementation of the EU norms has been better than expected, with Lithuania consistently being one of the leading countries in this respect. Finally, it assesses the main European policy priorities in Lithuania, in particular the reasons for some failures (such as the failure to join the eurozone in 2007) and achievements. It argues that most European policy failures have been due to the inconsistency and low credibility of some domestic policies. It concludes by providing venues for future research of European policy after the enlargement. Adapted from the source document.

Then the process of Enlargement has started, it was expected that Accession of much more agrarian and less developed countries from Eastern and Central Europe, compared to the Member States at that time, should encourage the radical reforms of the EU redistributive policies – Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and Cohesion Policy. Some researchers provided with numbers proving that Enlargement without reforming the EU redistributive policies would substantially increase the funding for implementation of these policies. While the other group of scientists noticed that the Enlargement process is getting momentum, whereas the internal EU reforms are postponing. The decision on the CAP reform was taken in 2003 by the Agricultural Council, while the Cohesion Policy reform was agreed in the Brussels European Council of 2005. In the Commission's reform proposals as well as during Member States' negotiations much attention was paid, especially in the case of the Cohesion Policy reform, to the challenges of Enlargement. In this paper the aforementioned last reforms of the EU redistributive policies are analysed: the CAP reform of 2002–2003 and the Cohesion Policy reform of 2004–2006 aiming to evaluate the impact of Enlargement on the Commission's reform proposals and the reform results. It is argued that the factor of Enlargement, although in the Commission's reform proposals was emphasised as encouraging to reform the CAP and the Cohesion Policy radically, in reality for the EU redistributive policy reforms had a minor impact. It is shown that Enlargement did not encourage radical reforms of the EU redistributive policies, because higher influence on the reform results was made by the financial interests of the Member States.