Suchergebnisse

External action has been of growing importance for the Union's Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ) and accounted in 2011 already for over 19 percent of all texts adopted by the Justice and Home Affairs Council. AFSJ related external action has also added a new dimension to previously existing fields of EU external relations. This article first considers the internal and external factors which have influenced the development the external side of the AFSJ and the impact of the post-Lisbon legal and institutional framework, including the special context created by the 'opt-outs' and coherence problems within this framework. It then provides a survey and analysis of the main forms of EU action in this domain (strategy formulation, cooperation with third countries, capacity-building and cooperation with and within international organizations) before assessing-in the conclusions-the implications of this external dimension for both the EU and the Member States and its future developments prospects. Adapted from the source document.

Protests and picketing of theatres will always be with humans: they are legal and legitimate, and they are a testimony to the depth of emotion and public discussion that the theatre can provoke. The new hysteria that is increasingly dominating political discourse has produced a particularly nasty outcrop of bullying tactics in the theatre, sometimes, alas, from theatre practitioners themselves, especially in the area of anything concerning Israel, a country with whom they are not at war and with whom they have full diplomatic relations. But the refusal of the police to accept responsibility for ensuring the safety of theatre goers who want to see plays or events which are perfectly legal is a fundamental threat to freedom. Here, Callow argues police should do more to protect and defend their right to attend controversial plays and works of art. Adapted from the source document.

This writing attempts to lift about polemic of interfaith marriage that occurred in Indonesia, where in the real some people want to legalize interfaith marriage. This is a necessity that occurred in the era of democracy that leads to free of speech. Looking at the phenomenon that leads to the understanding that interfaith marriage should be seen by point of view that more wide while utilizing common sense, so virtue appears is developed and perpetuated together constantly-at the same time design-building democracy isn't marred from the original. In this case democracy is directed as a system that seeks to freedom with logical limit. But the reality democracy is distorted in the nation's life deliberately. The issue appears lies in the effort to legalize interfaith marriage in order to realize the nuances of equality. Offer grounding and enforcement law prophetic show significance to be retained and developed together in here. Therefore in this writing will be revealed polemic of interfaith marriage with point of view prophetic law.

Three main ideological positions are behind the debate over current changes in Cuba: the statist position, which seeks to perfect a top-down, state socialism; the economicist position, which defends market socialism; and the self-managementist position, which favors democratic socialism and worker participation in company decision making. These visions largely coincide in maintaining that Cuba's main long-term goal should be a more just society, liberated from economic hardship, but they differ markedly in the way they understand justice and freedom and thus socialism. Consequently, different Cubans tend to set different short- and medium-term goals and to propose different means for reaching them. All three make legitimate points that need to be considered in the making of strategic decisions. However, pursuing more democracy would appear more desirable than conferring inordinate power on state functionaries who pledge to represent the interests of society or on resourceful economic actors who direct from the shadows an "invisible hand" that affects us all. [Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications Inc., copyright holder.]

Research shows that foreign aid promotes economic development in democracies but not in autocracies. Although explanations for this phenomenon vary, a common theme is that autocracies are more likely to misuse aid. We provide evidence of such misuse, showing that autocracies are more likely than democracies to divert development aid to the military. Theoretically, we build on "selectorate" models in which autocrats respond to aid by contracting civil liberties. Because this strategy requires military capacity, autocracies but not democracies should spend aid on the military. We support this hypothesis empirically, providing further evidence that autocracies misuse foreign aid. Adapted from the source document.