Search results

Address before the Royal institute of international affairs, London, Dec. 5, 1945.

Résumé La peine de mort a longtemps été considérée comme une mesure de « justice » pénale, relevant donc de la souveraineté de l'État. Progressivement, des organisations internationales, l'opinion publique internationale, le Conseil de l'Europe, l'Union européenne ou encore de la justice pénale internationale ont souligné qu'il s'agissait d'une violation des droits fondamentaux et la question est ainsi devenue un enjeu des relations internationales. Si aujourd'hui une majorité d'États ont renoncé à la peine de mort, de grandes puissances continuent à l'appliquer (Chine, États-Unis). Pour que la situation évolue, il convient de faire participer au débat des personnalités de l'Islam, du bouddhisme et du taoïsme, et de prouver que, dans la lutte contre la criminalité, la peine de mort est vaine.

Die Untersuchung befasst sich mit dem Verhältnis des internationalen Sportverbandsrechts zum Recht der Europäischen Union sowie dem (europäischen) Assoziierungsrecht. Es widmet sich den fortschreitenden Verflechtungen dieser Rechtskreise sowie den dabei auftretenden Kollisionsgemengen und zeigt hierfür materiellrechtliche und prozedurale Lösungsmöglichkeiten auf. Besonderes Augenmerk wird dabei auf die in den Unionsverträgen niedergelegten Grundfreiheiten und auf die Vorschriften des europäischen Wettbewerbsrechts gelegt; auch die verschiedenen Freizügigkeitsrechte und Diskriminierungsverbote in Drittstaatenabkommen werden als weitere Grenze sportverbandlicher Rechtsetzung thematisiert. Veranschaulicht werden diese allgemein erarbeiteten dogmatischen Grundlagen anhand ausgewählter aktueller sportverbandsrechtlicher Instrumente, wie etwa dem financial fair play-Regelwerk der UEFA, den sog. Mindestkontingenten oder der 50+1-Regel. / »International Sports Federation Law within the Scope of European Union and Association Law« -- The book deals with the relationship between international sports federation law and the law of the European Union. It is devoted to the progressive interconnections of these legal circles as well as to the collisions occurring in this process and presents legal solutions. The general foundations are illustrated by means of current sports association law instruments, such as UEFA's financial fair play rules.

The question of who decides when a state has not met its international responsibilities (and therefore forfeits the right to non-intervention) and what kind of international action should be taken (from limited intervention to full-blown regime change) divides liberal foreign policy thinking. To understand the nature of that division, and what is at stake, this article distinguishes 'neoliberal' from 'liberal internationalist' approaches and locates them in an English School understanding of international society. Where the latter stresses the importance of observing the procedural norms centred on the United Nations, the former contests the legitimacy of such norms if they fail to deliver substantive liberal outcomes. The article then interprets British foreign policy discourse either side of the 2003 Iraq conflict through the prism of this debate. The central claim is that a more cautious approach to the use of force and American unilateralism has not silenced the critique of the UN system and that the international reaction to the Libyan intervention prompts the kind of reflection that continues to separate neoliberal from liberal internationalist approaches.

Liberal international theory foresaw neither the end of the east–west rivalry nor the fall of the Soviet Union. However, from the 1960s up through the 1980s, several liberal international theorists put forward insightful analyses of the evolution of the cold war, its changing importance in world affairs and the problems that increasingly confronted the Soviet Union. Well before the fall of the Berlin Wall, several liberal international writers sensed that the cold war was abating, that this abatement was important for world politics and that the Soviet Union was having serious problems in maintaining its status as a superpower with an Eastern European empire.

In this paper we present a frame of reference for analysing the possible impact of economic integration under NAFTA on the size, composition and forms of migration between Mexico and the United States. Our argument is that the source of any possible impact on migration ought not to be sought in NAFTA but in the underlying processes of change in production operations. In particular, we contend that the new forms of migration are indicative of structural changes related to changes in labour market dynamics caused by the various forms of labour flexibility introduced in both Mexico and the United States. Both the neoliberal policy implemented in Mexico and economic restructuring in the United States have facilitated the reconfiguration of the two countries' trade relations in a context of more integrated economic and industrial relations. In this regard, labour force mobility within the bloc will depend not so much on the integration process in itself as on the linkage between work processes and labour markets in each economy and in the bloc as a whole.