This article analyzes the history, development, & continuity of the sociology of law within the context of Czech social & legal science since 1989. The sociology of law is depicted as a branch of both social & legal science that has suffered greatly from different political discontinuities & ideological repression during the communist era. After the 1989 political changes, the weak tradition of the Czech sociology of law had to be reconstituted. This development is mainly typical of the law faculties of different Czech universities, while academics trained in general sociology & social theory rather continue to ignore the importance & social functions of the legal system in the process of the postcommunist transformation of Czech society.
Being a part of the social world, international law is not closed nor isolated system -- on the contrary, it is in an intimate interaction with international relations & politics. Richard Falk, Professor of International Law, taught for example at the Princeton University & presently at the University of California, Santa Barbara. He is interested in the connections between IL & IR & is a prolific writer on this topic. Two of his last books, The costs of War -- International Law, the UN & World Order After Iraq (2008) & Achieving Human Rights (2009) are reviewed in this essay in highly critical manner. In the essay, Falk's normative inquiry into the legal & political developments is contrasted with the latest discussions in both the International Law & International Relations. In the review essay, Falk is criticized for his unconvincing criticism of the US foreign policy, for his intellectual shortcuts & excessive idealism. However, very interesting & significant parts of both books are emphasized & Falk's books are considered to be worth reading. His insight into the international legal problems & into the developments of human rights is outstanding. Adapted from the source document.
This article presents a review of the currently debated options for regulations of activities of private military companies (PMCs). This topic is a matter of pondering in the foreign literature. It primarily reflects on the massive use of PMCs in Iraq and Afghanistan, which, however, merely illustrates the broader shortcomings resulting from the prolonged absence of clearly defined and enforceable mechanisms for the monitoring and control of the accountability, transparency and effectiveness of PMCs' activities. The goal of this article is therefore not only to present the practical, legal, economic, and political pros and cons of the possible regulation frameworks, but also to illustrate why it is still so difficult to reach a consensus on a regulation framework that would be acceptable to all the relevant actors. Adapted from the source document.
The study focuses on spatial analysis of the general election results in Lower Silesia, Lodz and Lesser Poland voivodeships in a period between 2001 and 2015. Primary subjects of the analysis are political parties Law and Justice, Civic Platform, Polish People´s Party and Democratic Left Alliance, but particularly works also with the results of another parties (Self-Defence, League of Polish families, Modern). Standard electoral geography methodological methods, such as cartographic display of election results, correlation analysis and concentration of the election results measurement have been used on the local level and along with Polish and Czech literature review are included in the study. Main goal of the study was to find out if there are structural differences in terms of electoral support for the parties on both regional and voivodeship level. The analysis proved deeper context of the election results in the eastern regions along with a changing spatial structure of the Law and Justice support in the first decade of the 21st century and related deepening differences between voter bases of the Law and Justice and the Civic Platform- strongest parties in Poland. Findings of the analysis might be useful for upcoming research of the analysis of the electoral support in terms of regional differences.
New President of Romania Traian Băsescu is strong-willed to fight corruption which is a potential threat of national security. Fighting corruption, Băsescu and new government must smash through the shield of interposed persons. Such persons are covering "white collars" that are top-ranking businessmen or privatizers close to political parties. That is why new government and new President want to modify existing penal code and to widen criminal liability of involved persons and organized groups. Today's politically motley Parliament wouldn't be able to adopt such legal measures. In this case, President Băsescu, enjoying wide currency and making use of his accumulated electoral capital, will manifestly be leading the country to anticipated elections. By such a step he would provide current main coalition political parties (PD and PNL) with a comfortable majority in Parliament and with an appropriate milieu for adopting new penal code.
The goal of this contribution is to evaluate the relevance of the institutional factors and the influence of the single variables on the corruption. The key task is to find not only suitable indicator of the amount of corruption but also suitable approximants of institutional characteristics, else economical characteristics. The important advantage of this article is its focus also on the corruption measured by alternative ways, compared to the often used CPI. From the institutional characteristic view for the corruption fight seems to be important stable legal background. Not less important is also the government stability and its accountability. In the contradiction with the expected hypotheses claiming the strong and resistant bureaucracy to be beneficial against the corruption fight, almost all executed analysis is based on the contra productivity of the bureaucracy independency on the corruption fight. It is also important to mention that the direct and indirect taxes vary with their influence on the corruption. ; Web of Science ; 60 ; 2 ; 186 ; 167
This paper seeks to find out to what extent the process of EU accession has influenced legal regulations concerning the creation & functioning of social & political actors. Through the analysis of various statutes & changes made to them, the paper tries to determine the role the EU plays in amending assembly legislation. The actors under scrutiny include political parties, professional organizations, labor unions, & civil society organizations. The paper concludes that the most influenced field of actors was the area of chambers of professionals which was obliged to conform to requirements for the free movement of people & services in the European Union in order to comply with European law. The Czech Republic was quite leisurely in their harmonization of statutes, with the majority of them passed just before accession to the EU. An interesting part of the problem concerns the question of political party membership, which is still reserved only for Czech citizens. However, European citizenship, with its voting rights to the European Parliament & local magistrates, is arguably going to push slowly for change even in this domain. Adapted from the source document.
In connection to the process of the public administration reforms which take place in most of the European countries and also in connection to the "European administrative space", the issues of studying and mutually comparing administrative systems of various European countries, especially EU member countries, become more and more topical. They focus not only on purposeful and effective mutual use of experience in administrative systems improvements, but also on improving orientation in the already mentioned "European administrative space". There is nodue attention devoted so far to the systematic study of administrative systems of (other) European countries. Most of the publications which focus on this issue (mostly study books, study materials, or occassional articles) describe it only on a "descriptive" (mostly simplified) level. The cause of this lies in (apart from time and financial demands) significant complexity of the given issue, in terminological complications and in difficulties of getting adequate (essentially necessary) factography and in practically non-existing adequate methodology. Legal comparative jurisprudence and comparative studies of political systems might inspire onewhen developing the methodology. Even under the current situation, it would be efficient to pay more attention to the comparative studies of the structure of administrative systems, or to some selected areas of the public administration, for example to personnel systems in the public administration, financing public administration or administration of the public property. A thorough "stock -taking" of all the materials which have ever been published about this matter (even in different contexts) in our country orabroad might serve as a basis of these fragmented studies.
Due to the different and mutually incompatible interpretations of Article X of the Treaty of Utrecht of 1713, there is still an ongoing dispute between the United Kingdom and the Kingdom of Spain on the question of the sovereignty of Gibraltar. In the United Kingdom's view, which is largely shared by legal scholars, Article X of the Treaty of Utrecht grants full and entire sovereignty over Gibraltar to the UK. Meanwhile, the Kingdom of Spain argues that Article X yielded to the crown of Great Britain only the property of Gibraltar's castle, town and port. Sovereignty over Gibraltar, however, continued to be retained by the Spanish state. In spite of their disagreement, both states started negotiating a form of condominium at the beginning of the 21st century. In the end, they failed to achieve this goal, which seems to be incompatible with the UN General Assembly resolutions on the decolonization of Gibraltar. The people of Gibraltar, who are the third actor in the Spanish-British dispute, claim their own sovereignty and their right to self-determination. However, according to the UN General Assembly, the decolonization of Gibraltar requires as a precondition that the Kingdom of Spain and the UK solve their dispute on the question of sovereignty. Otherwise the decolonization of Gibraltar cannot occur. Both the United Kingdom and the Kingdom of Spain are European Union members but their inter-state dispute under international law cannot be solved within the EU context. Thus, three hundred years after the signature of the Treaty of Utrecht, the future of Gibraltar remains completely unclear. Adapted from the source document.
