Suchergebnisse

Today, Europe is living a new decisive time as it has been in its past after World War II, in search of unity in diversity in the name of a peace project to safeguard future. If, on the one hand, Europe expresses aspirations for profound changes in its external environment, in the domestic context, it ends up colliding with aspects linked to sovereignty and human rights; on the other hand, in European foreign policy, the model reveals the search to legitimize its action. Precisely, the objective and the motivation of this study seek, through the qualitative methodology in Political Science, to analyse and understand the current context of the European Union in the international system. In fact, it is identified that this new hierarchy of powers, in the reaffirmation of the Westphalian system, where economic power comes, is bound to consolidate the democratic development between the old and new times of international relations in the destiny of Europe. From the results obtained during the analysis, in order to face again the unpredictability of the world scenario, it is a reality that Europe must promote the re-encounter of an alternative role, in other words, to assume its initial project of European edification in the name of equality of circumstances and rights of its affirmation in the global arena.

It is common today, even in the European media, to treat the current crisis of the European Union almost exclusively as an economic crisis. The present article pretends to show that such a focus is not only wrong but is indeed dangerous for the future development of the European Union as a whole. The article will argue that the present economic crisis simply aggravated – and a lot – a crisis of legitimacy through which the European Union has been passing for some time. Showing that the anti-European tendencies which are spreading throughout the countries of the continent threaten the very future of the European project, the article will make suggestion on reforms for the future development of the EU, alerting to the necessity to finally elaborate once again a coherent argument for the continuation of the European integration process which puts the European population at the heart of the political process instead of just austerity.

Executive council Thirty-Fourth Ordinary Session 07 - 08 February 2019 Addis Ababa, Ethiopia ; The Heads of State and Government in 2016 adopted African Space Policy and Strategy through Assembly/AU/Dec.589(XXVI) Decision and requested the Commission to carry out consultations with a view to evaluating the legal, structural and financial implications for the creation of a continental African Space Agency. This was followed by the adoption, in January 2018 through Assembly/AU/Dec.676(XXX), the Statute of African Space Agency.

Executive council Thirty-Fourth Ordinary Session 07 - 08 February 2019 Addis Ababa, Ethiopia ; The Heads of State and Government in 2016 adopted African Space Policy and Strategy through Assembly/AU/Dec.589(XXVI) Decision and requested the Commission to carry out consultations with a view to evaluating the legal, structural and financial implications for the creation of a continental African Space Agency. This was followed by the adoption, in January 2018 through Assembly/AU/Dec.676(XXX), the Statute of African Space Agency.

O presente artigo tem como objetivo mostrar como a União Européia, por meio da atividade da Corte de Justiça das Comunidades Européias, vem restringindo a proteção à saúde em nome da efetivação do Mercado Comum Europeu, base da construção européia. Demonstra-se este fato pela análise das mais significativas decisões relativas, direta e indiretamente, à saúde emanadas por essa Corte. Constata-se o esvaziamento da noção de proteção à saúde por meio, principalmente, da interpretação estrita dos artigos(1) do Tratado das Comunidades Européias, que viabilizam a possibilidade de existência de medidas nacionais que contradigam o Direito Comunitário em nome da proteção de certos valores, aqui a saúde. Nesse contexto, a saúde enquanto medida derrogatória, o monopólio farmacêutico, o princípio de precaução encontram-se fortemente enfraquecidos. Esse fato revela o papel que a Corte européia vem assumindo por meio da integração negativa, dentro do atual contexto decisional cada vez mais complexo da União, e a incapacidade desta para traçar objetivos comuns em áreas controvertidas, mas de suma importância, como a da saúde. ; This article aims to highlight how the European Union, throughout the activity of the Court of Justice of the European Communities, has been restricting the protection of health on the behalf of the European Common Market effectiveness. This is shown by the analysis of the most significant decisions related to health. It is noted that the notion of protection of health has been loosing its sense by the strict interpretation of the articles of the European Community Treaty, which actually allows the existence of measures in opposition to the European Law, in the name of the protection of certain major tenets, like the protection of health. In this context, the derogatory measures, pharmaceutical monopoly and principle of precaution find themselves almost weakling. This fact reveals the role played by the European Court through the negative integration process, inside the complex decisional context of the European Union, and its incapacity of establishing common goals in controversial but highly important domains like health.

Defence date: 21 November 2008 ; Examining Board: Prof. Doutor Jacques Ziller, Instituto Universitário Europeu; Prof. Doutor Pedro Bacelar Vasconcelos, Universidade do Minho; Prof. Doutor Rui Moura Ramos, Universidade de Coimbra; Prof. Doutor Francesco Francioni, Instituto Universitário Europeu. ; First made available online 14 January 2015. ; Portugal is a very good illustration of the current identity quests that are pursued by communities of all shapes and sizes – local, national, supranational, international, civilizational – in response to old urges and new threats posed in a globalised, but also "glocalised", world. Torn between its European body and its atlantic/lusophone "soul", Portugal tries to strike a balance between the two dimensions of its identity as a polity and, in the process, claims a special role as mediator between north and south, Europe and the African continent. Although fully committed to the European immigration policy, with its restrictive dimensions and its focus on integration, Portugal purports to articulate the European demands with the special solidarity bonds that exist with the Portuguese speaking countries. It has been so for a number of years, but the recent developments in both the Portuguese nationality and immigration laws show that the fears expressed by many that Schengen would surpass the lusophone ties were well founded and that, no matter how well intended the Portuguese policies are in these matters, the result will be detrimental to the so-called lusophone citizens. They do enjoy a special status – encompassing voting rights and access to public office that is generally forbidden to all foreigners (a status unparalleled in the two other European countries under scrutiny, France and the United Kingdom) – but their access to the Portuguese territory has been curtailed. Even more than Portugal, which until recently was the last of the European "nation states" and only now faces visible cultural diversity in its society, the European Union and the Community of the Portuguese Speaking Countries (CPLP) struggle with the definition of their respective identities and sense of purpose, seeking to win the hearts and minds of their peoples. Commonly considered a natural spontaneous community, due to the existence of a common language, the CPLP faces the difficulties posed by mutual distrust and old grudges and the fear, by many, that it is only an expression of imperial nostalgia on the part of Portugal. Its member states show only a mild commitment, engaged as they all are in other regional communities of their own, as can be seen in the discussions on citizenship and free movement within the lusophone area. There are many similarities between the legal systems of the CPLP member states, which can be explained by the cooperation between lawyers and academics specially in Africa and East Timor, but some of those similarities are merely formal, with little correspondence in the law in action, and coexist with relevant differences due mostly to different levels of socio-economic development and political will. For the European Union the purpose of fostering a feeling of belonging and solidarity between the peoples of Europe is an ongoing struggle for legitimacy which has suffered major setbacks in recent years. After the constitutional momentum, the Union has adopted a more modest stance, but has by no means given up winning the support of the European citizens. One of the fields in which its intervention is demanded is directly linked with the identity quest in progress – border definition and control, policies towards illegal and legal aliens. Stressing the need to integrate the third country nationals who are legal residents and adopting the mantra of intercultural dialogue, the EU presents itself as a guardian for human rights and a fighter against racism, at the same time as it tries to keep Europe for the Europeans as much as possible. Its member states are willing, for European or domestic reasons, to go along and easily drop old preferences for extra-community bonds of solidarity. Portugal may again be the last of the empires, keeping a special status for the foreigners of lusophone origin, but it nevertheless keeps with the times when it comes to admission to its territory.

The Treaty of Lisbon, in line with the failed Constitutional Treaty and in the sequence of several initiatives which had taken place, came to provide for the mechanism of permanent structured cooperation. The goal of this mechanism is to enable the arising of a vanguard of Member States, eventually ready to form the embryo of a future European Union's exclusive defence system. Although permanent structured cooperation represents a step towards the application of the "community method" to security and defence of the European Union, it doesn't still fit in that pattern. Only future can tell, if permanent structured cooperation is likely to provide the European Union with a security and defence policy based on the "community method".

Executive Council Thirty-Fourth Ordinary Session 7 – 8 February 2019 Addis Ababa, Ethiopia ; The African Capacity Building Foundation (ACBF) was created in 1991 in response to the shortage of capacity to build indigenous human and institutional capacity to promote sustainable development in Africa. The Foundation was designed to serve as a coordinating mechanism for donor support to capacity building in Africa, through the pooling of resources and a common governance and reporting system. To date, 40 African countries have become members of ACBF. ACBF has, however, continued to avail its support to all African countries regardless of their membership status. In recognition of its effective support to African countries, ACBF was designated by African Heads of States and Government a Specialized Agency of the African Union by Decision Assembly/AU/Dec.621 (XXVIII) of the 28th Assembly in January 2017.