Cover -- Quartino -- Contents -- List of contributors -- Chapter I - Proceduralization of EU Agencies: Theory and Practice - Conticellli e De Bellis -- Part I - Rule-making and Regulation in Public Utilities and Aviation Safety -- Chapter II - The Evolution of the BEREC Governance: Cooperation Forum or Agency-Like Body? - Mariniello -- Chapter III - Ensuring Public Participation in ACER's Rule-making: the Case of EU Network Codes - Vlachou -- Chapter IV - The Rulemaking Function of the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) - Simoncini -- Part II - Accountability and Legitimacy in Banking and Financial Regulation -- Chapter V - Procedural Accountability through Formaland Informal Dialogue: the Case of the SingleSupervisory Mechanism (SSM) - Sciascia -- Chapter VI - The Orderly Resolution of Failing Banks: Administrative Guarantees in the Proceedings before the Single Resolution Board - Figliolia -- Chapter VII - Towards a "Procedural Legitimation" of EU Agencies? The Reform of the European Supervisory Authorities as a Case Study - Magliari -- Part III - Cross-cutting Issues: Soft Law and Boards of Appeal -- Chapter VIII - European Union Soft Law by Agencies: an Analysis of the Legitimacy of their Procedural Frameworks - Rocca and Eliantonio -- Chapter IX - A new era for EU Agencies' Boards of Appeal? A Preliminary Assessment of the Recent Reform of CJEU's Statute and its Implication on EU Administrative Adjudication - Alberti -- Chapter X - The Transformation of the European Administration - della Cananea -- Finito di stampare -- Volumi pubblicati.
Zugriffsoptionen:
Die folgenden Links führen aus den jeweiligen lokalen Bibliotheken zum Volltext:
The issue of the Constitution in the contemporary history of Morocco as ideas and a system of laws, reflecting the political transformations that Morocco has known since independence, it is mainly related to linking the production of the Constitution to the development of concepts and institutions and their relationship to democratic construction and the establishment of a modern state in the time of independence, as well as constitutional amendments reflect the transformations known in Moroccan society, At the political or social level, the shift towards building a democratic society, the emergence of civil society and human rights organizations in the national political arena, in addition to demanding political and constitutional reforms. The research project reflects the development of the executive power in successive Moroccan constitutions, up to the 2011 constitution, with a legal comparison between the powers and competencies of the head of state with the powers and competencies of the prime minister (Head of Government), and highlighting the transformations experienced in this area in the constitutions (1962-1970-1972-1992-1996), the accumulations that led to the distribution contained in the 2011 Constitution, and the problems of practice during the previous government mandate. Considering that the existing constitutional problem in Morocco was raised primarily at the level of the Constitution of the Organization of Authorities, and in particular the dominant role that the Royal Institution has continued to play towards other institutions, it seems that the new Constitutional Document did not provide what could establish a new type of relationship between the Institution. The monarchy and other institutions, therefore, continued to perpetuate the centrality of the monarchy and its dominance over political life. Whether as the "Commander of the Faithful" or "Head of State", the King retained wide and effective competencies and powers that would allow him to remain the center of the political system and the main determinant of his orientations and decisions, and even added new powers. In addition to the availability of (reserved field) makes it a monopoly of the right of initiative in five strategic areas: religious, military, external, judicial and security, the presence of (partner) in some other competencies, does not prevent him from having The last word, as reflected in the continued subordination of the government to him, and continued interference in the work of Parliament. Moreover, giving him the power to amend the constitution through direct recourse to parliament, along with other possibilities shared with the prime minister and the parliament, makes him control and even monopolize the sub-constituent authority. His presidency of a number of constitutional institutions would further entrench his role as a "hub for institutional and political life" and would contradict the result (the imbalances of the political and institutional paths in the past, which necessitated a redefinition of the roles and functions of the royal institution to serve it. Ballot boxes, not a substitute for them, to ensure balance and separation of powers, and avoid assigning roles incompatible with each other to the same institution). Although the constitution has strengthened the powers of the government and reconsidered the nature of its installation and composition, especially when its president has been immune from the possibility of direct dismissal, it generally remains hostage to the royal will. It is clear that the provisions of Article 47 make the King retain great authority over the members of the government, both in terms of appointment and exemption, and his presidency of the Council of Ministers, which is still a necessary crossing for a number of issues makes him in control of the government's choices and directions, and initiatives Its president, and thus becomes, the actual head of the executive, the primary determinant of the general policy of the state. The study of the 2011 Constitution, especially the executive, is of great importance for several considerations, as it is considered an authority directly related to public policies, as it reflects the local community to which it belongs and represents it in many aspects. Therefore, the study of the executive authority and the perception of the characteristics and mechanisms that control relations between its elements, An important aspect that this research seeks to highlight. The importance of this subject lies in reading the constitutional revisions and the impact of national and international changes in their visibility, with a focus on the context of the Arab Spring, which resulted in the new constitutional review. It also seeks to reveal the relationship between the Royal Institution and the Prime Minister's Institution and the gradual transfer of government competencies in order to find the balances required for the continuation of the performance of its roles as required, and read the past government experience as a constituent mandate, being the first government under the new constitution.
On 21 Nov 2003 the University of Pavia held a seminar on "Lorenzago di Cadore's plan for Constitutional Reform." The seminar was sponsored by the departments of Political & Judicial Studies, Statistics, & Applied Economics. Under the direction of professors Pietro Giuseppe Grasso & Pietro Vincenzo Aimo, the seminar offered an opportunity to analyze the contents of the proposed reform. This paper focuses on the two main characteristics of the reform: the will to fully respect the principle of sovereignty of people & the pledge to ensure a functional executive power, here intended as a government legitimated by modern consensus & endorsed by the people. M. Williamson
Il saggio prende spunto dal conflitto di attribuzione promosso da alcuni parlamentari nei confronti del Governo, per la mancata presentazione del disegno di legge di autorizzazione alla ratifica del Memorandum d'intesa con la Libia, concernente il contrasto all'immigrazione "illegale" e la sicurezza delle frontiere. Il conflitto interorganico è l'occasione, da un lato, per riconsiderare il tema dell'iniziativa legislativa per l'autorizzazione alla ratifica dei trattati internazionali, che non può ritenersi riservata al Governo (soprattutto per gli accordi in forma semplificata ricadenti nelle ipotesi di cui all'art. 80 Cost.) e, dall'altro, per evidenziare che, nell'ambito delle politiche migratorie e del controllo delle frontiere esterne, l'Unione europea e alcuni Stati membri prediligono ormai una strategia di esternalizzazione, che costituisce un mero palliativo alle inadeguatezze del c.d. sistema di Dublino ; The essay takes its cue from conflicts of attribution raised by four Deputies against the executive power, for the failure to present the bill authorizing the ratification of the Memorandum of Understanding with Libya, which concerns the fight against "illegal" migration and security of borders. The conflicts before the Constitutional Court are the occasion, on the one hand, to review the legislative initiative for the ratification of international treaties, which can not be considered reserved to the Cabinet (especially for executive agreements falling under Article 80 of the Constitution) and, secondly, to highlight that, in the context of migration policies and the control of external borders, the European Union and some Member States now favour an externalization strategy, which constitutes a mere palliative to the inadequacies of the Dublin system.
While scholars have generally focused attention on the analogies between the political perspective of The Federalist and that of Tocqueville's Democracy in America, this essay aims to highlight the theoretical differences between the two works. Alexander Hamilton theorized the need for a strong national executive power as an embodiment of a disinterested rationality; James Madison justified federal power in defense of freedom and property from possible interference by states' democratic legislative assemblies. Tocqueville's vision was the opposite: the French author looked to America as an experiment in democracy. In this perspective, his "science of politics" consisted in giving value to the past, recognizing a major source in "American feudalism", understood as the dispersion of power in the multiplicity of institutions and local associations of Puritan America.
The coming into being of the Conte government was the first in Italy to make use of the government-contract scheme; i.e., stating in writing the political objectives to be pursued by members of the executive power. The present paper deals with the proper allocation of such a practice within the framework of the Italian constitutional order. The paper starts with a survey of the theories of government contracts and ends with some considerations on their binding nature on members of parliament and of the cabinet. It focuses on the relationship between such contracts and freedom of the mandate, also analyzing the links between such agreements and the institute of parliamentary confidence. The paper concludes by assessing whether such an agreement can be considered a real contract or rather is void under ius civile.
