Suchergebnisse

The subject of the parliamentary law and public governance institutions is relevant and new, because it was not analysed before in the scientifical publications of Lithuanian constitutionalists. This subject includes the comparative aspects not only of the constitutional status, powers and interinstitutional relations between the President and the Parliament of Lithuania but also foreign countries governmental relations, status and powers (USA, Latvia and Portugal). The problem, set out in this master thesis, is the lack of systematic comparative analysis, that is connected to the presidential and parliamental relations and the fragmentary scientifical basis on this topic. The object of this thesis is the relations between the actual President and Parliament in Lithuania and three chosen foreign countries (USA, Latvia and Portugal), also their constitutional status, powers and functions that stipulates the mentioned governmental relations. The purpose of this work is to reveal the main aspects and possible solutions of the problematical situations in the sphere of presidential and parliamential relations, constitutional status, powers in the governmental field in Lithuania, USA, Latvia and Portugal. The purpose is obtained while using these main tasks: analysing the theory and the practice of the status, powers, intergovernmental relations in Lithuania, USA, Latvia and Portugal, introducing the similarities and the differences among all the mentioned countries and their governments. There are two hypothesis set out in this work: The mechanism of the relations of Lithuanian Parliament and President presupposes, that the Presidents' powers are inadequately limited in some areas of his actions and the second hypothesis is that the status, powers and relations of the Presidents and the Parliaments in USA, Latvia and Portugal confirms its' similarity to the President of Lithuania. The methods, used in this master thesis are: comparative systematic, teleological, documental analysis, logical method. At the end of analysis, the hypothesis, denoting that in the mechanism of the governmental relations the powers of the President are disproportionately limited, i.e. his rights in the process of the Governments' formation are too narrow and he has no constitutional right to apply to the Constitutional Court on the matter of the legal acts of Seimas incompatibility with the Constitution is confirmed. Moreover, the second hypothesis is partialy rejected: the intergovernmental relations of the researched foreign countries in the abstract level are similar to the governmental institutions of Lithuania but after the deeper examination the differences are also revealed. The American and Portuguese Presidents have strong powers and wide area of constitutional actions, unlike the President of Latvia, that has weaker status, powers and is more likely to be the nominal leader of the country. The master thesis consists of introduction, three main parts, conclusions, offers, the list of the literature used, anotation and the summary in Lithuanian and English languages. The first part of the this work consists of the analysis of the actual Parliament and President in Lithuania, their constitutional status, functions, powers and relations, the second part describes the same features of the three chosen foreign countries (USA, Latvia and Portugal) and the last part discloses the similarities and the differences among all those countries and their governmental relations. The Constitutions of Lithuania, USA, Latvia and Portugal were broadly used when writing this master thesis, as well as some laws, constitutional jurisprudence and some scientifical works of lithuanian constitutionalists, such as G. Mesonis, V. Sinkevičius, E. Jarašiūnas and others and some foreign scientists as well (especially american), such as G. Calabresi, I. Vladeck, W. Marshall and others.

The subject of the parliamentary law and public governance institutions is relevant and new, because it was not analysed before in the scientifical publications of Lithuanian constitutionalists. This subject includes the comparative aspects not only of the constitutional status, powers and interinstitutional relations between the President and the Parliament of Lithuania but also foreign countries governmental relations, status and powers (USA, Latvia and Portugal). The problem, set out in this master thesis, is the lack of systematic comparative analysis, that is connected to the presidential and parliamental relations and the fragmentary scientifical basis on this topic. The object of this thesis is the relations between the actual President and Parliament in Lithuania and three chosen foreign countries (USA, Latvia and Portugal), also their constitutional status, powers and functions that stipulates the mentioned governmental relations. The purpose of this work is to reveal the main aspects and possible solutions of the problematical situations in the sphere of presidential and parliamential relations, constitutional status, powers in the governmental field in Lithuania, USA, Latvia and Portugal. The purpose is obtained while using these main tasks: analysing the theory and the practice of the status, powers, intergovernmental relations in Lithuania, USA, Latvia and Portugal, introducing the similarities and the differences among all the mentioned countries and their governments. There are two hypothesis set out in this work: The mechanism of the relations of Lithuanian Parliament and President presupposes, that the Presidents' powers are inadequately limited in some areas of his actions and the second hypothesis is that the status, powers and relations of the Presidents and the Parliaments in USA, Latvia and Portugal confirms its' similarity to the President of Lithuania. The methods, used in this master thesis are: comparative systematic, teleological, documental analysis, logical method. At the end of analysis, the hypothesis, denoting that in the mechanism of the governmental relations the powers of the President are disproportionately limited, i.e. his rights in the process of the Governments' formation are too narrow and he has no constitutional right to apply to the Constitutional Court on the matter of the legal acts of Seimas incompatibility with the Constitution is confirmed. Moreover, the second hypothesis is partialy rejected: the intergovernmental relations of the researched foreign countries in the abstract level are similar to the governmental institutions of Lithuania but after the deeper examination the differences are also revealed. The American and Portuguese Presidents have strong powers and wide area of constitutional actions, unlike the President of Latvia, that has weaker status, powers and is more likely to be the nominal leader of the country. The master thesis consists of introduction, three main parts, conclusions, offers, the list of the literature used, anotation and the summary in Lithuanian and English languages. The first part of the this work consists of the analysis of the actual Parliament and President in Lithuania, their constitutional status, functions, powers and relations, the second part describes the same features of the three chosen foreign countries (USA, Latvia and Portugal) and the last part discloses the similarities and the differences among all those countries and their governmental relations. The Constitutions of Lithuania, USA, Latvia and Portugal were broadly used when writing this master thesis, as well as some laws, constitutional jurisprudence and some scientifical works of lithuanian constitutionalists, such as G. Mesonis, V. Sinkevičius, E. Jarašiūnas and others and some foreign scientists as well (especially american), such as G. Calabresi, I. Vladeck, W. Marshall and others.

The question concerning whether the formation of interinstitutional arrangements, especially those formed within the Common Foreign & Security Policy, have facilitated processes of parliamentarization within the European Union is addressed. An overview of the legal foundations & limitations of interinstitutional arrangements is presented, emphasizing how these cooperative devices are not easily located within existing European legal frameworks. Intergovernmentalist, neo-institutionalist, & structurationist approaches to understanding constitutional development within the European Union are subsequently discussed to better comprehend the role in interinstitutional arrangements within the European constitution. Analysis of the treaties of Amsterdam, Maastricht, & Nice is performed to determine how the competencies of the European Parliament were enlarged during the 1990s. Additional attention is dedicated to reviewing the establishment of interinstitutional arrangements in 1997 regarding the financing of the Common Foreign and Security Policy & explaining how these agreements enhanced the European Parliament's power within regional foreign & security policy. Various recommendations for future research are also offered. J. W. Parker

This article presents an interinstitutional network supporting older people in Portugal and a policy document that institutionalized this type of interinstitutional practices. The data are part of a large corpus collected in the course of interdisciplinary research: "Aging, poverty and social exclusion: an interdisciplinary study on innovative support services." (https://apseclunl.wordpress.com/). The documentation of good practices in intervention with older people at risk of exclusion were the aim of the research project. The data collected incudes: interviews, observation and recordings of inter-institutional meetings. In the light of the relevant literature, the study discusses the ethnographic account in relation to relevant policy documents ("Rede Social" Interinstitutional Network Program RCM no. 197/97, of 18 November). Describing the main aspects of the intervention strategies with the older population, the article documents the value of these experiences and the approach in policies for the democratization of services and the inclusion of citizens participating in decision making about delivery of services and the promotion of inclusive societies.

The article presents the effects of an attempt to ascertain to what extent the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register affects the phenomenon of lobbying in the European Union (EU). In order to examine the issue, the concept and essence of lobbying in the EU were introduced. Legal regulations concerning EU lobbying were also identified. A further portion of the article analyses the Interinstitutional Agreement of 20 May 2021 between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union, and the European Commission on a mandatory transparency register (IAMTR) in relation to the previously binding Agreement between the Parliament and the European Commission on the transparency register for organisations and self-employed individuals in EU Policy-making and Policy implementation (ATR). The article uses the formal-dogmatic method. As a result of the analysis, it was concluded that the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register
contains numerous exclusions, both subjective and objective, to registration in the Transparency Register. One positive aspect is the application of the IAMTR to the EU Council also.

The article presents the effects of an attempt to ascertain to what extent the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register affects the phenomenon of lobbying in the European Union (EU). In order to examine the issue, the concept and essence of lobbying in the EU were introduced. Legal regulations concerning EU lobbying were also identified. A further portion of the article analyses the Interinstitutional Agreement of 20 May 2021 between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union, and the European Commission on a mandatory transparency register (IAMTR) in relation to the previously binding Agreement between the Parliament and the European Commission on the transparency register for organisations and self-employed individuals in EU Policy-making and Policy implementation (ATR). The article uses the formal-dogmatic method. As a result of the analysis, it was concluded that the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register contains numerous exclusions, both subjective and objective, to registration in the Transparency Register. One positive aspect is the application of the IAMTR to the EU Council also.

There is surprisingly little knowledge about the informal 'trilogues' that play a pivotal role in almost 90 per cent of European Union legislation. This article maps out previously uncharted practices and explores their role in constituting the Parliament and Council as legislators. It proceeds by taking stock of the knowledge that actors in Parliament, the Council and the Commission have acquired and use to make sense of, and act in, trilogues. Our findings qualify the widespread belief that trilogues have drawn Parliament into unfamiliar territory of diplomatic culture, at a cost to political efficacy and democratic functions. Trilogues today are underpinned by norms, standard operating procedures and practices linking formal and informal institutions. They have imparted Parliament with a sharpened consciousness of its role and identity as a 'normal' parliament, while leaving the Council frustrated and less confident. Parliament has seen in norms of public accountability a means to develop leverage over the Council.

"This handbook has been developed to facilitate the use of resources and to maximize communication and interaction among law enforcement and public health officials in an effort to minimize potential barriers to communication and information sharing during a bioterrorism incident. The purpose of this handbook is to: Provide an overview of criminal and epidemiological investigational procedures and methodologies for a response to a bioterrorism incident, Enhance the appreciation and understanding of each discipline's expertise by all parties, and Identify challenges to sharing information and provide potential solutions that may be adapted to meet the needs of the various agencies and jurisdictions throughout the United States. Law enforcement and public health officials are encouraged to read the entire handbook and not limit their review to just their respective sections. It is important to take the time to understand the different goals and needs of the other organization before an event occurs. Doing so will enable law enforcement and public health personnel to effectively respond in a coordinated manner during a bioterrorism incident. While both disciplines have varying objectives and protocols, both public health and law enforcement ultimately share two common concerns: Early identification of the criminal event or public health emergency, and Protecting public health and public safety " - p. 7 ; Introduction -- What is bioterrorism? -- Public health -- Law enforcement -- Joint investigations model -- Appendix 1. Applicable federal weapons of mass destruction statutes regarding the criminal use of biological agents -- Appendix 2. National response framework biological incident annex -- Appendix 3. Laboratory response network -- Appendix 4. HIPAA medical privacy rules: exemptions -- Appendix 5. Sample procedure for a local bioterrorism threat assessment -- Appendix 6. Sample procedure for joint interviews -- Appendix 7. Sample joint interview questions -- Appendix 8. Acronyms -- Appendix 9. Glossary -- Appendix 10. Acknowledgements ; "This handbook represents a joint effort of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the US Department of Justice." - p. [A51] ; Title from online pdf file (viewed August 15, 2012). ; Mode of access: World Wide Web. ; Electronic document in pdf format (12.35 MB, 57 p.).

"The purpose of this handbook is as follows: To provide an introduction to epidemiological and criminal terrorist investigations so public health and law enforcement personnel have a better understanding of each other's information requirements and investigative procedures; To identify potential conflicts law enforcement and public health personnel will encounter during their respective biological incident investigations and to provide potential solutions that can be adapted to meet the needs of the various jurisdictions and agencies throughout the United States; To enhance the appreciation and understanding of each discipline's expertise by all parties. " - p. 3 ; Introduction -- Purpose -- Potential barriers -- -- National Policy -- National response plan -- Role of the U.S. Attorney General and the FBI -- Role of the FBI -- -- Public Health -- Public health investigation -- Public health epidemiological investigations -- -- Law Enforcement -- Law enforcement investigation goals -- Law enforcement criminal investigations -- -- Joint Operations -- Joint investigative information -- Effective information exchange -- Sharing sensitive information -- -- Summary -- Appendix A : Applicable Federal WMD Statutes Regarding the Criminal Use of Biological Agents -- Appendix B: Acronyms. -- Appendix C: Glossary -- Appendix D: Acknowledgements ; "This handbook represents a joint effort of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the US Department of Justice, and the US Army Soldier Biological Chemical Command." - p. [ii] ; Title from online pdf file (viewed April 26, 2007). ; Mode of access: World Wide Web. ; Electronic document in pdf format (839 KB, 103 p.).