Suchergebnisse

Ombudsman, unlike the court, cannot make binding decisions, but usually public authorities follow its recommendations, otherwise he may bring the case to the attention of politicians and the public by informing Parliament. The link between the two fundamental European institutions, the Court of Justice of the European Union and the Ombudsman, may be defined as a strong direct link between the problems of EU citizens. Requests to each institution represent an interest of each petitioner, which is intended to be solved by matching laws with moral rules and general principles of law.

The legal architecture of the EU is considered to be sui generis and like any other hybrid system, the process of integration and interaction with the older instruments of the member-states can sometimes become difficult. This article investigates the interventionist tendencies of the Bundesverfassungsgericht in EU development and the reactions of the EU Court of Justice. The main finding is that the German Court often acts as a balance setter in the process of EU integration. The research introduces the debate of the national states' legal resistance to integration and highlights the changes brought in this respect by the Treaties of Maastricht and Lisbon.

The preliminary ruling procedure is a useful tool that, over time, allowed the national courts to participate to the application of European Union law and contributed to this law system evolution. Our study reveals that the procedure is useful for both the national court and the litigant parties, as it clarifies both categories of participants on how should be applied the law of the European Union. However, the preliminary ruling procedure is subject to specific rules, very well systematized in the Recommendations to national courts and tribunals in relation to the initiation of preliminary ruling proceedings, a document issued by the Court of Justice of the European Union itself. Ignoring these recommendations led to the rejection, as inadmissible, of certain requests for a preliminary ruling, and this is a situation that should be avoided in the future.

The internationalization of national constitutions includes an eventual unification of constitutional rules deemed necessary to intensify international relations. So, in a broader way it is invoked the impact of international law and international relations on constitutional law. The result of the internationalization of national rights is a progressive harmonization of concepts and legal rules. In the current state of international law, constitutions' internationalization corresponds a concrete impact of international law on constitutional norms. The current trend of constitutions is to regulate in a more accurate and comprehensive way the relations between the state and international law. International law does not require any particular form of the conclusion of international treaties. In intensification of international relations, international conventions and integration of states in international organizations, the Parliament carries important consequences for both on normative function and the control function. Such legislative activity is guided by international treaties concluded by the state. While the executive and the legislative are involved in the development of international law, the jurisdictional power intervenes to reconcile domestic and international legal norms. States do not devote supremacy of international law over their constitution. Because international treaties to be part of the national legal order is not enough that the procedure for concluding treaties to be respected. It is also necessary that treaties do not contravene fundamental state constitutional principles of human rights and the relationship between public authorities. The control of international treaties' constitutionality can be mandatory or optional. In the process of ratification of the treaty on EU European constitutional courts tend to create a similar design to establish the limits of European integration. In reality, the issue of constitutionality of international treaties control is a political issue and it is difficult to apply legal principles purely political matters. There are three categories of states in the aspect of national courts on constitutional regularity control concluding treaties.

The European Union is a rather new player in international relations. The European Union is neither a state nor international organization. With the accession to the European Union, the states transfer some attributes of sovereignty and, thus, the governing is done by the European Union mostly, taking part in its relations with third countries. At the same time, it contains some elements of the union (confederation, federation). Therefore, the European Union is more than an international organization. We find elements of the federation, confederation without being identified as such, being established on a system of organization. The European Union aims for integration of societies within a single economic, social, political, legal area. The European Union acts as a proper system based on an idea of creating strong Union bonds between the people of Europe, by establishing an internal market, an economical Union. The European Union, in its relations with the member states, keeps the ultimate goal that it has, being an international legal person, special competences, realizing common goals established with the member states. The legal basis of the European Union is represented by two treaties: the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. The well-known Lisbon Treaty represents legally an amending treaty of the previous legal instruments - a compromise between the need for reform, on the one hand, and the need to live in a united Europe, on the other hand. The member states of the EU relate to two legal systems. As a result of their participation in an international organization with supranational character, Member States of the European Union assume a number of commitments with repercussions to their state sovereignty. The Member States coexist with the European Union. The European Union has become, along with its Member States, a matter of international law; even if it shows itself as a conglomerate of states - international organization; it is a union of states established by state attributes, an entity more complex and powerful, with a higher importance with its relations with the Member States, but also with an increased influence on international arena.

In international relations, international security combines that set of international relations that ensures global stability. In other words, international security is a state in which states are not threatened by war or by any breach of their sovereignty or independent development by other states. In accordance with the UN Charter, the Security Council currently has the main task of ensuring world peace, also having the sole right to impose sanctions against aggressors. The idea of international security, its realization in practice is determined by historical, economic, political, social conditions, as well as other factors. The problem of international security arose with the formation of the state institution, being always close to the problem of war and peace. Over time, there has been a change in the ability to analyze and report security issues. Along with these, both the policies and the security strategies of contemporary societies have undergone a process of metamorphosis.