Suchergebnisse

Welche Chancen und Probleme bietet der Verweis auf Menschenrechte bei der Definition völkerstrafrechtlich relevanter Verbrechen? Unter welchen Voraussetzungen ist ein Verweis auf den Katalog des internationalen Menschenrechtsschutz dogmatisch angemessen und praktisch wahrscheinlich? Diese Fragen werden sowohl rechtstheoretisch, in der tatsächlichen Rechtsanwendung als auch empirisch durch Gespräche mit Richterinnen und Richtern an völkerstrafrechtlichen Gerichten ergründet.Durch das Aufzeigen der Gemeinsamkeiten und Unterschiede der beiden Rechtsgebiete, der vorherrschenden dogmatischen Unschärfen sowie Ansätzen zu deren Lösung, leistet der Band einen entscheidenden Beitrag zur Debatte über Rechtssicherheit und Innovation im Bereich des Völkerstrafrechts

Die Untersuchung entwickelt eine Theorie des entschuldigenden Notstands (§ 35 StGB). Die in der Literatur vorhandenen Begründungen dieses Rechtsinstituts weisen eine »gnadenähnliche« Struktur auf und sind letztendlich kollektivistischer Art: Sie verweisen auf die »Sozialverträglichkeit« der Entschuldigung des Täters und nicht auf die Rechte der involvierten Personen. Nach einer Auseinandersetzung mit den bisher entwickelten Ansätzen wird eine Revision des $anorm$zbezogenen Schuldbegriffs vorgeschlagen: Schuld wird als $astraf$zbezogene normative Ansprechbarkeit definiert. Die entschuldigende Notstandslage ist dadurch charakterisiert, dass der Täter die Strafe nur vermeiden kann, indem er ein »angeborenes« Recht aufgibt (Leben, Leib, Freiheit). Strafe führt aber ihrerseits ebenfalls zum Entzug eines angeborenen Rechts. Der Täter kann also das Übel der Strafe nicht vermeiden. Der entschuldigende Notstand erweist sich somit als genuines Schuldproblem. / »Necessity and Punishment« -- The book intends to provide a theoretical foundation for the necessity defense in Criminal Law. The reasons for the exculpation in necessity depend on the concept of culpability. The author proposes to rethink the traditional approach: culpability means the possibility to avoid punishment, which is understood as the suppression of »innate« rights. These new approach leads to a new concept of necessity in Criminal Law.

Sažimajući cijeli rad potrebno je utvrditi kako zahtjevi koji za područje zaštite okoliša proizlaze iz sklopa nadležnosti uređenog ustavnim pravom Unije u stvarnosti imaju vrlo malen utjecaj na postupanje europskog zakonodavca. Načelo dodjeljivanja jednim dijelom ne spriječava da države članice postrože razinu zaštite, uslijed čega može doći do poremećivanja uvjeta tržišnog natjecanja. Također, u ovoj je sferi problematično i razgraničenje kriterija za korištenje pojedine konkretne osnove nadležnosti. Europski zakonodavac ima mogućnost u sklopu pravnog akta koji je finalno usmjeren na harmonizaciju unutarnjeg tržišta popratno urediti i pitanja koja se odnose na prostorno planiranje, kvanititativno upravljanje vodnim resursima te uporabu zemljišta (izuzev gospodarenja otpadom) dok god navedena područja ne predstavljaju stvarni cilj uređenja akta Europske unije. Navedeno u konačnici znači da je moguće čl. 114. UFEU-a barem djelomično potkopati strogi zahtjev jednoglasnosti koji je čl. 192. st. 2. podst. 1. slovom b) UFEU-a propisan za područja prostornog planiranja, vodne resurse i uporabu zemljišta. U svojoj praksi Sud Eurospke unije zahtjeva da se načelo supsidijarnosti poštuje samo na razini pozitivnog kriterija, slijedom čega dolazi do znatnog ograničavanja suvereniteta država članica kojega bi trebao štititi upravo negativan kriterij. Predmetni zaštitu nacionalnog suvereniteta nije u stanju pružiti niti načelo proporcionalnosti koje je bilo zamišljeno kao posljednji bedem protiv pravnih akata Unije koji prelaze granice nadležnosti Unije, iz razloga što Sud Eurospke unije de facto ne ispituje usklađenost pravnih akata Unije s ovim načelom. Kriteriji zaštite okolišta koji su sadržani u čl. 27. Povelje temeljnih prava Europske unije u bitnome se podudaraju sa sadržajem čl. 11 UFEU-a te u ovoj fazi razvoja pred zakonodavca Unije ne stavljaju zahtjeve koji nadilaze zahtjeve UFEU-a. Međutim, potrebno je pričekati hoće li i u kojem će opsegu odredba o zaštiti okolišta sadržana u čl. 37. Povelje temeljnih sloboda davati pojedincima subjektivna prava. Sukladno stavu autora, za europskog zakonodavca iz primarnog prava Europske unije ne proizlaze bitna ograničenja zakonodavne djelatnosti na području zaštite okoliša. Postavljeni zahtjevi vrlo su slabi, a što u konačnici u odnosu na podjelu nadležnosti između Europske unije i njezinih država članica za sobom povlači trajne trzavice. ; A summary of the entire paper includes the necessity of establishing how the demands, in the area of environmental protection emerging from the conglomerate of supervision regulated by constitutional law of the Union, in reality have very little influence on the actions of the European legislator. The principle of award partly does not prevent member states from increasing the level of protection, the result of which can cause disrupting the conditions of market competition. Also In this area, setting the boundaries for the use of certain concrete fundamentals of authority is problematic. The European legislator has the opportunity within the area of the legal act which is ultimately focussed on harmonising internal markets to also regulate issues related to spatial planning. In addition, it can quantitivelly manage water resources and the use of land (excepting managing waste) for as long as the mentioned areas represent the real aim of regulating the acts of the European Union. Finally, it is mentioned that it is possible to at least partially with art.114 UFEU to bury the strict demand of unanimity which art.193 section 2 subsection 1 b) of UFEU which regulate the areas of spatial planning, water resources and land use. In its practice, the Court of the European Union demands that the principle of subsidiarity is only respected at the level of positive criteria, the result of which leads to significant limitation of member state sovereignty which should actually protect the negative criterion. The subject of protection of national sovereignty is not able to offer even the principle of proportionality which was conceived as the last stand against the legal acts of the Union which cross the borders of the authority of the Union because the Court of the European Union de facto does not check the harmonisation of the legal acts of the Union with this principle. Criteria for the protection of the environment contained in art.27 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, for the main part, conflict with the content of art.11 UFEU and in this phase of development does not place the demands which supersede the demands of UFEU before the legislator of the Union .However, it is necessary to wait and see whether and to what extent the provision on environmental protection , contained in art.37 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights ,give individuals subjective rights. According to the author's opinion, for the European legislator, no significant limitations of legislative activity in the area of environmental protection emerge from the primary law of the European Union. The set demands are very weak which ultimately, in relation to the division of authority between the European Union and its member states, result in continual conflict.

First preliminary reference of the German Federal Constitutional Court – ECB Outright Monetary Transaction Programme (OMT) – Financial crisis – Ultra vires review – Principle of democracy – Judicial dialogue – Separation of powers – National constitutional identity – Mandate of the ECB – Article 123 TFEU – Article 18.1 ESCB-Statute – Economic and monetary policy – Honeywell test partially abandoned – Pringle judgment inverted – No margin of discretion for the ECB – Necessity, and prohibition of functional misuse, under Article 267 TFEU – Comparative reasoning

"Necessity knows no law." This saying contains, essentially, the doctrine of the state of emergency. After the attacks on the World Trade Center & the Pentagon on 11th September 2001 this doctrine celebrated a worldwide renaissance. In the current German security discourse one can trace the influence of Carl Schmitt, the most prominent representative of the doctrine. The essay argues that the "war on terror" cannot be won by means of the sovereign exemption laws. The strategy of sovereign self-assertion, instead, destroys the rule of democracy because this approach increasingly embraces the same means as its terrorist adversaries. Adapted from the source document.

Changes in the organisational structure of the Federal Republic of Germany can be observed at all democratic decision-making levels – at the local level, at federal state level and at federal level. In the light of the departure from beaurocratic administrative rule (that is required by constitutional law) that this entails, Germany must be understood as a state without a real executive. What is more, the emergent monopolisation of state will-formation through the political parties as well as the questionable democratic legitimacy of the European Union means that the key requirement of the Basic Law; that all state power emanates from the people (alone); is being undermined. It is the aim of the studies in this volume to explain this development and the consequent necessity to amend the constitutional law.

The importance of water resources for human life was consolidated worldwide by the resolution 64/292 of the United Nations. This also applies to Germany, where though the German Constitutional Court additionally the law for "Nassauskiesung" (wet gravel extraction) was passed. Water protection and the regulation of water uses are nowadays part of the key tasks of any Environmental Law. The necessity of providing answers to these problems led to the development of water management systems which, even though the influence of International Law is now bigger than ever, show national characteristics. Comparative Law examines the differences and similarities between Chilean and German Water Law and, when possible, helps giving recommendations towards the improvement and harmonization of Environmental Law. The Chilean Model represents a paradigmatic example of a free-market based Water Law founded on tradable water rights. German Water Law includes a more extensive administrative control of water rights and is strongly influenced by European Law. Moreover, there are differences concerning the major problems affecting each country´s Water Law and the role of sustainability in each legislation. Similarities can be found regarding the definition of water`s legal status.

Die Zusammenfassung ist nur in englischer Sprache verfügbar. ; The importance of water resources for human life was consolidated worldwide by the resolution 64/292 of the United Nations. This also applies to Germany, where though the German Constitutional Court additionally the law for "Nassauskiesung" (wet gravel extraction) was passed. Water protection and the regulation of water uses are nowadays part of the key tasks of any Environmental Law. The necessity of providing answers to these problems led to the development of water management systems which, even though the influence of International Law is now bigger than ever, show national characteristics. Comparative Law examines the differences and similarities between Chilean and German Water Law and, when possible, helps giving recommendations towards the improvement and harmonization of Environmental Law. The Chilean Model represents a paradigmatic example of a free-market based Water Law founded on tradable water rights. German Water Law includes a more extensive administrative control of water rights and is strongly influenced by European Law. Moreover, there are differences concerning the major problems affecting each country ́s Water Law and the role of sustainability in each legislation. Similarities can be found regarding the definition of water`s legal status.

Adam Smith was not just a pioneer of political economy; he was also a moral philosopher who aspired to write a systematic theory of law. Though he never completed the project - he asked the executors of his estate to burn his notes - his major published works contain a multitude of passages from which significant portions of his legal theory can be reconstructed. Many of Smith's views are of great relevance to present-day issues. He proposed financial regulation restricting the freedom of individuals, which he likened to the necessity of equipping buildings with firewalls. In light of the global firestorm caused by the most recent banking crisis, Smith's ideas appear strikingly modern. Jens Petersen, Universität Potsdam.