#e article analyses the justice sector reforms in Moldova. Tracing of reform process in Moldova, combined with the insights of europeanization theories and theories of legal sector reforms, was applied for the identiƒcation of the mechanism, which explains, why the reform was not successful in Moldova. #e main conclusions of the article are: First, to be successful, reform, aimed at the establishment of the rule of law, should include such measures as the establishment of e"ective institutions of accountability. #ese institutions would ensure both positive and negative incentives for the transformation of behaviour by main political and legal actors according to the new rules. Second, the reformers take measures to establish the required institutions of accountability if this is instrumentally rational to them. #e rationality of such political decision depends on both internal and external factor. Political instability weakens administrative capabilities to ensure consecutive and coherent implementation of the reform. Further, interaction of political instability with the public dissatisfaction with reform results induces politicians to use reform as an instrument of electoral mobilization, by making promises of fast results and supporting these promises by new initiatives concerning the direction and measures of the reform. #e focus of international donors on quantitative results, pressure to achieve results as soon as possible and liberal attitude towards various o"ences by pro-democratic elite do not motivate reformers to aim at the consistent implementation of the reform, either
#e article analyses the justice sector reforms in Moldova. Tracing of reform process in Moldova, combined with the insights of europeanization theories and theories of legal sector reforms, was applied for the identiƒcation of the mechanism, which explains, why the reform was not successful in Moldova. #e main conclusions of the article are: First, to be successful, reform, aimed at the establishment of the rule of law, should include such measures as the establishment of e"ective institutions of accountability. #ese institutions would ensure both positive and negative incentives for the transformation of behaviour by main political and legal actors according to the new rules. Second, the reformers take measures to establish the required institutions of accountability if this is instrumentally rational to them. #e rationality of such political decision depends on both internal and external factor. Political instability weakens administrative capabilities to ensure consecutive and coherent implementation of the reform. Further, interaction of political instability with the public dissatisfaction with reform results induces politicians to use reform as an instrument of electoral mobilization, by making promises of fast results and supporting these promises by new initiatives concerning the direction and measures of the reform. #e focus of international donors on quantitative results, pressure to achieve results as soon as possible and liberal attitude towards various o"ences by pro-democratic elite do not motivate reformers to aim at the consistent implementation of the reform, either
Then the process of Enlargement has started, it was expected that Accession of much more agrarian and less developed countries from Eastern and Central Europe, compared to the Member States at that time, should encourage the radical reforms of the EU redistributive policies – Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and Cohesion Policy. Some researchers provided with numbers proving that Enlargement without reforming the EU redistributive policies would substantially increase the funding for implementation of these policies. While the other group of scientists noticed that the Enlargement process is getting momentum, whereas the internal EU reforms are postponing. The decision on the CAP reform was taken in 2003 by the Agricultural Council, while the Cohesion Policy reform was agreed in the Brussels European Council of 2005. In the Commission's reform proposals as well as during Member States' negotiations much attention was paid, especially in the case of the Cohesion Policy reform, to the challenges of Enlargement. In this paper the aforementioned last reforms of the EU redistributive policies are analysed: the CAP reform of 2002–2003 and the Cohesion Policy reform of 2004–2006 aiming to evaluate the impact of Enlargement on the Commission's reform proposals and the reform results. It is argued that the factor of Enlargement, although in the Commission's reform proposals was emphasised as encouraging to reform the CAP and the Cohesion Policy radically, in reality for the EU redistributive policy reforms had a minor impact. It is shown that Enlargement did not encourage radical reforms of the EU redistributive policies, because higher influence on the reform results was made by the financial interests of the Member States.
Then the process of Enlargement has started, it was expected that Accession of much more agrarian and less developed countries from Eastern and Central Europe, compared to the Member States at that time, should encourage the radical reforms of the EU redistributive policies – Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and Cohesion Policy. Some researchers provided with numbers proving that Enlargement without reforming the EU redistributive policies would substantially increase the funding for implementation of these policies. While the other group of scientists noticed that the Enlargement process is getting momentum, whereas the internal EU reforms are postponing. The decision on the CAP reform was taken in 2003 by the Agricultural Council, while the Cohesion Policy reform was agreed in the Brussels European Council of 2005. In the Commission's reform proposals as well as during Member States' negotiations much attention was paid, especially in the case of the Cohesion Policy reform, to the challenges of Enlargement. In this paper the aforementioned last reforms of the EU redistributive policies are analysed: the CAP reform of 2002–2003 and the Cohesion Policy reform of 2004–2006 aiming to evaluate the impact of Enlargement on the Commission's reform proposals and the reform results. It is argued that the factor of Enlargement, although in the Commission's reform proposals was emphasised as encouraging to reform the CAP and the Cohesion Policy radically, in reality for the EU redistributive policy reforms had a minor impact. It is shown that Enlargement did not encourage radical reforms of the EU redistributive policies, because higher influence on the reform results was made by the financial interests of the Member States.
Then the process of Enlargement has started, it was expected that Accession of much more agrarian and less developed countries from Eastern and Central Europe, compared to the Member States at that time, should encourage the radical reforms of the EU redistributive policies – Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and Cohesion Policy. Some researchers provided with numbers proving that Enlargement without reforming the EU redistributive policies would substantially increase the funding for implementation of these policies. While the other group of scientists noticed that the Enlargement process is getting momentum, whereas the internal EU reforms are postponing. The decision on the CAP reform was taken in 2003 by the Agricultural Council, while the Cohesion Policy reform was agreed in the Brussels European Council of 2005. In the Commission's reform proposals as well as during Member States' negotiations much attention was paid, especially in the case of the Cohesion Policy reform, to the challenges of Enlargement. In this paper the aforementioned last reforms of the EU redistributive policies are analysed: the CAP reform of 2002–2003 and the Cohesion Policy reform of 2004–2006 aiming to evaluate the impact of Enlargement on the Commission's reform proposals and the reform results. It is argued that the factor of Enlargement, although in the Commission's reform proposals was emphasised as encouraging to reform the CAP and the Cohesion Policy radically, in reality for the EU redistributive policy reforms had a minor impact. It is shown that Enlargement did not encourage radical reforms of the EU redistributive policies, because higher influence on the reform results was made by the financial interests of the Member States.
Then the process of Enlargement has started, it was expected that Accession of much more agrarian and less developed countries from Eastern and Central Europe, compared to the Member States at that time, should encourage the radical reforms of the EU redistributive policies – Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and Cohesion Policy. Some researchers provided with numbers proving that Enlargement without reforming the EU redistributive policies would substantially increase the funding for implementation of these policies. While the other group of scientists noticed that the Enlargement process is getting momentum, whereas the internal EU reforms are postponing. The decision on the CAP reform was taken in 2003 by the Agricultural Council, while the Cohesion Policy reform was agreed in the Brussels European Council of 2005. In the Commission's reform proposals as well as during Member States' negotiations much attention was paid, especially in the case of the Cohesion Policy reform, to the challenges of Enlargement. In this paper the aforementioned last reforms of the EU redistributive policies are analysed: the CAP reform of 2002–2003 and the Cohesion Policy reform of 2004–2006 aiming to evaluate the impact of Enlargement on the Commission's reform proposals and the reform results. It is argued that the factor of Enlargement, although in the Commission's reform proposals was emphasised as encouraging to reform the CAP and the Cohesion Policy radically, in reality for the EU redistributive policy reforms had a minor impact. It is shown that Enlargement did not encourage radical reforms of the EU redistributive policies, because higher influence on the reform results was made by the financial interests of the Member States.
Then the process of Enlargement has started, it was expected that Accession of much more agrarian and less developed countries from Eastern and Central Europe, compared to the Member States at that time, should encourage the radical reforms of the EU redistributive policies – Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and Cohesion Policy. Some researchers provided with numbers proving that Enlargement without reforming the EU redistributive policies would substantially increase the funding for implementation of these policies. While the other group of scientists noticed that the Enlargement process is getting momentum, whereas the internal EU reforms are postponing. The decision on the CAP reform was taken in 2003 by the Agricultural Council, while the Cohesion Policy reform was agreed in the Brussels European Council of 2005. In the Commission's reform proposals as well as during Member States' negotiations much attention was paid, especially in the case of the Cohesion Policy reform, to the challenges of Enlargement. In this paper the aforementioned last reforms of the EU redistributive policies are analysed: the CAP reform of 2002–2003 and the Cohesion Policy reform of 2004–2006 aiming to evaluate the impact of Enlargement on the Commission's reform proposals and the reform results. It is argued that the factor of Enlargement, although in the Commission's reform proposals was emphasised as encouraging to reform the CAP and the Cohesion Policy radically, in reality for the EU redistributive policy reforms had a minor impact. It is shown that Enlargement did not encourage radical reforms of the EU redistributive policies, because higher influence on the reform results was made by the financial interests of the Member States.
Then the process of Enlargement has started, it was expected that Accession of much more agrarian and less developed countries from Eastern and Central Europe, compared to the Member States at that time, should encourage the radical reforms of the EU redistributive policies – Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and Cohesion Policy. Some researchers provided with numbers proving that Enlargement without reforming the EU redistributive policies would substantially increase the funding for implementation of these policies. While the other group of scientists noticed that the Enlargement process is getting momentum, whereas the internal EU reforms are postponing. The decision on the CAP reform was taken in 2003 by the Agricultural Council, while the Cohesion Policy reform was agreed in the Brussels European Council of 2005. In the Commission's reform proposals as well as during Member States' negotiations much attention was paid, especially in the case of the Cohesion Policy reform, to the challenges of Enlargement. In this paper the aforementioned last reforms of the EU redistributive policies are analysed: the CAP reform of 2002–2003 and the Cohesion Policy reform of 2004–2006 aiming to evaluate the impact of Enlargement on the Commission's reform proposals and the reform results. It is argued that the factor of Enlargement, although in the Commission's reform proposals was emphasised as encouraging to reform the CAP and the Cohesion Policy radically, in reality for the EU redistributive policy reforms had a minor impact. It is shown that Enlargement did not encourage radical reforms of the EU redistributive policies, because higher influence on the reform results was made by the financial interests of the Member States.
Then the process of Enlargement has started, it was expected that Accession of much more agrarian and less developed countries from Eastern and Central Europe, compared to the Member States at that time, should encourage the radical reforms of the EU redistributive policies – Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and Cohesion Policy. Some researchers provided with numbers proving that Enlargement without reforming the EU redistributive policies would substantially increase the funding for implementation of these policies. While the other group of scientists noticed that the Enlargement process is getting momentum, whereas the internal EU reforms are postponing. The decision on the CAP reform was taken in 2003 by the Agricultural Council, while the Cohesion Policy reform was agreed in the Brussels European Council of 2005. In the Commission's reform proposals as well as during Member States' negotiations much attention was paid, especially in the case of the Cohesion Policy reform, to the challenges of Enlargement. In this paper the aforementioned last reforms of the EU redistributive policies are analysed: the CAP reform of 2002–2003 and the Cohesion Policy reform of 2004–2006 aiming to evaluate the impact of Enlargement on the Commission's reform proposals and the reform results. It is argued that the factor of Enlargement, although in the Commission's reform proposals was emphasised as encouraging to reform the CAP and the Cohesion Policy radically, in reality for the EU redistributive policy reforms had a minor impact. It is shown that Enlargement did not encourage radical reforms of the EU redistributive policies, because higher influence on the reform results was made by the financial interests of the Member States.
Then the process of Enlargement has started, it was expected that Accession of much more agrarian and less developed countries from Eastern and Central Europe, compared to the Member States at that time, should encourage the radical reforms of the EU redistributive policies – Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and Cohesion Policy. Some researchers provided with numbers proving that Enlargement without reforming the EU redistributive policies would substantially increase the funding for implementation of these policies. While the other group of scientists noticed that the Enlargement process is getting momentum, whereas the internal EU reforms are postponing. The decision on the CAP reform was taken in 2003 by the Agricultural Council, while the Cohesion Policy reform was agreed in the Brussels European Council of 2005. In the Commission's reform proposals as well as during Member States' negotiations much attention was paid, especially in the case of the Cohesion Policy reform, to the challenges of Enlargement. In this paper the aforementioned last reforms of the EU redistributive policies are analysed: the CAP reform of 2002–2003 and the Cohesion Policy reform of 2004–2006 aiming to evaluate the impact of Enlargement on the Commission's reform proposals and the reform results. It is argued that the factor of Enlargement, although in the Commission's reform proposals was emphasised as encouraging to reform the CAP and the Cohesion Policy radically, in reality for the EU redistributive policy reforms had a minor impact. It is shown that Enlargement did not encourage radical reforms of the EU redistributive policies, because higher influence on the reform results was made by the financial interests of the Member States.
Reform of Insolvency Procedures: Ways and Delusions. The replacement of the Law on Enterprise Bankruptcy and the Law on Enterprise Restructuring by one consolidated Law on Insolvency of Legal Persons is to be considered as one of the major reforms implemented in Lithuania in 2020 affecting the daily economic life. This insolvency reform has introduced many changes and innovations into Lithuanian insolvency law, which not only reconcile procedural differences in insolvency procedures, create preconditions for the rehabilitation of legal persons who are in financial difficulties, but also change a fundamental subject such as the concept of insolvency. Accordingly, the main objective of this master's thesis is to evaluate the insolvency reform of legal persons, identifying the advantages and disadvantages of the changes introduced by the new regulation, based on the practice of foreign countries and international recommendations. The work is structured in such way that the first section analyses the factors behind the insolvency reform that led to its emergence, and then moves on to the presentation of specific reform goals and objectives. After the analysis of will of the legislator, the second section of the work is devoted to the analysis and evaluation of the innovations and changes introduced, identifying the pros and cons of the reform, the potential risks, based on EU practice and various international recommendations on legislation of insolvency law. The final sub-section summarizes the likely impact of insolvency reform and looks at possible perspectives on the Law on Insolvency of Legal Persons, taking into account Lithuania's external and internal factors that may influence insolvency regulation in the future. After the evaluation of the reform of insolvency procedures, the work ends with an assessment of the changes and innovations that have been made, as well as an overview of critical moments that are likely to require the attention of the legislator in further improving Lithuanian insolvency law.
Reform of Insolvency Procedures: Ways and Delusions. The replacement of the Law on Enterprise Bankruptcy and the Law on Enterprise Restructuring by one consolidated Law on Insolvency of Legal Persons is to be considered as one of the major reforms implemented in Lithuania in 2020 affecting the daily economic life. This insolvency reform has introduced many changes and innovations into Lithuanian insolvency law, which not only reconcile procedural differences in insolvency procedures, create preconditions for the rehabilitation of legal persons who are in financial difficulties, but also change a fundamental subject such as the concept of insolvency. Accordingly, the main objective of this master's thesis is to evaluate the insolvency reform of legal persons, identifying the advantages and disadvantages of the changes introduced by the new regulation, based on the practice of foreign countries and international recommendations. The work is structured in such way that the first section analyses the factors behind the insolvency reform that led to its emergence, and then moves on to the presentation of specific reform goals and objectives. After the analysis of will of the legislator, the second section of the work is devoted to the analysis and evaluation of the innovations and changes introduced, identifying the pros and cons of the reform, the potential risks, based on EU practice and various international recommendations on legislation of insolvency law. The final sub-section summarizes the likely impact of insolvency reform and looks at possible perspectives on the Law on Insolvency of Legal Persons, taking into account Lithuania's external and internal factors that may influence insolvency regulation in the future. After the evaluation of the reform of insolvency procedures, the work ends with an assessment of the changes and innovations that have been made, as well as an overview of critical moments that are likely to require the attention of the legislator in further improving Lithuanian insolvency law.
Reform of Insolvency Procedures: Ways and Delusions. The replacement of the Law on Enterprise Bankruptcy and the Law on Enterprise Restructuring by one consolidated Law on Insolvency of Legal Persons is to be considered as one of the major reforms implemented in Lithuania in 2020 affecting the daily economic life. This insolvency reform has introduced many changes and innovations into Lithuanian insolvency law, which not only reconcile procedural differences in insolvency procedures, create preconditions for the rehabilitation of legal persons who are in financial difficulties, but also change a fundamental subject such as the concept of insolvency. Accordingly, the main objective of this master's thesis is to evaluate the insolvency reform of legal persons, identifying the advantages and disadvantages of the changes introduced by the new regulation, based on the practice of foreign countries and international recommendations. The work is structured in such way that the first section analyses the factors behind the insolvency reform that led to its emergence, and then moves on to the presentation of specific reform goals and objectives. After the analysis of will of the legislator, the second section of the work is devoted to the analysis and evaluation of the innovations and changes introduced, identifying the pros and cons of the reform, the potential risks, based on EU practice and various international recommendations on legislation of insolvency law. The final sub-section summarizes the likely impact of insolvency reform and looks at possible perspectives on the Law on Insolvency of Legal Persons, taking into account Lithuania's external and internal factors that may influence insolvency regulation in the future. After the evaluation of the reform of insolvency procedures, the work ends with an assessment of the changes and innovations that have been made, as well as an overview of critical moments that are likely to require the attention of the legislator in further improving Lithuanian insolvency law.
Reform of Insolvency Procedures: Ways and Delusions. The replacement of the Law on Enterprise Bankruptcy and the Law on Enterprise Restructuring by one consolidated Law on Insolvency of Legal Persons is to be considered as one of the major reforms implemented in Lithuania in 2020 affecting the daily economic life. This insolvency reform has introduced many changes and innovations into Lithuanian insolvency law, which not only reconcile procedural differences in insolvency procedures, create preconditions for the rehabilitation of legal persons who are in financial difficulties, but also change a fundamental subject such as the concept of insolvency. Accordingly, the main objective of this master's thesis is to evaluate the insolvency reform of legal persons, identifying the advantages and disadvantages of the changes introduced by the new regulation, based on the practice of foreign countries and international recommendations. The work is structured in such way that the first section analyses the factors behind the insolvency reform that led to its emergence, and then moves on to the presentation of specific reform goals and objectives. After the analysis of will of the legislator, the second section of the work is devoted to the analysis and evaluation of the innovations and changes introduced, identifying the pros and cons of the reform, the potential risks, based on EU practice and various international recommendations on legislation of insolvency law. The final sub-section summarizes the likely impact of insolvency reform and looks at possible perspectives on the Law on Insolvency of Legal Persons, taking into account Lithuania's external and internal factors that may influence insolvency regulation in the future. After the evaluation of the reform of insolvency procedures, the work ends with an assessment of the changes and innovations that have been made, as well as an overview of critical moments that are likely to require the attention of the legislator in further improving Lithuanian insolvency law.
Valakas land reform was started in the Great Duchy of Lithuania in the middle of the 16th century and is mostly related to the changes in social and economic life. However, the reform not only changed the agrarian relationship between the estate and the village and the agronomy system, but also made complete changes in Lithuanian landscape. The rules of Valakas reform regulated the changes in Lithuanian landscape territory and settlement structures. Due to Valakas reform a three-field strip system, street strip villages with a new barton plan structure, a new building type (stockyard), the network of village streets and roads, the network of small estates, as well as new space forms of agro plantings were developed, town planning was changed, a rectangular plan system was applied for their reorganization. The research object of the present paper is the objects that developed in state lands of Upytė district under the influence of Valakas reform. The constituent parts of the research object are as follows: landscape that developed in Upytė district during the Valakas reform and its separate elements, such as replanned towns, formed street strip villages, the network of small estates. The object of the paper is analysed in several aspects: in the aspect of heritage research and in the aspect of heritage conservation. The aim of the paper is to localize the heritage of Valakas reform in state lands of Upytė district and to analyse the heritage situation in the view of heritage conservation as well as to provide a conservation outline. The present paper claims to be the first complex analysis of Valakas reform from identification and localization of Valakas heritage, to its accountancy, security. According to the inventory of Upytės district of the year 1554, the following landscape elements of state lands of Upytė district were formed: 357 villages and 2 towns. During the research 279 villages and 2 towns mentioned in Upytė district inventory were localized. After using the maps of the 19th-20th centuries for the analysis it was determined that 103 villages with the names defined in the inventory of the 16th century, no longer exist. During the field study inventory of 20 villages it was defined that the following elements of valakas landscape have remained up to the present: fragments of street villages, plan structure of barton buildings, fragments of street plantings, rectangular plan of town squares and street network, cultural layer of towns, fragmental network of small estates. The landscape which developed during the 16th century and its separate elements remained almost unchanged for even four centuries, i.e. until the first part of the 20th century. The structure of valakas landscape started disappearing at the end of the 19th century and at the beginning of the 20th century, when grange reform and later kolkhoz reforms in the middle of the 20th century were started to be implemented. Although the typological notion of heritage is developing, in research projects and in the system of heritage conservation the term of Valakas reform does not exist in the way that terms of industry heritage, defence heritage or other groups of heritage which were determined by certain defence, social and political actions of the society, exist. The notion of this heritage group that has not been validated does not allow to understand the complex value of this heritage, as well as the necessity of its integral security Until present the heritage of Valakas reform has been saved by keeping the cultural value of separate element objects despite their primary complex whole. The Law of the Conservation of Cultural Heritage of the Republic of Lithuania is an attempt to fortify the complex or integral security of ethno cultural parts of towns and villages by providing them with the status of cultural reservation.