Suchergebnisse

Due to its founding ambiguity, its political connotations and its relatively recent character, the principle of subsidiarity, expressly enshrined in the legal order of the European Union by the Treaty of Maastricht, is being instrumentalized by many actors for purposes that are often contradictory but nevertheless consistent with the legal nature of the European Union. While its consecration inprimary law, like that of the principle of proportionality, was obviously intended to reassure Member States and European citizens and ensure that the Union's action would be limited to what is necessary, the principle of subsidiarity was nevertheless some what subversive because of its potentially ascending dynamic and its implicitly federal content. Applying subsidiarity, for the European institutions which are the guardians of its observance, almost always means justifying the Union's intervention with regard to the objectives of the envisaged action and, therefore, disqualifying action by the lower levels of government. Paradoxically, however, the instrumentalization of the principle of subsidiarity is not so much « federal » as « functional », since federalism seeks to promote values such as autonomy and diversity, which subsidiarity, despite appearances, does not guarantee. Usually presented as an instrument of federalization of the European Union, the principle of subsidiarity is in reality an instrument of integration since it has never been able to extricate itself from the functionalist matrix that has always characterized the construction of Europe. ; Du fait de son ambiguïté fondatrice, de ses connotations politiques et de son caractère relativement récent, le principe de subsidiarité, expressément consacré dans l'ordre juridique de l'Union européenne par le traité de Maastricht, fait l'objet d'une instrumentalisation par de nombreux acteurs à des fins souvent contradictoires mais néanmoins cohérentes avec la nature juridique de l'Union. Si à l'évidence, sa consécration dans le droit primaire visait, à l'instar ...

The PhD is the result of a research carried out in the sciences of language: lexicology, lexical semantics and discourse analysis. It is based on the primary sources of European Union law, the doctrinal sources of the Church's Social Doctrine and the corpus of German legal doctrinal texts, as well as a rereading of philosophical sources: Aristotelianism, Thomism, Kantism and romanticism.It is generally argued by European legal doctrine (in France, MILLON-DELSOL, 1991, CONSTANTINESCO, 1991) that the principle of subsidiarity, a rule of positive European law (Maastricht Treaty - 1993) defined in Article 3B), would initially have been theorized by the Social Doctrine of the Church in the 20th century (Pius XI, Quadragesimo Anno, 1931). The "directive" rule (CORNU, Legal Vocabulary, 2015), however, would have been relieved of its problematic philosophical and theological position in order to resemble a procedural rule. On the linguistic level, the French form subsidiarity would be a francized loan of the German neologism Subsidiarität.The PhD focuses on the inconsistencies of the linguistic hypotheses related to the connection of this notion and its linguistic form (subsidiarity, substantivation of the adjective subsidiary (relief, reinforcement of an element lower than a superior thing, initially in a Latin military context), as well as its attachment to philosophical and theological sources, in particular Thomists and personalists.A search for the Latin etymon and the German occurrence (Subsidiarität) tends to show that the subsidiarity form originally designates the Roman law (subsidiäres Recht), a regular occurrence of German legal doctrine throughout the 19th century. The PhD therefore presents the results of a retrieval and collection of a corpus of occurrences of subsidäre (Recht/Staat, Subsidiarität, Subsidiarität der Staat, Subsidiär-Prinzip, Subsidiaritätsprinzip, Grundsatz der Subsidiarität, Prinzip der Subsidiarität) in the works of the German legal science, especially among the members of the Historical ...

The PhD is the result of a research carried out in the sciences of language: lexicology, lexical semantics and discourse analysis. It is based on the primary sources of European Union law, the doctrinal sources of the Church's Social Doctrine and the corpus of German legal doctrinal texts, as well as a rereading of philosophical sources: Aristotelianism, Thomism, Kantism and romanticism.It is generally argued by European legal doctrine (in France, MILLON-DELSOL, 1991, CONSTANTINESCO, 1991) that the principle of subsidiarity, a rule of positive European law (Maastricht Treaty - 1993) defined in Article 3B), would initially have been theorized by the Social Doctrine of the Church in the 20th century (Pius XI, Quadragesimo Anno, 1931). The "directive" rule (CORNU, Legal Vocabulary, 2015), however, would have been relieved of its problematic philosophical and theological position in order to resemble a procedural rule. On the linguistic level, the French form subsidiarity would be a francized loan of the German neologism Subsidiarität.The PhD focuses on the inconsistencies of the linguistic hypotheses related to the connection of this notion and its linguistic form (subsidiarity, substantivation of the adjective subsidiary (relief, reinforcement of an element lower than a superior thing, initially in a Latin military context), as well as its attachment to philosophical and theological sources, in particular Thomists and personalists.A search for the Latin etymon and the German occurrence (Subsidiarität) tends to show that the subsidiarity form originally designates the Roman law (subsidiäres Recht), a regular occurrence of German legal doctrine throughout the 19th century. The PhD therefore presents the results of a retrieval and collection of a corpus of occurrences of subsidäre (Recht/Staat, Subsidiarität, Subsidiarität der Staat, Subsidiär-Prinzip, Subsidiaritätsprinzip, Grundsatz der Subsidiarität, Prinzip der Subsidiarität) in the works of the German legal science, especially among the members of the Historical School of Law (FK VON SAVIGNY) and the first formalists (Paul LABAND, Georg JELLINEK) and German thinkers of the Rule of Law VON MOHL, Julius VON STAHL).The work discusses this occurrence as a discursive formula, that is to say a German political slogan, which is diffused in the legal science and in the works of the historical school of economics, throughout the 19th century. Initially, it is a historicist slogan, advanced by Savigny in the Quarrel of the codification which crosses the German states of the Old Germanic Roman Empire, starting from the Congress of Vienna (1814). The occurrence (adjectival and adverbial) is subsequently disseminated and becomes a motive of the social law state (especially from R. VON MOHL, 1829), becomes substantive, becomes a legal principle (relations legal orders Regional and federal), then penetrates the economic terminology (Subsidiary State, subsidiary duty of the State in assisting the poor). His motive conditioned the vote of the first laws called "social" under Otto von Bismarck.The PhD attempts to demonstrate that the pontifical occurrence of 1931 is a late borrowing from these different theoretical and doctrinal sources and not a Catholic neologism. ; La thèse est le résultat d'une recherche menée en sciences du langage : lexicologie, sémantique lexicale et analyse du discours. Elle s'appuie sur les sources primaires du droit de l'Union, les sources doctrinales de la Doctrine Sociale de l'Eglise et des corpus de textes doctrinaux (juridiques allemands), ainsi que sur une relecture de sources philosophiques : aristotélisme, thomisme, kantisme et romantisme allemand. Il est généralement avancé par la doctrine juridique européenne (en France, MILLON-DELSOL, 1991, CONSTANTINESCO, 1991), que le principe de subsidiarité, règle de droit positif européen (traité de Maastricht - 1993) défini à l'article 3B (5TUE), aurait initialement été théorisé par la Doctrine sociale de l'Eglise au 20e siècle (Pie XI, Quadragesimo Anno, 1931). La règle « directive » (CORNU, Vocabulaire juridique, 2015) aurait toutefois été délestée de sa charge philosophique et théologique problématique pour s'apparenter à une règle de procédure. Sur le plan linguistique, la forme française subsidiarité serait un emprunt francisé du néologisme allemand Subsidiarität.Nombreux auteurs soulignent le caractère ambigu, polysémique ou gigogne d'une notion « plus politique que juridique » (DU GRANRUT, 1997, BARROCHE, 2012). Cet « élément juridique communautaire » (Rapport parlementaire DE LA MALENE, 1996-1997), introduit par J. Delors et A. Spinelli dans les années 1980, aurait eu pour vocation de désamorcer les conflits relatifs à la caractérisation constitutionnelle de l'Union Européenne. Il permettrait également d'organiser de manière souple la réalisation des objectifs politiques communautaires définis par les Traités européens dans le domaine des « compétences partagées » (TUE). La thèse s'attache à montrer les incohérences des hypothèses linguistiques relatives au rattachement de cette notion et de sa forme linguistique (subsidiarité, substantivation de subsidiaire (secours, renfort d'un élément inférieur à une chose supérieure, initialement en contexte militaire latin)), ainsi qu'à son rattachement à des sources philosophiques et théologiques en particuliers thomistes et personnalistes.Une recherche sur l'étymon latin et de l'occurrence allemande (Subsidiarität), tend à montrer que la forme subsidiarité désigne initialement le droit romain (subsidiäres Recht), occurrence régulière de la doctrine juridique allemande, tout au long du 19e siècle. La thèse présente donc les résultats d'un repérage et de la collecte d'un corpus d'occurrences de subsidäre(r) Recht/Staat, Subsidiarität, Subsidiarität der Staat, Subsidiär-Prinzip, Subsidiaritätsprinzip, Grundsatz der Subsidiarität, Prinzip der Subsidiarität, dans les œuvres de la science allemande du droit, en particulier chez les membres de l'Ecole historique du droit (F. K. VON SAVIGNY) et chez les premiers formalistes (Paul LABAND, Georg JELLINEK) et penseurs allemands de l'Etat de droit (Robert VON MOHL, Julius VON STAHL). Le travail discute cette occurrence comme une formule discursive, c'est-à-dire un mot d'ordre politique allemand, qui se diffuse dans la science juridique et dans les œuvres de l'école historique d'économie, tout au long du 19e siècle. Initialement, il est un mot d'ordre historiciste, avancé par Savigny dans la Querelle de la codification qui traverse les Etats allemands de l'Ancien Empire Romain Germanique, à partir du Congrès de Vienne (1814). L'occurrence (adjectivale et adverbiale) se diffuse par la suite et devient un motif de l'Etat de droit social (en particulier à partir de R. VON MOHL, 1829), se substantive, devient un principe juridique (relations les ordres juridiques régionaux et fédéraux), puis pénètre la terminologie économique (Etat subsidiaire, devoir subsidiaire de l'Etat dans l'assistance aux pauvres). Son motif conditionne le vote des premières lois dites « sociales » sous Otto von Bismarck.

This article's ambition was to question the concept of subsidiarity through its semantic contextualization. Contrary to the official genealogies which attribute the notion to Aristotle and then follow imperturbably the same intermediate stages until the present time (Thomas Aquinas, Althusius, Tocqueville), this work sought to demonstrate that subsidiarity find its roots in a recent past, which can be precisely defined. To this end, we traced back two main contexts in the concept's discursive life: 1) subsidiarity as the major component of the social doctrine of the Church; 2) subsidiarity as the major component of the federal governance of Europe. From these reference points, we were able to enlighten a series of structural homologies which, once stylized, share the stigmatization of the same polemical target: the State. Their theoretical exploitation allowed then to disentangle some of the main ideological bridges between the Christian and European phobias about the State. At the core of this statophobia are a totalitarian disguise of the State institution and a traumatic experience, that of Nazi Germany, both fields of adversity and historic laboratory against which will appear the European federalism. Adapted from the source document.

Le présent recueil de la Revue suisse de sciences politiques est consacré à la question suivante: que signifie l'agir étatique subsidiaire dans les sociétés modernes?1 Il a été conçu à un séminaire du Groupe de travail "Politiques publiques" de l'Association suisse de sciences politiques. Ce séminaire, dirigé par les éditeurs, a été organisé dans le cadre du Congrès des sciences sociales suisses, qui s'est tenu à Berne du 11 au 14 octobre 1995. En plus des contributions exposées, un certain nombre d'auteurs ont été invités à donner leur point de vue sur le thème proposé. Les articles présentés dans ce volume ont fait l'objet d'une évaluation anonyme, puis ont été retravaillés sur le plan éditorial, conformément à la pratique en usage dans la Revue suisse de sciences politiques.

The Control of Member States Community Expenses and the Subsidiarity Principle

In terms of public finance, the new dynamics set off by the Single Act of 1986, which found its ultimate expression in the Maastricht Treaty, can be seen in the remarkable increase in financial resources mobilized by the Community. In this regard, the précisé application of the subsidiarity principle has concrète conséquences on sharing control over EC structural funds expenses between the Community and the member States, in a context marked by national will to control public finances.

Discusses the concept of subsidiarity in government in the modern world and types of action taken at different levels, both nationally and internationally; Switzerland, chiefly. Papers presented at a seminar organized in connection with the Congrès des Sciences Sociales Suisses, held in Bern, Switzerland, Oct. 11-14, 1995. Text in French and German; summaries in English, French, and German. Topics include protection of Swiss wetlands, social welfare programs of Swiss towns, participation of the local population in urban planning in France, reform of Swiss fiscal federalism, development of federalism in the US, Swiss clean air policies, and subsidiarity in the European Union. Parallel title: Subsidiäres Staatshandeln.

International audience ; The terms Jacobin and Gironde continue to define two opposing political attitudes. According to the first, political and administrative decisions must be concentrated at the central level of the State. To be Jacobin, therefore, is to oppose subsidiarity. As for the term Gironde, it means being in favour of a decentralised republic applying the principle of subsidiarity. Which of these conceptions dominates in France? ; Les termes jacobin et girondin continuent à définir deux attitudes politiques opposées. Selon le premier, les décisions politiques et administratives doivent être concentrées au niveau central de l'État. Être jacobin, c'est donc s'opposer à la subsidiarité. Quant au terme girondin, il signifie être partisan d'une république décentralisée appliquant le principe de subsidiarité. Laquelle de ces conceptions domine-t-elle en France ?

International audience ; The terms Jacobin and Gironde continue to define two opposing political attitudes. According to the first, political and administrative decisions must be concentrated at the central level of the State. To be Jacobin, therefore, is to oppose subsidiarity. As for the term Gironde, it means being in favour of a decentralised republic applying the principle of subsidiarity. Which of these conceptions dominates in France? ; Les termes jacobin et girondin continuent à définir deux attitudes politiques opposées. Selon le premier, les décisions politiques et administratives doivent être concentrées au niveau central de l'État. Être jacobin, c'est donc s'opposer à la subsidiarité. Quant au terme girondin, il signifie être partisan d'une république décentralisée appliquant le principe de subsidiarité. Laquelle de ces conceptions domine-t-elle en France ?