Made available in DSpace on 2016-03-15T19:34:51Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Guilherme Newton do Monte Pinto.pdf: 1223982 bytes, checksum: 4aba3128ebe6ae2eb0b4183a4aa2c104 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2009-11-30 / The separation of powers, in its historic design, should be glimpsed in its multiple dimensions social, legal, political and organic-functional and if it´s certain that currently it´s not taken into account its social and political dimensions, it has, in the current stage of contemporary constitutional State, the exact meaning of conciliation, equilibrium and harmony between its political and organic-functional dimensions, once it seeks to assign to each established organ certain functions that allow, within a system of checks and balances, harmony, coordination, interdependence, cooperation, to reach a more complete political balance as possible and aiming, at the same time, as far as possible and without harming the pursued balance, to assign functions in accordance to the Constitution, the capability, training, composition, in short, the profile, the vocation and the specific ability of each body, which means that, despite the impossibility of an exclusive attribution, each organ must have a preponderant function. The reservation of jurisdiction, in turn, while available at the same time to organic arrangements and functional efficiency, at the moment that preserves, to the courts, the full exercise of the function that, based on adequacy and efficiency standards, it is constitutionally assigned, as well as the political balance, since focused only on a minimum essential nucleus of typically jurisdictional function, deviates and repudiates the absolute correlation between organ and function and the typical functional exclusivity of a rigid separation that, as seen, would invariably conduct to the supremacy of only one power and, therefore, to a political imbalance, does nothing more than reproduce the idea and the purposes contained in what we call organic-functional and political dimensions of the separation of powers, so we can say that it´s currently the most incisive and faithful expression of separation of powers, as it stands in contemporary constitutional State. / A Separação de Poderes, em sua concepção histórica, deve ser vislumbrada em suas múltiplas dimensões social, jurídica, política e orgânico-funcional e se é certo que atualmente não mais se contemplam as dimensões social e política, tem ela, no atual estágio do Estado Constitucional contemporâneo, o exato significado da conciliação, do equilíbrio e da harmonia entre as suas dimensões política e orgânico-funcional, tendo em vista que busca atribuir a cada órgão constituído determinadas funções que permitam, dentro de um sistema de checks and balances, de harmonia, de coordenação, de interdependência, de cooperação, se chegar ao equilíbrio político mais pleno que se possa alcançar e, ao mesmo tempo, objetiva, na medida do possível, e sem prejudicar o equilíbrio perseguido, atribuir as funções de acordo com a constituição, a capacidade, a formação, a composição, enfim, o perfil, a vocação e a habilidade específica de cada órgão, o que implica dizer que, não obstante não possa haver uma atribuição com ares de exclusividade, se deve dar a cada órgão uma função preponderante. A Reserva de Jurisdição, por sua vez, estando ao mesmo tempo a serviço da adequação orgânica e eficiência funcional, no momento em que preserva, para os órgãos jurisdicionais, o pleno exercício da função que, por critérios de adequação e eficiência, lhe é constitucionalmente atribuída, bem como, também, do equilíbrio político, visto que, focando-se apenas em um núcleo essencial mínimo da função tipicamente jurisdicional, afasta e repudia a correlação absoluta entre órgão e função e a exclusividade funcional típica de uma Separação rígida que, como visto, conduziria invariavelmente à supremacia de um Poder e, portanto, ao desequilíbrio político, nada mais faz do que reproduzir a ideia e os fins contidos no que se denominou de dimensões orgânico-funcional e política da Separação de Poderes, pelo que se pode afirmar que constitui atualmente a mais incisiva e fiel manifestação da Separação de Poderes, tal qual esta se apresenta no Estado Constitucional contemporâneo.

La fiscalité des particuliers en Afrique subsaharienne s'articule autour des principes de territorialité, d'extraterritorialité et d'internationalité. Ces derniers n'ont pas connu d'évolution particulière ces dernières années, en dépit de changements radicaux que connaît la société internationale. Ces principes demeurent fondés sur la reconnaissance pleine et entière de la souveraineté juridique de l’État, qui en fait l'acteur principal de la fonction fiscale. Ils évoquent une « société internationale vertébrée », dans laquelle les frontières physiques sont autant politiques qu'économiques. Ils postulent que l’État a les moyens de contrôler toutes les activités économiques réalisées dans les limites de son territoire, et en particulier les importations et les exportations tant de biens que de prestations. En réalité, la société internationale actuelle, du fait de la mondialisation, est devenue économiquement « invertébrée ». Il ne fait point de doute que l'érosion amorcée des frontières politiques (et sûrement des frontières économiques), entraînera une mobilité toujours plus accrue des particuliers, et donc une propension plus élevée à la fraude et à l'évasion fiscales. Les notions de résidence fiscale (qui découle du principe de territorialité) ou de disponibilité du revenu, de vente d'un bien ou de prestation d'un service (constitutive du fait générateur) ne sont pas devenues totalement inutiles. L'impôt restera toujours rattaché à une entité politique, qu'elle soit appelée État ou pas. De même, la mobilisation d'une recette fiscale dépendra toujours de l'évènement qui crée la dette fiscale. Toutefois, deux évolutions majeures fie peuvent plus être ignorées : (1) l'inefficacité du principe de territorialité pour définir la résidence fiscale dans un monde de plus en plus ouvert, et (2) l'indiscernabilité du fait générateur d'un nombre croissant de transactions économiques. A l'évidence, ces deux principes ont besoin d'être revisités, à coup sûr « rajeunis », pour tenter de les adapter à la société économique actuelle. Au bout de cette démarche devrait se dessiner une « nouvelle fiscalité des particuliers » qui consacre les aspirations légitimes à la liberté politique, économique et sociale des individus. Ce chantier commence avec l'autonomisation du cadre conceptuel et administratif de la fiscalité des particuliers. En effet, l'inadaptabilité de la fiscalité des particuliers à l'environnement économique international s'explique prioritairement par son alignement inexplicable sur le système fiscal des entreprises. La recherche de l'efficacité suggère pourtant une autonomie des règles d'imposition et de gestion des impôts des particuliers. En matière de politique fiscale, les questions essentielles comme la concurrence fiscale des hauts revenus, la juridiction fiscale des personnes ou l'affectation du produit de l'impôt suggèrent des approches originales et spécifiques aux particuliers. En matière d'administration fiscale, le même souci d'efficacité commande la mise en place d'un dispositif organisationnel et méthodologique adapté à l'exigence de « bonne gouvernance » particulièrement sensible en matière de gestion fiscale des particuliers.Au total donc, ce nouveau monde politique, économique et social appelle à une rénovation conséquente du cadre actuel d'imposition des individus en Afrique et la consécration d'un système fiscal construit autour de la recherche d'un meilleur équilibre entre les principes de coercition d'une part et d'attractivité d'autre part. / Individual taxation instruments in SSA are fundamentally premised on the principles o f: (I) territoriality, (II) extraterritoriality and (III) internationality. Despite a lot of radical changes largely driven by globalization these instruments of individual taxation have more or less remained the same. The principal actor in the tax function is the state whose being is based on the full recognition of the legal sovereignty of states. The state evokes an "international society vertebrate", where physical boundaries are both political and economic. They imply that the state has the means to control all economic activities within its territory, but also to effectively control imports and exports of both goods and services. The current international society has become "spineless" economically due to globalization. There is no doubt that this erosion of political and economic boundaries results in an increase in the mobility of individuals, as well as an increase in fraud and higher tax evasion. The principle of territoriality (that anchors the notion of tax residence or domicile for tax purposes) and the availability of income, sale of goods, or performance of a service (constituting the operative event) are not inherently challenged. The notion of taxation will always be linked to a political entity whether it is called a State or not, just as the mobilization of tax revenue will always depend on an event that creates tax obligation. On the one hand, what is at stake is operational incompleteness of territoriality in defining tax residence, and on the other hand the indiscernibility of certain transactions for triggering the calculation of due dates for certain taxes. These principles in face of globalization and societal development have their own challenges. Consequently, there is need to rethink their relevance in modern taxation to adapt them to changing times.In this context, it seems necessary to build a "new income tax system" which incorporates the legitimate aspirations of the political, economic, and social freedom of individuals. This new project begins with empowering the conceptual and administrative framework for individual taxation. Indeed, the unsuitability of individual taxation in the international economic environment is primarily due to the inexplicable alignment of the tax system with the individual companies. The search for efficiency demands a range of standards for taxation and income tax management, principally in the current context of international mobility. In tax policy, developing an autonomous approach to the international tax competition phenomena of tax jurisdiction, the traceability of taxes collected from individuals and which considers the peculiarity of this category of taxpayers, is an urgent necessity. In tax administration, the same concern for efficiency requires the implementation of a new organizational and methodological device to implement the demand for transparency and traceability. This new situation proposes a significant renovation of the taxation framework for individuals that aimed at a better balance between the principles of coercion and fiscal attractiveness.

Old age – and particularly the increasing numbers of older people globally and within the United Kingdom - is becoming a social and political phenomenon. Yet despite this, very little has been written on how the law – and especially mental disability law – intersects with old age. This is notwithstanding the fact that many older people may encounter conditions that impact their mental or cognitive abilities, and proportionally, may therefore be greatly affected by this area of law. By drawing on a number of theories – sometimes termed ‘relational’ theories – which are derived predominantly from feminist theory, this thesis seeks to explore the adequacy of mental disability law for safeguarding health and welfare-related decision-making of older adults in three areas; where an older person has been subjected to ageism, where they have been the victim of interpersonal abuse, and where they have dementia and may lack mental capacity. Within this broader goal, this thesis has two specific aims. First, to explicitly critique and challenge the adequacy of the law as it is applied in these circumstances. It is suggested in particular that a deeper analysis of the law in both its previous and current forms betrays the liberal and unduly individualistic roots of the legislative framework. These are roots that are predicated on non-interference, and an idealistic paradigm of the rational, autonomous, and healthy bodied individual. This – it is contended throughout – is an unsuitable philosophy to underpin the law, particularly where the law engages with older adults. Second, this thesis aims to navigate a more suitable pathway within the law as it currently exists. While operating as a tool to critique the legislative framework and its underpinning philosophy, it is argued that the theories drawn upon throughout the thesis also have the potential to highlight how the law could be implemented in such a way so as to emphasise the importance of the realities of the lived experiences of old age, and particularly the experience of ageism, abuse, and dementia. Crucially, it is also suggested that such theories can help the law pay greater attention to the complex web of relationships – both positive and negative; personal and societal – that an older person may find themselves embedded within, and that frequently take on an added significance in old age.

L'étude des fondements de la compétence internationale des juridictions repose en général sur la recherche de proximité entre le juge et le litige. En effet, dans une conception traditionnelle, la compétence internationale est une question de limitation spatiale de la fonction juridictionnelle de l'Etat, limitation qui doit se faire de manière neutre et en fonction de la localisation territoriale des éléments du litige. Or, ce programme d'organisation de la compétence internationale va au-devant de graves difficultés en raison de la dématérialisation croissante des activités humaines et de la massification des relations privées transfrontières. Plus fondamentalement, la conception proximiste fait peu de cas de l'idée que la compétence internationale constitue avant tout une organisation par l'Etat de sa mission de justice dans les litiges internationaux. Cette organisation devrait refléter les considérations de justice ayant cours dans ledit Etat, considérations qui peuvent être observées à deux niveaux ; celui de la justice procédurale et celui de la justice matérielle. Ces deux niveaux d'analyse constituent les considérations substantielles dont nous nous proposons d'étudier, autour de la matière délictuelle, l'influence sur l'organisation de la compétence internationale. Ainsi, la présente recherche entreprend, d'abord, de souligner les faiblesses de l 'approche proximiste de la compétence internationale, dont ni les justifications, ni les résultats ne résistent à l'examen. Une fois ce travail de déconstruction effectué, elle envisage, ensuite, une reconstruction des fondements de la compétence internationale à partir de considérations substantielles. / It is a common place idea that the rules of international jurisdiction are based on the geographical localization of the dispute, also known as the principle of proximity. If one thinks, as is the case traditionally, of international jurisdiction as being a question of territorial limitation of a State's adjudicatory authority, it makes sense to rely on the localization of the dispute to organize it in a neutral way. Yet, this program is faced with dire difficulties, namely the growing virtualization of entire swathes of human activities and the rise in cross border private relations. More fundamentally, the vision of international jurisdiction as being based on the principle of proximity pays little heed to the notion that international jurisdiction is but an organization by the State of its duty to render justice, be it with regards to cross border private relations. In this perspective, the rules of international jurisdiction should reflect the values and principles of justice that are held by the State, and more generally within the society. These values may be apprehended at two levels: at the level of procedural justice and at the level of substantial justice. These two levels can be merged into a broader category, that of policy considerations and it is the goal of this work to study the influence of these policy considerations on the rules of international jurisdiction with regards to cross border tort cases. This research first underlines the shortcomings of the localizing approach to international jurisdiction. It then moves to envisage an organization of the State's adjudicatory authority in cross border private relations that would be based on policy considerations.

La mise en œuvre de mesures restrictives de gel ainsi que de mesures judiciaires de saisie et de confiscation des avoirs de dirigeants d'État étrangers constitue un phénomène contemporain du droit international. Ces mesures représentent également le versant coercitif des efforts internationaux de développement de l'État de droit, en s'attaquant à la cause endogène la plus symptomatique de ses dysfonctionnements, à savoir la dénaturation des fonctions exercées par la classe des dirigeants, que ce soit à son profit, ou bien pour mettre en œuvre une politique d'État contraire aux règles les plus essentielles du droit international. Les mesures forment ensemble un réseau complexe de procédures dont la validité peut être justifiée, mais également contestée, par référence au droit international. À ce titre, l'encadrement du phénomène repose sur les règles qui régissent non seulement le titre de compétence de l'État au sein duquel les avoirs sont entreposés et les règles d'immunité qui conditionnent son exercice, mais encore les limites au déploiement des mesures sous l'angle du respect des garanties du droit international des droits de l'homme. Les limites juridiques posées par le droit international à l'exercice des pouvoirs de l'État entreposant les avoirs connaissent des mutations vertigineuses. Les zones d'ombres qui jalonnent les conditions de validité du phénomène au droit international autorisent, de ce point de vue, à rechercher et analyser les règles de droit qui sont à même d'en garantir le bien-fondé et l'effectivité. / The implementation of asset freezing and asset confiscation of politically exposed persons is a contemporary phenomenon of international law. These measures represent the coercive side of the promotion of the rule of law, tackling the most symptomatic cause of its breakdowns - the distortion of the functions of State leaders' to their own profit or to conduct a state policy that violates the most elementary rules of international law. Together, these measures amount to a complex network of procedures whose validity may be justified but also contested, referring to international law. This phenomenon is framed by the rules which govern the jurisdiction of the States in which assets are stored and by the rules of immunity affecting its exercise. It also falls within the scope of international human rights law. The way by which international law may allow or restrict the power to implement these measures has significantly changed in recent years. The validity of this phenomenon with regards to international law remains unclear. These grey areas call for an analysis of the legal rules which could guarantee their legitimacy and effectiveness.

De plus en plus soulevées, les exceptions préliminaires sont devenues aujourd’hui une institution classique du procès CIRDI. Leur utilisation croissante par les acteurs contentieux, et les multiples enjeux qu’elles recèlent, invitent résolument à s’interroger sur l’existence d’un réel régime juridique qui les encadre et, partant, qui permettrait de garantir un certain degré de prévisibilité. A cet égard, le volet procédural de l’exception renferme maints éléments problématiques. Certains sont liés à la mise en œuvre, d’autres au moment de l’introduction de l’exception. Ainsi, d’une part, cette étude s’intéressera aux motivations réelles derrière la consécration de la faculté de les soulever et aux acteurs contentieux qui en ont accès. D’autre part, ce mémoire se focalisera sur la réalité de l’exigence d’introduction in limine litis pour mieux cerner les dérogations fréquentes ainsi que la souplesse exagérée dont elle fait l’objet. Quant au volet substantiel, nous nous interrogerons sur l’objet de l’exception tant du point de vue de la qualification que du point de vue de la délimitation. Plus précisément, nous aborderons la question de la distinction entre compétence et recevabilité. Pourquoi cette distinction et tantôt observée, tantôt complètement ignorée par les parties au procès. Quel impact pourrait avoir une telle distinction sur le résultat escompté ? De même, nous nous nous interrogerons sur l’extension fréquente, parfois abusive, du champ de la compétence ou de la recevabilité afin de mieux appréhender les contours de l’objet, l’usage qu’en font les Tribunaux CIRDI et les raisons derrière un tel phénomène. / Increasingly used, preliminary objections have now become a traditional institution of ICSID proceedings. The increasing use by litigation actors raises many questions about the reality of their treatment. In particular, it raises questions about the existence of a consistent set of rules that would framework their use and, hence, ensure a certain degree of predictability. In this regard, the procedural aspect of the objections includes many problematic elements. Some are linked to the implementation of the objection, others to the introduction timing. Thus, on the one hand, this research will focus on the real incentives behind the consecration of the right to raise them and who has access to that right. On the other hand, this research will focus on the actuality of the condition to introduce them in limine litis and try to explain the frequent exceptions, and exaggerated flexibility, in the arbitral practice regarding this condition. As to the substantive aspect, we will inquire about the purpose of the objection from both qualification and delimitation point of views. Specifically, we will address the issue of the distinction between jurisdiction and admissibility. Why this distinction is sometimes considered and sometimes completely ignored by the parties to the proceedings. What impact might such a distinction have on the final outcome? Similarly, we will question the frequent extension, sometimes even abusive, of the scope of jurisdiction or admissibility by the ICSID Tribunals to help better understand the borders of the objections substance and the reasons behind such a phenomenon.

LL. M. (International Commercial Law) / Please refer to full text to view abstract

[pt] O presente trabalho de dissertação verifica a mudança de paradigma de interpretação ensejado pelas decisões de caráter concretista provenientes da jurisdição constitucional brasileira através das quais se exterioriza o fenômeno jurídico político denominado por expansionismo jurisdicional, gênero constituído pelas espécies denominadas por ativismo judicial e judicialização da política, que têm na ineficiência do Estado em executar políticas públicas, bem como na omissão de documentos legislativos que restringem a fruição, por parte da sociedade, dos direitos fundamentais garantidos constitucionalmente, como elementos motivadores para a mudança do parâmetro. Para tanto, realiza pesquisa para identificar conceitos e elementos históricos da evolução do fenômeno jurídico para melhor compreender as possíveis causas para a alteração da performance na interpretação das decisões que realizam os magistrados. / [en] This dissertation verifies the paradigm shift of interpretation occasioned by decisions concretist character from the Brazilian constitutional jurisdiction through which externalizes the political and legal phenomenon called by jurisdictional expansionism genus comprises the species named by judicial activism and legalization of politics, that have the inefficiency of the state run public policies, as well as the omission of legislative documents that restrict the enjoyment, by society, the constitutionally guaranteed fundamental rights, as motivators for change of parameter elements.For both, conducts research to identify concepts and historical elements of the evolution of the legal phenomenon to better understand the possible causes for the change in performance in the interpretation of decisions that carry the magistrates.

Magister Legum - LLM / With regard to the establishment of legislative frameworks for investigating and prosecuting genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes at both national and international level, a number of pertinent issues come up concerning the Court which should have primacy to deal with a particular case. States have had a variety of options at their disposal, such as complementarity, exclusivity, subsidiarity and concurrent jurisdiction principles. As a rule, these experiences find their limits in the full criminalisation of conduct that is also punishable before the international criminal tribunals under international law, ignoring the fact that international law does not provide definite guidance with respect to a number of questions in relation to interaction between national and international jurisdiction vis-à-vis the ‘core crimes.’ In addition,a considerable increase in the content of international law and divergences in various legal systems in criminal law, both general and special, since the end of World War II, influence the effective prosecution of ‘core crimes.’ Against this background; this work is organised into five chapters. Chapter one gives a general introduction and background to the study. Chapter two will set out the present international legal framework governing the prosecution of ‘core crimes’ in national courts and a description of the relevant practice in various states. Chapter three will examine critically the jurisdiction and overlaps of the international courts and ad hoc tribunals,along with the corresponding models of international criminal justice of exclusivity, subsidiarity, complimentarity and concurrent jurisdiction. Chapter four seeks to discuss the optimal relationship based on interactions between national and international jurisdictions. It will also include the merits and limits of both jurisdictions, basing on existing precedents and legislation.Finally, Chapter five contains a summary of conclusions drawn from the whole study and winds up with a set of recommendations.

Doctor Legum - LLD / The 20th century witnessed several wars and genocides worldwide. Notable examples include the Armenian and Jews genocides which took place during World War I and World War II respectively. The Rwandan genocide of 1994 is a more recent example where a large number of the population was affected, either as victims or perpetrators. Over 800,000 Tutsis were dead, and more than 120,000 suspects were in prison for the genocide. The present study focuses on the Rwandan genocide against Tutsi where the scale of the crimes simultaneously dictated the overwhelming need for justice at both international and national level. At the international level, the ICTR was set up by the United Nations to deal with the organisers of the genocide while the Rwandan national courts were left to deal with the remaining suspects. Yet it became increasingly clear that the national courts lacked themselves the capacity to deal with the vast majority of alleged perpetrators. If their impact was to be enhanced, they needed to rely on the support of alternative justice mechanisms. So Rwanda introduced a modern version of the traditional Gacaca courts as an attempt to deal with the huge backlog of cases in order to combat the culture of impunity. However, having different courts for one and the same situation has had its own limitations. One of these issues is the legal and practical disparities that exist between the ad hoc International Tribunal and national justice mechanisms in the process of prosecuting perpetrators, such as the unequal treatment of the accused. This study therefore attempts to show these discrepancies and their impact on the process of accountability and reconciliation. Thus, the study analyses the relationship between the ICTR, national courts and Gacaca in prosecution of genocide suspects as well as lessons from the adopted ‘multifaceted approaches’ to deal with the crime of genocide.