No description available.

Where CLS, and other critical discourses, seek to “uncover” and “explode” the ideologies and biases of law, to demonstrate its inability to fulfil its promises, the present work is intended to initiate the task of demanding that law, and especially CIL, live up to those very promises. But first, the nature of these promises, and the structure and purpose of law must be examined, analysed, and where necessary contested and decided, or rather, defined. In this regard, the hidden assumptions of legal theory must be uncovered and problematised; the debates over law must be disaggregated, before law itself can be properly determined. Only after these tasks have been completed can the nihilist challenges of NAIL be met. This thesis argues that CIL is best understood as an independent system of rules, against which state conduct may be assessed; rather than as a necessarily authoritative institutional reality. This highlights the distinction between law-creative, and merely legally evaluable, state actions. The theory presented in the final chapter - which is developed from the methodology outlined in the preceding four chapters - acts as a lens through which those actions of states which alter or develop CIL may be distinguished from those actions which ought, merely, to be judged in the light of CIL. This allows us to distinguish legal from illegal state conduct, regardless of the absence or presence of enforcement. This distinction between the legal and the illegal is distinct from, analytically prior to, and more important than, the enforcement of legal commands.

This thesis aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of the principle of diplomatic inviolability. The principle of diplomatic inviolability is generally regarded by international law scholars as one of the oldest established principles of international law. The concept of inviolability in contemporary international law contains two distinct aspects: in terms of the duty of the receiving State, the first aspect involves the negative duty of not taking any enforcement action against the inviolable diplomatic premises, diplomatic agents or the diplomatic property, while the second aspect requires the positive duty to protect these premises, personnel and property. The contemporary legal regime governing the principle of diplomatic inviolability can be seen through the core provisions stipulated in the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations 1961. Several controversies can be identified when the authorities of the receiving State face dilemmas of deciding whether the principle of diplomatic inviolability or other norms of international law shall prevail. The dilemmas reveal the conflicts between the principle of diplomatic inviolability and other norms of international law, such as the protection of national security, public safety and human life. In the era of fragmentation of international law, it is not easy for either the authorities of the receiving State or international law scholars to settle the controversies with any straightforward solutions, for the reason that the precedence of diplomatic inviolability would inevitably compromise other norms and vice versa. The thesis examines the concept and theoretical basis of the principle of diplomatic inviolability, explores the historical evolution of the principle, analyses the contemporary legal regime of the principle and the controversies involving the conflicts between the principle and other norms of international law. Finally, the thesis critically reviews the various traditional solutions and proposes several alternative solutions to settle the controversies.

Cette thèse a pour objet l'étude des immunités des diplomates et des représentants des puissances étrangères en droit pénal. La thèse se divise en deux parties:La première partie est consacrée à l'environnement juridique des immunités. Sont exposés successivement: les fondements, la nature juridique, les sources et les attributs des immunités.La seconde partie traite du régime juridique des immunités. Sont abordés: le régime substantiel et le régime procédural.Ce travail montre la diversité des analyses autour de la notion d'immunité diplomatique qui couvre à la fois les immunités des diplomates, consulaires et représentants des États étrangers et démontre la nécessité de concilier, d'une part, la protection conférée par ces immunités et, d'autre part, les droits fondamentaux de la victime d'un acte couvert par une immunité. / This dissertation studies the immunities of diplomats and representatives of foreign authorities in criminal law . The dissertation is divided in to tow parts :The first part is devoted to legal environment of immunity .That was exposed in succession :the foundations ,the legal nature ,sources and attributes of immunities .The second part discusses the legal system of immunity .Are discussed :the substantial and procedural regime of immunity .This work shows the diversity of analysis around the concept of diplomats ,consular, and representatives of foreign states and demonstrates the need to reconcile ,on the one hand ,the protection afforded by theses immunities and on the other hand ,the fundamental rights of the victim of an act covered by immunity.

Cette thèse porte sur le périmètre de l’intervention publique dans l’économie en droit français et en droit tunisien. L’intervention de l’État dans l’économie vise à améliorer les conditions du développement des activités économiques sur un territoire donné. Saisir les mutations juridiques de l’action économique des personnes publiques requiert d’abord la description des moyens de l’intervention étatique tels qu’ils furent utilisés en période d’économie dirigée. Discrétionnaires, ils s’appuyaient sur la nationalisation, la planification, le contrôle des entreprises et la réglementation étatique des prix. Ensuite, il est montré comment la crise économique des années soixante-dix, l’union européenne, les institutions financières internationales, le poids croissant des collectivités locales ont détruit la légitimité du monopole d’action de l’État. Ce sont globalement les facteurs qui expliquent le déclin des prétentions de l’État à diriger l’économie et agir globalement sur le territoire national pour favoriser ledéveloppement économique. La nouvelle action économique participe plus largement à un nouveau type de régulation publique de l’économie.L’intervention de l’État dans l’économie questionne aussi sur la façon dont l'État peut ou doitil intervenir par le biais de sa Constitution, vis à vis des acteurs économiques, vis à vis du marché, vis à vis de l'État. Il s'agit de savoir en quoi ce principe a-t-il ou non un rôle un jouer dans l'économie de marché et dans l'interventionnisme étatique.À travers notre analyse, nous pouvons conclure que l'efficacité de l'État dans le développement économique résulte de son intervention pour améliorer l'efficacité organisationnelle du marché. C'est ainsi que l'économie française a réussi à minimiser la possibilité de l'aléa moral et desactivités de « rent-seeking » en orientant les ressources vers les secteurs plus productifs. EnTunisie, l'intervention de l'État qui ne se conformait pas aux règles de la mondialisation a été une cause importante de la révolution de 2011 par son action négative sur l'efficacité organisationnelle du marché. Il est impératif aujourd’hui d’introduire des réformes fondamentales au niveau de l’État et ses organisations, encourager l’initiative privée, assurer une restriction des anciennes institutions et de promouvoir la participation de tous citoyens à l’édification de la nouvelle Tunisie sans exclusive ni marginalisation. / This thesis focuses on the scope of public intervention in the economy under French law and Tunisian law. State intervention in the economy aims to improve the conditions for the development of economic activities in a given territory. To grasp the legal changes in the economic action of public persons first of all requires the description of the means of state intervention as they were used in a controlled economy. Discretionary, they relied on nationalization, planning, corporate control and state regulation of prices. Then, it is shown how the economic crisis of the seventies, the European Union, the international financial institutions,the increasing weight of the local authorities destroyed the legitimacy of the monopoly of action of the State. These are the factors that explain the decline of the state's claims to lead the economy and act globally on the national territory to promote economic development. The new economic action participates more widely in a new type of public regulation of the economy.State intervention in the economy also questions how the State can or should it intervene through its Constitution, vis-à-vis the economic actors, vis-à-vis the market, vis-à-vis the state. It is a matter of knowing in what way this principle does or does not have a role to play in the market economy and in state interventionism.Through our analysis, we can conclude that the effectiveness of the state in economic development results from its intervention to improve the organizational efficiency of the market. Thus, the French economy has managed to minimize the possibility of moral hazard and rent-seeking activities by channeling resources towards the more productive sectors. In Tunisia, state intervention that did not conform to the rules of globalization was an important cause of the 2011 revolution because of its negative effect on the organizational efficiency of the market. It is imperative today to introduce fundamental reforms at the level of the state and its organizations, to encourage private initiative, to ensure a restriction of the old institutions and to promote the participation of all citizens in the construction of the new Tunisia. Without exclusiveness or marginalization.

Cette recherche part de la volonté de comprendre et d‘expliquer l‘interaction entre la politique intérieure et la politique internationale dans les processus de construction étatique des pays les moins développés et avec une histoire de forte dépendance extérieure. Son objectif central consiste donc à étudier les transformations du phénomène de l‘intervention internationale dans le contexte de la mondialisation à partir de l‘analyse du cas colombien. C‘est pourquoi, en premier lieu, y sont examinés les théories qui, selon les relations internationales, ont rendu compte de l‘intervention comme partie de la dynamique de la politique internationale contemporaine. Un type spécifique d‘intervention, la construction étatique, est analysé dans le cadre de la politique extérieure nord-américaine au XXe siècle. En second lieu, l‘étude de cas présentée analyse l‘intervention des États-Unis en Colombie lors de trois moments distincts : l‘Alliance pour le progrès (1961-1972), la lutte contre les drogues (1975-1994) et le Plan Colombie (2000-2010). A travers ceux-ci est exposé de quelle manière l‘intervention de la superpuissance dans le pays sud-américain a changé tant dans sa conception que dans sa mise en place au long d‘un demi-siècle. L‘examen détaillé de ces trois périodes permet d‘identifier les point de comparaison afin d‘établir s‘il s‘agit ou non d‘une intervention orientée vers la construction étatique. / This research project emerges from an interest in understanding and explaining the interaction between domestic and international politics in the processes of state-building in less developed countries that also have histories of strong3foreign dependence. The main objective of this work is to study the transformation of the phenomena of foreign intervention in the context of globalization through the analysis of the Colombian case. Thus, theories from the discipline of international relations that study intervention as part of the dynamics of contemporary international politics are examined first. Specifically, the intervention related to statebuilding, which is presented in the context of American foreign policy in the 20th century, is analyzed. Second, the intervention of the United States in Colombia in three different periods is explored: the Alliance for Progress (1961-1972), the War on Drugs (1975-1994) and Plan Colombia (2000-2010). Throughout these periods, this study establishes how the intervention of this superpower in this South American country was changing in both its conception and implementation for half of a century. Also, by a detailed examination, the study identifies points of comparison in order to assess whether or not the intervention was oriented towards statebuilding.