A partir do exame comparativo dos regimentos passados aos governadores-gerais Antônio Telles da Silva, em 1642, Jerônimo de Ataíde, em 1653, e ao mestre-de-campo general Roque da Costa Barreto, em 1677, o presente trabalho procura, em sua primeira parte, determinar e sistematizar as atribuições e competências do Governo-Geral no que se refere à administração do Estado do Brasil, buscando apresentar como a instituição se organizava, do ponto de vista formal.Na segunda parte, examina-se a prática administrativa dos referidos governadores, tendo por foco as questões relacionadas à defesa e conservação da América portuguesa, como também a sua exploração econômica. Objetiva-se, com isso, verificar as condições de governabilidade, a posição do governador-geral dentro da estrutura administrativa da América, sua interface com os grupos da sociedade e seus distintos interesses, possibilitando compreender seu efetivo funcionamento e sua penetração na sociedade. Pretende-se, dessa forma, apreender a aplicação das normas regimentais e sua recepção no corpo social, identificando, a partir da articulação entre a forma normativa, expressa nos regimentos, e a da prática administrativa, o alcance e os limites do poder da Coroa. / From the comparative examination of the regiments passed to the Governors General Antônio Telles da Silva, in 1642, Jerônimo de Ataíde, in 1653, and Field Master General Roque da Costa Barreto, in 1677, this paper aims at, in its the first part, determining and systematizing the duties and powers of the General Government in relation to the State administration of Brazil, seeking to present itself how the institution was organized from the formal point of view.The second part examines the administrative practices of those governments focusing on issues related to protection and conservation of Portuguese America, as well as its economic exploitation. The aim is, thus, verify the conditions of governance, the position of the Governor General within the administrative structure of America, its interface with society groups and their different interests, allowing to understand its effective operation and its penetration in society. The purpose is therefore to seize the application of procedural rules and its reception in the social body, identifying, from the articulation between the normative form, expressed in the regulations, and administrative practice, the scope and limits of the power of the Crown.

A partir do exame comparativo dos regimentos passados aos governadores-gerais Antônio Telles da Silva, em 1642, Jerônimo de Ataíde, em 1653, e ao mestre-de-campo general Roque da Costa Barreto, em 1677, o presente trabalho procura, em sua primeira parte, determinar e sistematizar as atribuições e competências do Governo-Geral no que se refere à administração do Estado do Brasil, buscando apresentar como a instituição se organizava, do ponto de vista formal.Na segunda parte, examina-se a prática administrativa dos referidos governadores, tendo por foco as questões relacionadas à defesa e conservação da América portuguesa, como também a sua exploração econômica. Objetiva-se, com isso, verificar as condições de governabilidade, a posição do governador-geral dentro da estrutura administrativa da América, sua interface com os grupos da sociedade e seus distintos interesses, possibilitando compreender seu efetivo funcionamento e sua penetração na sociedade. Pretende-se, dessa forma, apreender a aplicação das normas regimentais e sua recepção no corpo social, identificando, a partir da articulação entre a forma normativa, expressa nos regimentos, e a da prática administrativa, o alcance e os limites do poder da Coroa. / From the comparative examination of the regiments passed to the Governors General Antônio Telles da Silva, in 1642, Jerônimo de Ataíde, in 1653, and Field Master General Roque da Costa Barreto, in 1677, this paper aims at, in its the first part, determining and systematizing the duties and powers of the General Government in relation to the State administration of Brazil, seeking to present itself how the institution was organized from the formal point of view.The second part examines the administrative practices of those governments focusing on issues related to protection and conservation of Portuguese America, as well as its economic exploitation. The aim is, thus, verify the conditions of governance, the position of the Governor General within the administrative structure of America, its interface with society groups and their different interests, allowing to understand its effective operation and its penetration in society. The purpose is therefore to seize the application of procedural rules and its reception in the social body, identifying, from the articulation between the normative form, expressed in the regulations, and administrative practice, the scope and limits of the power of the Crown.

The United Nations' Convention on the rights of the child presents a legislative framework that nations worldwide through their ratification have promised to aim for. Going from theory to practice this field study intends to investigate how the work to implement the children’s rights is carried out in reality by social institutions in Somoto Nicaragua. This essay specifically looks at how a children’s rights approach is performed in the work with working children and will therefore focus on two rights that protrude as relevant to the target group; the right to education and the right to be protected from hazardous work and economic exploitation. Furthermore, this paper considers existent criticism towards the human rights conventions for being Eurocentric in its visions and not always applicable to local conditions. Therefore the perception of working children locally in Nicaragua is examined to see how well this is in accordance with the legislation on children’s rights or if the social institutions have met difficulties in the implementation. Fundamental in the work carried out by the social institutions has been to raise awareness in the society on the children’s rights. The conclusion is that attitudes to working children have gone through a change since the introduction of a children’s rights approach in Somoto, but what remains the major obstacle to implementation is the restricted access to economic resources.

Philosophiae Doctor - PhD / This research attempts to answer the following questions: How and why genocide became possible in Gishamvu and Kibayi? In other words, what was the nature of power at different epochs and how was it exercised? How did forms of political competition evolve? In relation to these forms of competition, what forms of violence occurred acrosshistory and how did they manifest themselves at local level up to 1994? And what was the place of identity politics? Then, what were economic and social conditions since colonial times up to 1994 and how were these conditions instrumentalized in the construction of the ideology of genocide? Finally, how did the Tutsi genocide unfold in Gishamvu and Kibayi? / South Africa

Le domaine privé des personnes publiques, ensemble de biens publics classiquementappréhendé par opposition au domaine public, subit actuellement une profonde mutation. Lamodification des critères de définition du domaine privé engendre l’insertion de nouveauxéléments dans cette catégorie juridique, et invite à redéfinir son rôle au sein de laclassification des propriétés publiques. Le domaine privé ne peut plus être perçu comme unpatrimoine que l’administration exploiterait « à titre privé ». Il remplit indéniablement unefonction d’intérêt général, en fournissant des revenus à ses propriétaires, ou en leur offrant dessupports pour mener leurs missions. Le développement des hypothèses d’utilisation des biensdu domaine privé à des fins non financières conduit à formuler une proposition dehiérarchisation des utilités publiques qu’ils sont susceptibles de procurer. Elle permet deconcilier la recherche d’un profit avec les autres objectifs de l’action publique. Cette qualitése reflète dans la définition du régime de la domanialité privée, qui accorde une placesignificative à l’objectif de préservation de la valeur économique d’un patrimoine public, ets’ouvre, en parallèle, à une logique de protection des fonctions d’utilité publique remarquabledont ses biens sont les supports. La mutation de la domanialité privée dessine les contoursd’un nouveau régime juridique, apte à concilier les impératifs de protection avec la recherchede valorisation économique des patrimoines publics, ce dont la domanialité publique estincapable. On peut alors envisager de l’étendre à l’ensemble des biens publics, comme unesolution à la crise que traverse la domanialité publique. / The private domain of public entities, which is the ensemble of public possessions inopposition to the public domain, is facing a deep mutation. Criterias of definition of private domain are changing, which leads to the insertion of new elements in this legal field and to a redifining of its role in public properties classification. The private domain can not be perceived anymore as an heritage that the administration uses in a private capacity. It undeniably has a role for the general interest by granting incomes to its owners or by giving them supports to achieve their assignements. The growing number of hypothesis where assets of the private field are used to non-financial aims lead us to suggest a scale of public interests these usages can lead to. This scale is aimed to reconcile a profit-driven approach with public action other objectives. This is shown by the definition of the system of private domain, which gives much importance to the fonction of preserving the economic value of a public asset while opening up to a logic of protection of its public interests fonctions which are supported by its assets. The mutation of the definition of the private domain draws a new legal system by joining the search for an economic exploitation of public assets with its protection imperatives where the definition of the public domain fails. We can consider to extend this new legal system to the field of public domain to try to counter the crisis it isfacing.

L’intérêt public imprime aux ports une organisation juridique et institutionnelle spéciale. Les installations portuaires doivent fonctionner sans désemparer et aucun usager ne doit en être privé au-delà des restrictions nécessaires à la satisfaction de tous. À ce titre, elles sont traditionnellement soumises au régime de la domanialité publique et les activités qui s’y déroulent à celui du service public. Les deux régimes étant, par leur essence même, exorbitants, leur application simultanée génère une surprotection préjudiciable à la compétitivité des ports.L’objet de cette étude est de démontrer l’inadaptation de la domanialité publique portuaire, tant du point de vue de sa cohérence générale, que de du point de vue de son impact sur le développement des sites portuaires. L’adoption du CGPPP et les réformes postérieures n’ont pas permis de résoudre le problème de l’hypertrophie du domaine public portuaire, pas plus qu’elles n’ont consacré un régime domanial véritablement adapté.L’émergence du régime des conventions de terminal constitue une évolution majeure, mais insuffisante. S’il favorise un certain partage des risques entre autorités portuaires et opérateurs privés, il n’a, malheureusement, pas résolu le problème de la précarité des occupations domaniales. L’insécurité juridique demeure ; ce qui n’encourage pas l’investissement privé.Face aux contraintes du droit de la concurrence et à la généralisation de la libre circulation des biens et des personnes au sein de l’UE, les modalités de gestion des installations portuaires doivent s’adapter aux enjeux modernes de l’économie de marché. / Public interest gives harbours a specific legal and institutional framework. Harbour facilities must work continuously and stay available to every user, according to the limitations required to satisfy everybody. As such, they are traditionally subject to the state ownership system and their related activities are subject to the public service one. Both systems are exorbitant by nature. Applying them simultaneously triggers off an overprotection detrimental to harbours competitivity.This study aims at showing the harbour state ownership system is unsuitable, both in terms of overall consistency and its impact on the harbour site growth. Adoption of the general code ruling the public ownership and posterior reforms did not allow to resolve the harbour state ownership hypertrophy issue, nor did they establish an ownership system truly appropriate.Appearing harbour terminals contracts constitute a major but still insufficient evolution. If they do allow to share risks between harbour authorities and private operators to some extent, unfortunately they did not resolve the ownership activities precarity issue. Legal insecurity remains, which does not stimulate private investment.Against competition law obligations and the free movement of goods and people spreading within the EU, harbour facilities management terms need to adapt to today’s market economy challenges.