Im Idealfall bilden die Kopenhagener Kriterien zusammen mit dem Art.-7-Verfahren EUV einen lückenlosen Schutzmechanismus der EU-Werte. Die Verfassungskrisen in Ungarn und Polen haben allerdings nicht nur die Schwächen des Art.-7-Verfahren aufgedeckt, sondern auch die Frage aufgeworfen, ob die gegenwärtige Anwendungsweise des Kopenhagener Mechanismus ausreichend ist. Da das Beitrittsverfahren an sich Regierung-zentrisch ist, ist es offenkundig, dass dieses Verfahren nicht viel dazu beiträgt, die Bürger in den politischen Prozess ihres Landes einzubinden und die Zivilgesellschaft zu stärken. Es dauert eine gewisse Zeit, bis die konstitutionelle Grundwerte in die Herzen der Bürger eines neulich demokratisierten Landes gebracht werden. Die EU wurde allerdings dadurch unter Zeitdruck gesetzt, dass sie die Osterweiterung in einem relativ kurzen Zeitraum vollenden musste, um die Gunst der Stunde für ein vereintes Europa nutzen können. Der aktuellen Zustand der EU entspricht dem echten Bund im Schmittschen Sinn. Die Substanz der Homogenität in einem echten Bund ist das Produkt des Zusammenspiels der Verfassungsordnung des Bundes und seiner Mitglieder. Daraus ergibt sich, dass mit jedem Beitritt eines neuen Mitgliedstaats die Verfassungsidentität der EU mit einer neuen Verfassungsidentität angereichert und wesentlich geändert wird. Wenn man die Eingriffskapazität der EU in die innerstaatlichen Verfassungsordnungen über die heutige Intensität hinaus noch verstärken will, darf man die politische Natur der Werte-Frage in einem echten Bund nicht außer Acht lassen. Der Priorisierung der politischen Kriterien vor den wirtschaftlichen Kriterien, mit der die EU die Beitrittsverhandlungen durchgeführt hat, ist für Taiwans China-Politik ebenso wichtig. Eine entscheidende Aufgabe für Taiwan ist, klar zu machen, dass Taiwan politische Verhandlungen nur mit einem Ansprechpartner führen wird, der die gleichen politischen Werte einhält. / In the course of developing a general theory aiming at reversing and preventing the deterioration of political values in the European and East-Asian context, this study answered two sets of questions. First, on the empirical level, how reasonable and effective are the current pre-accession evaluations? Regarding the existing deterioration in the post-accession context, does it reflect any short coming in the way the EU implements the Copenhagen Criteria? Since Taiwan has not established such monitoring mechanism yet, what are the damages already done to Taiwan’s constitutional values? Second, on the normative level, this study followed two very different approaches. On the one hand, it clarified where the limits of judicial solution to this problem are. The fact that the sanction procedures prescribed in the current Art. 7 TEU take the form of collective actions revealed that what is at stake here is a shared value system. On the other hand, this study took into account the interaction between law and politics. The accession of new member states, as well the sanction against member states which failed to respect the political values of the Union, are in essence political decisions of the European Union. Since Taiwan needs to set up political conditions for it negotiations with China, the task is highly political, too. By identifying elements that caused or prevented the deterioration of political values, this study proposed suggestions for correcting and preventing deterioration by understanding its operation. A protective mechanism for Taiwan’s political values can create a reverse “lock-in effect.” By enunciating stringent negotiation guidelines and a code of conduct for Taiwanese government that requires cautiousness and vigilance, this mechanism will place the cross-strait negotiations under a legal framework which ensures that any given Taiwanese government could not sacrifice Taiwan’s constitutional values in exchange for advancing its political agenda.

La présente thèse de doctorat décrit comment la construction européenne, point de confluence de la démarche politique de Valéry Giscard d'Estaing et d'Helmut Schmidt, a déterminé la poursuite de leur collaboration après 1981/82. Dans ce but, elle se focalise sur les travaux du Comité pour l'Union monétaire de l'Europe, créé à l'initiative de Valéry Giscard d'Estaing et d'Helmut Schmidt en 1986, au lendemain de l'adoption de l'Acte unique européen par leurs successeurs. Quel rôle leur initiative a-t-elle joué sur la constitution du Comité Delors en 1988, chargé d'étudier le projet d'Union économique et monétaire de l'Europe, et, plus largement, sur la mise en oeuvre du traité de Maastricht ? L'analyse, en replaçant la conception européenne de Valéry Giscard d'Estaing et d'Helmut Schmidt dans les débats des années 1980 et 1990 entre approches institutionnalistes et intégrationnistes, économistes et monétaristes, keynésianistes et ordolibérales, ou encore françaises et allemandes, met à jour les enjeux du lobbyisme et de l'intégration économique dans le processus de construction européenne. / The present dissertation describe how the construction of Europe, point of confluence of the political measure of Valery Giscard d'Estaing and Helmut Schmidt, was determinant in the pursuit of their collaboration after 1981/82. In this goal it is focussing on the works of the Comity for Monetary union of Europe, created by Valery Giscard d'Estaing and Helmut Schmidt in 1986, before the adoption of the Single European Act by their successors. What role their initiative did played on the constitution of the Delors Comity in 1988, charged to study the project of Economic and Monetary Union of Europe and more widly on the execution of the Maastricht Treaty? The analysis, with the replacement of the European concept of Valery Giscard d'Estaing and Helmut Schmidt in the beginning of the years 1980 and 1990between the approaches institutionalist and integrationist, economist and monetist, keynesianist and ordoliberal, or French and German , reveal the issues of the lobbyist and the economical integration in the process of the construction of Europe.

Depuis le Conseil européen de Lisbonne en 2000, l’Union européenne s’active à devenir une société de la connaissance leader dans l’hypercompétition mondiale. Elle s’attache à enrichir et structurer ses ressources de diversité et de créativité en restructurant sa méthode d’intégration suivant une approche plus ascendante. Elle pousse aussi au décloisonnement de tous les secteurs socio-économiques afin d’en libérer les potentiels d’innovation. Une société en réseau se tisse ainsi grâce au développement des acteurs locaux et d’une connivence public-privé. Toutefois, ces mutations juridiques exigent l’adhésion active des citoyens. Dès lors, à côté des politiques d’éducation, de recherche et d’innovation, l’Union favorise les synergies avec les domaines de l’emploi, de la jeunesse et de la culture. Tous ces changements entraînent une quête effrénée de cohérence globale nécessaire à la compétitivité et à la durabilité du modèle européen de société de la connaissance. Pour atteindre ces objectifs, le droit européen va puiser sa cohérence dans l’articulation des concepts d’Etat social actif, de méritocratie et de démocratisation. / Since the European Council of Lisbon in 2000, the European Union tends to become a knowledge society leader in the world competition. It enriches and structures its ressources of diversity and creativity by generating a renewal of its integration method around a bottom-up approach. It stimulates too a decompartmentalization of all the socio-economic sectors to free all the innovation potentials. So, a network society appears thanks to the development of regional actors and a public-private connivance. But, the legal evolutions need to get the adhesion of the citizens. That’s why, in addition to the policies of education, research and innovation, the European Union fosters synergies with the domains of employment, youth and culture. All these transitions trigger a search of global coherence to guarantee the competitiveness and the sustainability of the European model of knowledge society. To reach these goals, the European law finds its coherence by articulating the notions of active welfare State, meritocracy and democratization.

Pretendendo evidenciar uma leitura jurídico-política sobre o começo da integração europeia - iniciada por meio da fundação jurídica da CECA, esta Tese visa a responder à pergunta: quando, como e por meio de quais instituições, países europeus tradicionalmente opostos em termos militares estabeleceram entre si, após o término da Segunda Guerra Mundial, de maneira inédita e inaudita em sua História, um novo modo de relações responsável por tornar impossível e impensável a deflagração de nova Guerra regional? Para responder a essa pergunta, o presente trabalho assume a perspectiva de uma Pesquisa interdisciplinar em Direito, recorrendo não apenas ao Direito Positivo, mas também a outras áreas do conhecimento, tais como a Filosofia Política Antiga e Contemporânea e a História Contemporânea da Europa. O objetivo consiste em formular um aparato discursivo racional conceitual a partir de matriz de leitura fornecida pela Filosofia Política Antiga e Contemporânea para, em seguida, aplicá-lo sobre elementos da experiência histórica e jurídico-normativa positiva da CECA. A chave de leitura conceitual formada a partir de contribuições da Filosofia Política tem sua origem principalmente na aproximação das reflexões de POLÍBIO e de Claude LEFORT. O trabalho evidencia a importância de normas jurídicas institucionalmente previstas para lidar com oposições escalares na construção e na manutenção de um sistema de relações jurídico-Politicamente organizado, de maneira a que tensões entre distintas dimensões existenciais - institucionalmente absorvidas e encaminhadas - não possam significar a ruptura violenta desse sistema. Este aparato racional conceitual pode ser aplicado sobre os elementos da experiência histórica e normativa originária (Tratado de Paris de 1951) da CECA, o que permite diferenciar histórica e institucionalmente esta iniciativa em particular dos demais Projetos de Europa Unida do imediato pós-Segunda Guerra Mundial. Para os fundadores da CECA (Konrad ADENAUER, Jean MONNET e Robert SCHUMAN), um regime juridicamente regulado de simples cooperação política (Unionismo Europeu) não era considerado como suficiente para instaurar um novo modo de relações na Europa. Ao mesmo tempo, eles não visavam à construção jurídica de uma Unificação Política da Europa em torno de um Estado Federal Europeu (Federalismo Europeu). Nesse sentido, a CECA pode ser entendida como exemplo histórico singular de organização jurídico-Política de países europeus. Foram criados pelo Tratado da CECA órgãos comunitários supranacionais e intergovernamentais voltados a compartilhar com os Estados-Membros e com os respectivos povos europeus a formação do sentido normativo que deveria ser impresso sobre questões concretas sensíveis tornadas comuns. A nenhum deles foi atribuída uma posição central na nomogênese comunitária. A leitura jurídico-política da integração europeia iniciada com a CECA se mostra possível assim a partir da constatação de que a arquitetura das instituições do Tratado desta Organização Internacional mesmo das instituições que se referiam a normas jurídico-econômicas - foi responsável pela afirmação e pela conservação de um novo modo de relações entre os países europeus. Buscava-se, não um Estado Europeu, nem uma singela cooperação intergovernamental institucionalizada, mas um meio termo de organização jurídico-Política: um sistema de relações estruturado por um engenhoso mecanismo institucional orientado para promover, por meio de freios e contrapesos, de forma ininterrupta, oposições entre os participantes da vida comunitária. / Aiming to unveil a legal-political reading of the beginning of European integration - initiated by the legal foundation of the ECSC, this Thesis intends to answer the question: when, how and through which institutions, European countries traditionally opposed militarily established between themselves, after the end of the Second World War - unprecedentedly and unparalleled in their history, a new kind of relationship, which was responsible for making impossible and unthinkable the outbreak of new regional war? In order to answer this question, this study follows the path of an interdisciplinary Research in Law, resorting not only to Positive Law, but also to other fields of knowledge, such as Ancient and Contemporary Political Philosophy and Contemporary History of Europe. The objective is to read experience elements given by ECSCs History and positive legal rules through lens framed according to a rational conceptual apparatus grounded on Ancient and Contemporary Political Philosophy. The hermeneutical key framed according to Political Philosophy has its main origins in the conjoint discussion of POLYBIUS thought and Claude LEFORTs contributions. This work highlights the importance of legal institutions dealing with dimensional oppositions within the construction and maintenance of a legal-Politically organized relationships system, by which tensions institutionally absorbed and addressed - between different existential dimensions do not disrupte violently this system. This conceptual apparatus can be applied to understand ECSCs historical and and normative (Treaty of Paris, 1951) experience and helps differentiating from both a historical and institutional perspective this peculiar initiative from alternative European Union Projects immeadiately proposed after the Second World War. For ECSC founding fathers (Konrad ADENAUER, Jean MONNET and Robert SCHUMAN), a mere legal regime of political cooperation (European Unionism) was not regarded as sufficiently capable of creating a new kind of relationship in Europe. At the same time, they did not pursue a legal Political Unification of Europe within a European Federal State (European Federalism). In this sense, the ECSC can be seen as an unique historic example of a legal-Political organization of European countries. Supranational and intergovernmental community bodies were created by ECSCs Treaty in order to share with its own member-States and their respective peoples the construction of the normative sense which would conduct issues concerning sensitive common problems. To none of them was assigned a central position in Communitys normative process. A legal-political reading of European integration - started with the ECSC - seems possible because the institutional framework whithin its Treaty - even when referred to legal and economic rules - was responsible for the affirmation and preservation of a new kind of relationship between European countries. It was envisaged, neither a European State, nor an institutionalized intergovernmental cooperation, but a middle-way legal-Political organization: a relationship system erecte by an ingenious institutional mechanism conceived to promote - through checks and balances - nonstop oppositions between participants of Communitys life.

Acte unique européen, Maastricht, Amsterdam, Nice, Lisbonne, élargissements… les grandes révisions des traités de l’Union européenne se sont succédé à un rythme soutenu en vingt-cinq ans. Si cette série est nécessaire dans un processus évolutif d’intégration, elle montre également la difficulté de réformer l’Union. L’objet de cette étude est de déterminer le degré de rigidité des traités de l’Union européenne, en recherchant les causes, les obstacles et les conséquences juridiques de cette (in)adaptabilité des traités. La rigidité trouve sa source dans le processus de constitutionnalisation des traités qui a renforcé leur protection formelle et matérielle par l’émergence de limites au pouvoir de révision. La rigidité des traités est par ailleurs accentuée par celle de la procédure de révision ordinaire qui est fondée sur deux notions qui peuvent sembler antinomiques : le respect de la souveraineté des États membres, par la pluralité des mécanismes nationaux de ratification, et la volonté de démocratisation, par l’émergence de mécanismes européens de légitimation. Pour faciliter l’adaptabilité des traités, les États membres ont institué des procédures simplifiées, complémentaires et dérogatoires à la procédure de droit commun. Leur insuffisante distinction par rapport à la procédure de révision ordinaire les rend inefficaces, si bien que l’on assiste à une remise en cause de la rigidité des traités par le développement d’une révision implicite de leurs dispositions et d’une coopération entre les États membres à l’intensité différenciée voire hors du cadre institutionnel de l’Union. La recherche de moyens efficaces d’assouplissement de la rigidité des traités est donc nécessaire afin de conserver à la fois leur rang dans l’ordre juridique et l’unité du processus d’intégration européenne dans le cadre de l’Union européenne. / Single European Act, Maastricht, Amsterdam, Nice, Lisbon, enlargements… Over a 25-year period, the major revisions of the European Union treaties followed one another at an intensive pace. If that series is necessary for a progressive process of integration, it also illustrates the challenge of reforming the Union. The purpose of this study is to determine the level of rigidity of the European Union Treaties by searching the legal causes, obstacles and consequences of the (in)adaptability of the treaties. Rigidity originates from the constitutionalisation process of the treaties, which consolidated their formal and substantial protection through the emergence of limits to the revision power. The rigidity of the treaties is further increased by that of the ordinary revision procedure, which is based on two notions that may appear antinomic: the respect of the Member States sovereignty (through the plurality of the national mechanisms of ratification), and the willingness of democratisation (through the emergence of European mechanisms of legitimacy). In order to facilitate the adaptability of the treaties, the Member States established simplified procedures, which complement and derogate to the general procedure. As they do not significantly differ from the ordinary revision procedure, they are not efficient; a reconsideration of the rigidity of the treaties can then be observed through the development of an implicit revision of their provisions as well as a cooperation between Member States, the intensity of which is differentiated, and which may grow beside the Union’s institutional framework. Therefore, the pursuit of efficient ways to relax the rigidity of the treaties is necessary to maintain both their position within the legal order and the unity of the European integration process within the framework of the European Union.

La présente thèse porte sur l'affirmation d'une compétence pénale de la construction européenne. Elle vise à répondre à la question principale, comment au cours du développement du processus de l'intégration on arrive à la reconnaissance d'un pouvoir de l'ensemble communautaire dans le domaine pénal et quelles sont les dimensions concrètes dudit pouvoir.Dans la Première partie, on révèle que les deux facteurs essentiels de la reconnaissance d'une compétence de type communautaire, relative à la problématique pénale, ont d'abord conduit à un effet d'encadrement de la souveraineté pénale des Etats membres. Ce phénomène se manifeste sur deux plans: d'un côté, les principes d'application du droit communautaire et le fonctionnement propre du système de l'intégration, jouent le rôle d'un facteur puissant de l'encadrement de la souveraineté pénale des Etats. D'autre part, au cours du développement de la construction européenne, se pose la question de mettre le dispositif de l'intégration en service de la lutte contre la criminalité transfrontalière, qui résulte dans la création du Troisième pilier en tant que cadre européen spécifique en matière pénale, vu le manque de volonté à consacrer explicitement une compétence communautaire dans le domaine étudié.La Deuxième partie est ciblée sur la reconnaissance même d'un pouvoir de l'ensemble européen pour intervenir en matière pénale, en fonction des deux facteurs essentiels - l'application effective du droit de l'intégration et la nécessité de mettre le dispositif communautaire en service de la lutte contre la criminalité transfrontalière. Elle cherche également à clarifier la nature et les conditions d'exercice de cette compétence. Sur ce plan sont d'abord étudiées les deux sources d'affirmation d'une compétence pénale de l'ensemble européen et les expressions concrètes de la communautarisation du domaine pénal. Ainsi est démontré le lien dialectique entre le développement de la construction communautaire en tant qu'une nouvelle forme de régulation publique et la reconnaissance d'un pouvoir du niveau européen d'agir en matière pénale. En deuxième lieu, le cadre juridique de la compétence pénale de l'Union européenne sous l'emprise du Traité de Lisbonne est profondément analysé. Cela permet de révéler la nature de la compétence pénale du système de l'intégration et de tirer des conclusions sur l'originalité de la construction européenne en tant qu'une forme de fédération de type nouveau.De cette manière on arrive à établir, que l'affirmation d'une compétence de type communautaire en matière pénale est une émanation de la nature particulière de la construction européenne, une fonction de l'approfondissement du projet communautaire et de la consolidation du système de l'intégration en tant qu'une nouvelle organisation du pouvoir public. / The present thesis focuses on the assertion of Community competence in criminal matters. It aims not only to answer the question as to how the European integration process allows room for the recognition of a power of the European system in the field of criminal law, but also to shed light on the various aspects of the above-mentioned competence.The first part of the study revolves around the problem how the two essential factors leading to the recognition of a Community competence in criminal law brought about an effect of framing criminal sovereignty as towards the Member States of the European construction. This phenomenon manifests itself in two aspects. On the one hand, the principles of the application of European law alongside the functioning of the European integration system together play a very important role in limiting the sovereignty of the Member States in the field of criminal law. On the other hand, the important matter of using the set of legal tools of the European integration to combat cross-border criminality, resulted, despite the lack of common will to make explicit conferral of competence in the field of study, in the establishment of the Third Pillar as a specific European legal framework in criminal matters.It is the recognition of power of intervention of the European integration system in criminal law matters that is analysed in the second part of the present study. This recognition is conditioned by two main factors - the effective implementation of European integration law and the need to use the integration legal tools to combat cross-border criminality. It also made a constructive attempt to clarify the nature and the conditions of the exercise of the abovementioned competence. In this aspect, the two sources of the assertion of a Community competence in criminal matters and the precise legal expressions of this process are examined in the first place. Thus, the dialectical interconnection between the development of the European legal construction as a new form of public regulation and the recognition of the power of the European community to intervene in criminal matters is demonstrated. In a second step, the legal provisions of European competence in the field of criminal law according to the Treaty of Lisbon are analysed in depth. This shows the legal understanding of European competence in the field of criminal law and allows a positive conclusion on the originality of the European integration system as a federation of an unseen kind to be drawn. In this respect, the present study establishes that the assertion of a Community-based competence in the field of criminal law is an emanation of the peculiar nature of the European construction, a function of the deepening of the European project and of the consolidation of the integration system as a new form of public power.

No abstract available / Political Sciences / M. A. (International Politics)

Pretendendo evidenciar uma leitura jurídico-política sobre o começo da integração europeia - iniciada por meio da fundação jurídica da CECA, esta Tese visa a responder à pergunta: quando, como e por meio de quais instituições, países europeus tradicionalmente opostos em termos militares estabeleceram entre si, após o término da Segunda Guerra Mundial, de maneira inédita e inaudita em sua História, um novo modo de relações responsável por tornar impossível e impensável a deflagração de nova Guerra regional? Para responder a essa pergunta, o presente trabalho assume a perspectiva de uma Pesquisa interdisciplinar em Direito, recorrendo não apenas ao Direito Positivo, mas também a outras áreas do conhecimento, tais como a Filosofia Política Antiga e Contemporânea e a História Contemporânea da Europa. O objetivo consiste em formular um aparato discursivo racional conceitual a partir de matriz de leitura fornecida pela Filosofia Política Antiga e Contemporânea para, em seguida, aplicá-lo sobre elementos da experiência histórica e jurídico-normativa positiva da CECA. A chave de leitura conceitual formada a partir de contribuições da Filosofia Política tem sua origem principalmente na aproximação das reflexões de POLÍBIO e de Claude LEFORT. O trabalho evidencia a importância de normas jurídicas institucionalmente previstas para lidar com oposições escalares na construção e na manutenção de um sistema de relações jurídico-Politicamente organizado, de maneira a que tensões entre distintas dimensões existenciais - institucionalmente absorvidas e encaminhadas - não possam significar a ruptura violenta desse sistema. Este aparato racional conceitual pode ser aplicado sobre os elementos da experiência histórica e normativa originária (Tratado de Paris de 1951) da CECA, o que permite diferenciar histórica e institucionalmente esta iniciativa em particular dos demais Projetos de Europa Unida do imediato pós-Segunda Guerra Mundial. Para os fundadores da CECA (Konrad ADENAUER, Jean MONNET e Robert SCHUMAN), um regime juridicamente regulado de simples cooperação política (Unionismo Europeu) não era considerado como suficiente para instaurar um novo modo de relações na Europa. Ao mesmo tempo, eles não visavam à construção jurídica de uma Unificação Política da Europa em torno de um Estado Federal Europeu (Federalismo Europeu). Nesse sentido, a CECA pode ser entendida como exemplo histórico singular de organização jurídico-Política de países europeus. Foram criados pelo Tratado da CECA órgãos comunitários supranacionais e intergovernamentais voltados a compartilhar com os Estados-Membros e com os respectivos povos europeus a formação do sentido normativo que deveria ser impresso sobre questões concretas sensíveis tornadas comuns. A nenhum deles foi atribuída uma posição central na nomogênese comunitária. A leitura jurídico-política da integração europeia iniciada com a CECA se mostra possível assim a partir da constatação de que a arquitetura das instituições do Tratado desta Organização Internacional mesmo das instituições que se referiam a normas jurídico-econômicas - foi responsável pela afirmação e pela conservação de um novo modo de relações entre os países europeus. Buscava-se, não um Estado Europeu, nem uma singela cooperação intergovernamental institucionalizada, mas um meio termo de organização jurídico-Política: um sistema de relações estruturado por um engenhoso mecanismo institucional orientado para promover, por meio de freios e contrapesos, de forma ininterrupta, oposições entre os participantes da vida comunitária. / Aiming to unveil a legal-political reading of the beginning of European integration - initiated by the legal foundation of the ECSC, this Thesis intends to answer the question: when, how and through which institutions, European countries traditionally opposed militarily established between themselves, after the end of the Second World War - unprecedentedly and unparalleled in their history, a new kind of relationship, which was responsible for making impossible and unthinkable the outbreak of new regional war? In order to answer this question, this study follows the path of an interdisciplinary Research in Law, resorting not only to Positive Law, but also to other fields of knowledge, such as Ancient and Contemporary Political Philosophy and Contemporary History of Europe. The objective is to read experience elements given by ECSCs History and positive legal rules through lens framed according to a rational conceptual apparatus grounded on Ancient and Contemporary Political Philosophy. The hermeneutical key framed according to Political Philosophy has its main origins in the conjoint discussion of POLYBIUS thought and Claude LEFORTs contributions. This work highlights the importance of legal institutions dealing with dimensional oppositions within the construction and maintenance of a legal-Politically organized relationships system, by which tensions institutionally absorbed and addressed - between different existential dimensions do not disrupte violently this system. This conceptual apparatus can be applied to understand ECSCs historical and and normative (Treaty of Paris, 1951) experience and helps differentiating from both a historical and institutional perspective this peculiar initiative from alternative European Union Projects immeadiately proposed after the Second World War. For ECSC founding fathers (Konrad ADENAUER, Jean MONNET and Robert SCHUMAN), a mere legal regime of political cooperation (European Unionism) was not regarded as sufficiently capable of creating a new kind of relationship in Europe. At the same time, they did not pursue a legal Political Unification of Europe within a European Federal State (European Federalism). In this sense, the ECSC can be seen as an unique historic example of a legal-Political organization of European countries. Supranational and intergovernmental community bodies were created by ECSCs Treaty in order to share with its own member-States and their respective peoples the construction of the normative sense which would conduct issues concerning sensitive common problems. To none of them was assigned a central position in Communitys normative process. A legal-political reading of European integration - started with the ECSC - seems possible because the institutional framework whithin its Treaty - even when referred to legal and economic rules - was responsible for the affirmation and preservation of a new kind of relationship between European countries. It was envisaged, neither a European State, nor an institutionalized intergovernmental cooperation, but a middle-way legal-Political organization: a relationship system erecte by an ingenious institutional mechanism conceived to promote - through checks and balances - nonstop oppositions between participants of Communitys life.

La thèse effectue une revue de la littérature scientifique sur la Cour dans le processus d’intégration juridique, en classant les différentes positions selon qu’ils définissent le rôle de la Cour comme réactif ou pro-actif. En faisant cette revue de la littérature, cinq facteurs sont mis en exergue pour ce qui concerne la problématique de l’autonomie de la Cour, qui feront l’objet d’une analyse approfondie dans la suite de la thèse :<p>I) Limites inhérentes à l’interprétation juridique des Traités tels qu’ils se retrouvent dans les règles institutionnalisées du raisonnement de la Cour ;<p>II) L’interaction, au niveau européen, entre la Cour et les autres institutions ;<p>III) Les pressions et les stratégies d’influence des Etats membres vis-à-vis de la Cour comme agent de leurs préférences ;<p>IV) La dépendance structurelle de la Cour supranationale vis-à-vis ses interlocuteurs judiciaires au niveau national ;<p>V) Le degré d’obéissance que les appareils administratifs et exécutifs des Etats membres démontrent vis-à-vis la jurisprudence de la Cour.<p>Par rapport à ces facteurs, et leur importance relative dans la détermination de la ligne d’action de la Cour de Justice, la thèse évalue les changements et les défis auxquels est soumise la fonction de la Cour de justice au niveau de l’Union européenne, en particulier par rapport à l’environnement de plus en plus critique ou évolue la trajectoire jurisprudentielle de la Cour par rapport aux acteurs politiques et juridiques, l’érosion du caractère sui generis du droit communautaire dans le contexte du droit international, le rôle de plus en plus affiché des cours nationales, et le contexte institutionnel dans lequel se trouve à agir cette juridiction. / Doctorat en Sciences politiques et sociales / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished

The origins of European integration and the factors that made it possible in the post-1945 era have been examined from different perspectives and interpreted in various ways. While federalists argue that the concept of European unity had been developed over centuries by different intellectual movements, the realist approaches of Milward and Dinan stress the importance of economic, political and security motives. Referring to the factors that contributed to the implementation of the Schuman Plan, both the federalist and realist approaches highlight the chief importance of states and their representatives. Yet, the ideas that inspired Jean Monnet, who designed the Schuman Plan, have received little attention. While the state is seen in the literature as the main actor that made the outcome possible, the role of Monnet and that of some of his close associates are almost ignored. By investigating Monnet's thought, this study shows that the source of his inspiration was not the countless plans for European unity put forward by European federalist movements or the random concepts that he came across, such as the New Deal. Rather, it is argued here that he was in fact constantly exposed to a coherent and well-structured philosophy. This thinking reached him through his direct contacts and frequent encounters with Felix Frankfurter and his associates, who formed an epistemic community, as defined by Peter M. Haas. The core concepts of this thinking inherited from Louis Brandeis and developed by Frankfurter – restoring and overseeing free competition – can be identified in Monnet's 1950 plan. The evidence shows that it became a shared philosophy of Monnet's group of friends. This is a fundamental aspect since, once the Schuman Plan was made public, Monnet's friends rallied around his project and contributed not only to overcoming stalemate at critical moments of the negotiations on the future treaty, but also to convincing statesmen of the value of the project. / Graduate