The aim of this Master thesis was to find out whether the rotating presidency of the Council of the European Union was able to exert influence in EU's external relations after the Lisbon Treaty has entered into force. Thesis was looking on two post-Lisbon Council Presidencies- Hungarian Council Presidency and the Polish Council Presidency and their influence in Eastern Partnership-the flagship initiative of both of these presidencies. Through the identification of the informal roles of the rotating presidency-agenda setter role and broker's role, the influence on the development of Eastern Partnership of both Council Presidencies was determined. The other factors such as the reputation of the presiding country, stable domestic political situation, ability to deal with unexpected developments have been considered as important pre-requisites for the Council Presidency to be able to exert influence through its informal roles.

Primary assumption of this thesis is that the European Union (EU) represents a unique international actor that embodies the major changes in institution of diplomacy. These changes culminate in the 21st Century. They rest namely in widening of diplomatic agenda, increasing number and kind of actors conducting diplomacy, growing importance of multilateral frameworks and transformation of diplomatic actors' objectives. At the centre of our interest lays the concept of structural foreign policy (SFP) that constitutes an analytical framework of this thesis. SFP is an instrument through which the EU exercises its structural power towards third countries. The aim of this thesis is to provide an analysis and critique of the EU's SFP towards Maghreb. The region has been chosen as the subject of our analysis since despite a long term and continuous effort since 1990s the EU has largely failed to effectively exercise its structural power in the region.

Bibliografický záznam VLACH, Michael. Evropské ekonomické vládnutí - možnost nebo nutnost? Praha, 2011. 95 s. Diplomová práce (Mgr.) Univerzita Karlova, Fakulta sociálních věd, Institut mezinárodních studií. Katedra západoevropských studií. Vedoucí diplomové práce Prof. Ing. Luděk Urban, CSC., Jean Monnet Professor Abstract Diploma Thesis "European Economic Governance - an option or the necessity?" deals with the current debate on the reform of European economic governance (EEG). It focuses on the genesis of the pre-crisis European economic governance, primarily on the Economic and Monetary Union, and on the performance of the EMU and the features of EEG before and during the crisis. It investigates the issues and challenges that arisen largely from the aftermath of the crisis such as imbalances on the Internal Market due to serious competitiveness issues between the Member States, lack of crisis management, financial supervision etc. The common cause of these problems, the insufficient economic governance is identified having source largely in the original design of EMU which was adopted largely for economic reasons but contemporary political limits restrained the Economic union and macroeconomic coordination provisions thus enabling the current situation. In the final part the proposed and implemented...

European Union faced several external challenges in the beginning of the 21st century. Its enlargement to 24 member states led to a state of dissimilar and not well interconnected economies in need of a new model of external competitiveness. Finding the model and, more importantly, delivering it on community level, was a new task of the European Commission, especially after re-launch of the Lisbon strategy in 2005. Yet, there was another challenge for EU that was not so easy to address by the Commission: the relative weakening of EU's external economic action comparing to new increasingly assertive policies of other international players, especially BRICs. Was it possible for the Commission focus only on supporting EU competitiveness without any external action, as was expected by articles of the Treaty of Nice? As the thesis argues, indeed there was an external action of the Commission before the Lisbon treaty, through its public support of SME internationalization within the Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme (CIP). A neoinstitutional analysis of the issues on two levels is carried out: Firstly on the level of European institutions (motives, relevant contexts and institutional rules), secondly, on the level of secondary actors (SMEs, NGOs, CIP executive agency EACI), where the...

The criminal justice as well as the persons participating in criminal proceedings, they both are currently facing number of newly posed challenges and unanswered questions so far, due to the onward going integration of the European Union and much closer cooperation of the Member States, in the field of the Procedural Criminal Law. There have been established many new institutions within the field of the European Union in last few years and there were adopted many legal tools which directly influence the cooperation between the judicial and police authorities of individual countries. In connection with newly emerging forms of the crime and more coherent cooperation of the perpetrators of severe crime, the relevant authorities at the union level as well as at the national level encounter situations not being resolved at all, or which are specified by theoretical standards only and have not been put into practice yet. Due to the diversity and abundance of the legal tools and institutions which interfere the criminal law sphere without adjusting their mutual cooperation or without having sorted out the priority of application in many cases, the author of this thesis considers as an appropriate to have such comprehensive view to this relevant issue introduced to the specialized public, as well as having...

L’État membre de l’Union européenne a longtemps été occulté des études de droit communautaire, devenu droit de l’Union européenne. Seule l’adaptation interne de l’État était étudiée. Le « retour de l’État » marqué par le traité de Lisbonne invite cependant à penser la place que ce droit accorde à l’État membre. Ce dernier s’intègre en effet dans un ensemble normatif qui comprend un panel de droits et d’obligations réglant les modalités de son appartenance et de sa participation à l’Union européenne. L’étude de cet ensemble normatif, du point de vue de l’ordre juridique de l’Union, permet alors d’identifier deux sous-ensembles, l’un concernant l’appartenance de l’État à l’Union principalement maîtrisé par ce dernier, l’autre concernant sa participation institutionnelle à la production et l’exécution du droit de l’Union, par lequel l’Union instrumentalise l’État membre afin d’assurer l’effectivité de son droit et d’affirmer l’autonomie de son ordre juridique. / Until recently, European studies did not consider the Member State of the European Union. It has mainly been studied from a national point of view. However, the Lisbon treaty suggests that the Member State is not as neglected by European Union law as one could think. The European Union legal order includes a diversity of rights and duties concerning the membership and the participation of the Member State to the European Union. The norms concerning its membership are controlled by the Member State, while the norms concerning its participation are used by the European Union in order to ensure the effectivity and the autonomy of the European legal order.

In dieser Arbeit werden vier zwischen 1712 und 1755 entstandene Kritiken von Leibniz’ Optimismus-Lehre der ‚besten aller möglichen Welten‘, wie diese in der Theodizee (1710) vorgestellt wird, dargestellt und kritisch untersucht. Nach der Meinung etlicher Kommentatoren wurde Leibniz’ philosophischer Optimismus erst nach dem Erdbeben von Lissabon 1755 und Voltaires Angriffen zum Ziel gewichtiger Kritiken seitens Philosophen und Theologen. Gegen dieses geläufige Bild zeigt diese Dissertation, dass jene Kritiken sehr bald nach der Veröffentlichung der Theodizee kamen, und dass zentrale Thesen des Leibniz’schen Optimismus schon in der ersten Hälfte des 18. Jh. Gegenstand philosophiegeschichtlich bedeutender Polemiken waren. Es wird gezeigt, dass die Kritik an Leibniz’ Gottesbegriff – der in dieser Arbeit als ‚intellektualistisch‘ bezeichnet wird – eine fundamentale Rolle spielt, und dass ein beträchtlicher Teil des Konflikts zwischen dem Optimismus und dem frühen ‚Gegen-Optimismus‘ durch den Konflikt zwischen Intellektualismus und Voluntarismus erklärt werden kann. / This work describes and examines four critical reviews, all of them written between 1712 and 1755, of Leibniz’s theory of optimism or the system of ‘the best of all possible worlds’, as it is presented in the Theodicy (1710). Several commentators state that the first important criticisms of Leibnizian philosophical optimism by philosophers and theologians came only after the Lisbon Earthquake of 1755 and Voltaire’s subsequent attacks. In opposition to this standard picture, this dissertation shows that criticisms emerged very soon after the publication of Theodicy, and that central theses of Leibniz’s optimism were already the target of significant philosophical criticisms in the first half of the eighteenth century. Furthermore, it is demonstrated that the criticism of Leibniz’s concept of God – a concept described here as ‘intellectualist’ – plays a fundamental role, and that a considerable part of the conflict between optimism and early ‘counter-optimism’ can be explained by referring to the conflict between intellectualism and voluntarism.

Submitted by SBI Biblioteca Digital (sbi.bibliotecadigital@puc-campinas.edu.br) on 2017-03-24T17:26:42Z No. of bitstreams: 1 HENRIQUE REZENDE DE CASTRO.pdf: 3998674 bytes, checksum: 512f0552445e945597fd7f2a5cfde508 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-03-24T17:26:42Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 HENRIQUE REZENDE DE CASTRO.pdf: 3998674 bytes, checksum: 512f0552445e945597fd7f2a5cfde508 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2017-02-08 / Coordena??o de Aperfei?oamento de Pessoal de N?vel Superior - CAPES / Metropolitan territories constitute, in the world urban system, fundamental support for the capitalist mode of production and accumulation. Metropolitan management, whose main agent is the State, appears as an important tool to exercise control over the land use planning of such territories, since the state political institutions - government and public administration - would operate under permanent pressure of the interests of capital. Based on this premise, it is assumed that a highly coercive management model would prevail in the sense of centralizing decision by the state apparatus and imposing an agenda of public policies that would favor the production and appropriation of the territory by economic agents. In order to make possible a classification of the existing types of metropolitan management, an analysis instrument was created based on a referential frame with the different types according to the characteristics of the political process of the management. Two case studies were then selected for application of the proposed methodology: the management of the Metropolitan Area of Lisbon, in Portugal, and the metropolitan regions of the state of S?o Paulo, both chosen for the particularities they present in different contexts and for the possibility of comparing the types found. Based on these cases, the aim was to demonstrate the tendency to prevail the coercive model in the contemporary metropolitan management, to the detriment of a territorial cohesion model, which would operate towards a more democratic management, with an agenda based on the reduction of socioeconomic inequalities, which are expressed more severely in the metropolitan territories. / Os territ?rios metropolitanos constituem, no sistema urbano mundial, suporte fundamental para o modo de produ??o e de acumula??o capitalista. A gest?o metropolitana, cujo principal agente ? o Estado, surge como importante ferramenta para exercer o controle sobre o ordenamento de tais territ?rios, uma vez que as institui??es pol?ticas estatais ? governo e administra??o p?blica ? operariam sob permanente press?o dos interesses do capital. Com base nessa premissa, sup?e-se que prevaleceria atualmente um modelo de gest?o marcadamente coercitivo, no sentido da centraliza??o decis?ria pelo aparelho estatal e na imposi??o de uma agenda de pol?ticas p?blicas que favoreceriam prioritariamente a produ??o e a apropria??o do territ?rio pelos agentes econ?micos. De modo a viabilizar uma classifica??o dos tipos existentes de gest?o metropolitana, criou-se um instrumento de an?lise baseado em um quadro referencial com os diferentes tipos segundo as caracter?sticas do processo pol?tico da gest?o. Foram ent?o selecionados dois estudos de caso para aplica??o da metodologia proposta: a gest?o da ?rea Metropolitana de Lisboa, em Portugal, e das regi?es metropolitanas do estado de S?o Paulo, ambos escolhidos pelas particularidades que apresentam em contextos diferentes e pela possibilidade de compara??o dos tipos de gest?o encontrados. Com base nesses casos, procurou-se ent?o demonstrar a tend?ncia de prevalecer o modelo coercitivo na gest?o metropolitana contempor?nea, em detrimento de um modelo de coes?o territorial, que operaria no sentido de uma gest?o mais democr?tica, com uma agenda pautada pela diminui??o das desigualdades socioecon?micas, que se expressam com maior gravidade nos territ?rios metropolitanos.

Pour contrer la menace de la criminalité organisée qui ne se cesse de se développer en devenant l’un des plus graves enjeux au sein de l’UE, les États membres se trouvent dans l’obligation de renforcer la coopération pénale contre celle-ci. Avec le traité de Maastricht puis la création de l’ELSJ par le traité d’Amsterdam dont la lutte contre la criminalité organisée constitue le moteur essentiel, les États membres expriment leur volonté pour s’organiser les actions et s’unir contre les menaces de la criminalité organisée. Toutefois, ces deux phases ont montré l’ineffectivité de la répression ; la paralysie et beaucoup de faiblesses. Avec son entrée en vigueur en 2009, le traité de Lisbonne commence une nouvelle ère de la lutte contre la criminalité organisée au sein de l’ELSJ. Cependant, même en intégrant ses avancées, il n’amorce pas la rationalisation nécessaire du cadre juridique qu’institutionnel de l’ELSJ contre la criminalité organisée. Des fortes crises que l’UE et l’ELSJ ont connues posent des questions sur la confiance nationale dans cet espace et cette union. La présente thèse cherche à identifier le rôle actuel et futur de l’UE en matière pénale contre la criminalité organisée au sein d’un espace où la libre circulation est le principe. Le rôle attendu ne peut se réaliser réellement qu’à travers d’un système pénal autonome où l’UE a la main forte à l’appliquer dans un climat de confiance et le respect des droits fondamentaux ; des systèmes juridiques d’États membres et leur souveraineté nationale. Dans cette perspective, une modification radicale qui touche à la nature de l’UE et son rôle sera indispensable. Mais qui a la volonté de faire la révolution ? / To counter the threat of organized crime, which is constantly growing and becoming one of the most serious issues in the European Union, member states are under an obligation to strengthen penal cooperation against it. With the Maastricht Treaty, and the creation of the area of freedom, security and justice by Amsterdam Treaty, of which the fight against organized crime is the essential driving force, the Member States express their will to organize their actions and unite against the threats of organized crime. However, these phases have shown the ineffectiveness of the repression; paralysis and a lot of weaknesses. With its entry into force in 2009, Lisbon Treaty begins a new era in the fight against organized crime within the AFSJ. However, even in integrating its progress, it does not initiate the necessary rationalization of the institutional legal framework of the AFSJ against organized crime. Strong crises that the EU and the AFSJ have experienced raise questions about national confidence in this area and the EU. This thesis seeks to identify the current and future role of the European Union within a space where free movement is the principle. The expected role can only really be achieved through an autonomous criminal system where the EU has a strong ability in applying it in a climate of trust and respect for fundamental rights; legal systems of member states and their national sovereignty. In this perspective, a radical change that concerns the nature of the EU will be essential. But who has the will to make the revolution?

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.