The thesis tries to provide an answer to the problem of tax avoidance. For this purpose a reinterpretation of taxes as practices of mutual recognition is defended. The conception of taxation and tax law defended in the thesis contrast sharply to the merely instrumental or functional conceptions of taxation and tax law that dominates today’s common understanding of taxation and tax law. The thesis lays out the basis for a new general theory of tax law, but does not develop in detail each of the elements of such a theory. The thesis first lays out the problem by analysing different definitions of tax avoidance, tax evasion, and tax planning, as well as their shortcomings. From that discussion, it emerges that the ways in which tax avoidance has been conceptualised are not only unclear but they also fail to produce any relevant insight into the problem of tax avoidance. The thesis then relates those shortcomings to what it calls the classical paradigm of tax law, which leads, in turn, to the contemporary general theory of tax law. A combination of these conceptions – of the substance (function) and form of tax law – explains that the structure of tax law is based on a conception of the obligation to pay taxes in which there is space for tax avoidance. The thesis argues that, in doing so, the purpose of tax law is defeated. Recent alternatives to the contemporary general theory are also analysed and critically evaluated. The second part of the thesis develops the positive aspect of the argument, in three connected moves. First, an argument is provided to prove that both liberal egalitarian and luck egalitarian theories of justice are not able to offer an answer to tax avoidance because they consider taxes and tax law to be mere instruments for redistribution. Second, a substantive reinterpretation of taxation as a practice with an internal good is presented, in which mutual recognition is defended as taxation’s internal good. Finally, an argument for the thesis that the best possible understanding of tax law requires us to interpret it as a teleological institution is provided. With this positive programme, the thesis aims at providing a superior alternative to the merely instrumental conception of taxation and tax law that derives from the classical paradigm presented at the outset. Its superiority is evidenced by the fact that the alternative provided can offer us the conceptual resources to understand the problem of tax avoidance and hence of what tax law is about.

The European Arrest Warrant (EAW) is the first and most important measure in the field of European criminal law for the purpose of implementation of the principle of mutual recognition of judicial decisions. The Framework Decision which introduced it was adopted on 13 June 2002 following point 35 of the Conclusions of the Tampere European Council of 15-16 October 1999 (aiming at abolishing the formal extradition procedure among the Member States of the European Union). The Warrant is a judicial decision issued by a Member State, which requires the arrest and surrender of a person by another Member State, for the purposes of conducting a criminal prosecution or executing a custodial sentence or detention order. It is issued when the person whose return is sought is accused of an offence for which the law establishes a maximum of at least one year in prison, or when the person has already been sentenced to a prison term of at least four months. The research aims at exploring the context in which the EAW was adopted, as part of the mutual recognition agenda. This will be done through an analysis of the substantive and procedural legal aspects of its implementation. Is mutual recognition correctly implemented? While some authors hail it as a giant leap towards a new system of inter-state judicial cooperation, others view it as a danger for the traditional principles of criminal law as developed in Europe in the last centuries. The thesis will look at the functioning of the EAW in the EU criminal law area and at its implications for national sovereignty as well as individual rights, with particular reference to the radical modification of the principles of classical extradition law. An evaluation of its effectiveness and its real importance will be carried out from both an international and a European law point of view.

Mutual recognition versus harmonization - development and perspectives of the criminal law in the EU Abstract The criminal law, which stood away from the attention of the mainstream European integration process for a long time, is at present considered one of the fastest growing spheres of the Union law. The thesis focuses in 8 chapters on the development and perspectives of the criminal law in the EU by analysing two main forms of the development of the member states' cooperation in this area, which are mutual recognition and harmonization. After an introductory part the second and third chapters at first pursue historical roots of the member states' cooperation in the area of the criminal law and the description and justification of the current legal framework of the EU criminal law, which has been set up by the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty in 2009. The key notions this thesis focuses on are the principle of mutual recognition and harmonization, therefore a comprehensive chapter deals with each of these terms (chapter four with mutual recognition, chapter five with harmonization). The chapter about mutual recognition points out to its origin, grounds for the use of the principle of mutual recognition in the criminal area, centres at its basic characteristics and mutual trust as a central notion...

<p>The European union started as an area of economic cooperation, but has developed into an area of cooperation in many legal fields. There are these days even cooperation when it comes to dealing with criminals. There is a new procedure called the European arrest warrant which goal is to make the extradition of criminals between the different member states in the European union more efficient. Sometimes when a state receives a European arrest warrant they have to extradite the person in question without doing any investigation of their own. The procedure is based on the principle of mutual recognition. This principle means that the member states should recognise the legal decisions of the other member states, as they were their own. The aim of the thesis is to see if this procedure is acceptable concerning the legal security. Will the procedure with the European arrest warrant effect the legal security for the suspects, or the rest of the citizens?</p>

The aim of this thesis is to identify some of the obstacles to trade, that occurs on the common market, and to analyse the errors that still occurs in the national authorities application of the principle of mutual recognition. Is the principle of mutual recognition sufficient for the creation of a common market, or is there a need for additional measures to cope with the obstacles to trade that still exists on the common market? The problems related to the incorrect procedures of the national authorities and the fact that undertakings prefer to bring their products in to line with the rules of every single member state must be solved, if the principle of mutual recognition is to become trustworthy. On some areas, harmonisation ought to be chosen above the principle of mutual recognition, but in other cases an increased administrative collaboration, mandatory training for the national authorities or information campaigns intended mainly for undertakings could be the answer. The possibility to help undertakings to sue member states for damages should also be investigated. If these problems are solved, the principle of mutual recognition, in addition to harmonisation, could become an excellent tool for the upholding of the free movement of goods in the common market.

The European union started as an area of economic cooperation, but has developed into an area of cooperation in many legal fields. There are these days even cooperation when it comes to dealing with criminals. There is a new procedure called the European arrest warrant which goal is to make the extradition of criminals between the different member states in the European union more efficient. Sometimes when a state receives a European arrest warrant they have to extradite the person in question without doing any investigation of their own. The procedure is based on the principle of mutual recognition. This principle means that the member states should recognise the legal decisions of the other member states, as they were their own. The aim of the thesis is to see if this procedure is acceptable concerning the legal security. Will the procedure with the European arrest warrant effect the legal security for the suspects, or the rest of the citizens?

<p>The aim of this thesis is to identify some of the obstacles to trade, that occurs on the common market, and to analyse the errors that still occurs in the national authorities application of the principle of mutual recognition. Is the principle of mutual recognition sufficient for the creation of a common market, or is there a need for additional measures to cope with the obstacles to trade that still exists on the common market? The problems related to the incorrect procedures of the national authorities and the fact that undertakings prefer to bring their products in to line with the rules of every single member state must be solved, if the principle of mutual recognition is to become trustworthy. On some areas, harmonisation ought to be chosen above the principle of mutual recognition, but in other cases an increased administrative collaboration, mandatory training for the national authorities or information campaigns intended mainly for undertakings could be the answer. The possibility to help undertakings to sue member states for damages should also be investigated. If these problems are solved, the principle of mutual recognition, in addition to harmonisation, could become an excellent tool for the upholding of the free movement of goods in the common market.</p>

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / From a phenomenological perspective, is investigated the ethical concepts of alterity and mutual recognition in the work of Paul Ricoeur. In the first place, it s shown that, after pointing out the central role of the other in the Aristotelian concept of friendship and the second formulation of Kantian s categorical imperative, Ricoeur suggests the practical wisdom as a point of balance between the teleological tendency and deontological. In the second place, based on the phenomenological approach, it is demonstrated that the radical polarization in terms ego and alter ego is invalid insofar that it does not lead the valorization of other's uniqueness. From the relationship between the ethic of respect and sympathy of the phenomenology, results that is necessary situate the historical character and anthropological of the alterity, firmed by the inherent conflicts in the struggle for recognition. Finally, it is evident that the struggle, the violence and the disregard are forms of recognition of someone that deny the alterity and conceal the desire for solitude through his death. As an alternative to the recognition for the struggle, is presented a model of peaceful recognition that is established through the generosity and gratitude, inherent of the dynamics of exchange of gifts. / Desde uma perspectiva fenomenológica, investigam-se os conceitos éticos de alteridade e de reconhecimento mútuo na obra de Paul Ricoeur. Em primeiro lugar, mostra-se que, depois de destacar o papel central do outro no conceito aristotélico de amizade e na segunda formulação do imperativo categórico kantiano, Ricoeur sugere a sabedoria prática como ponto de equilíbrio entre a tendência teleológica e a deontológica. Em segundo lugar, com base na abordagem fenomenológica, demonstra-se que a polarização radicalizada nos termos ego e alter ego é inválida na medida em que não leva à valorização da singularidade do outro. Da relação entre a ética do respeito e a fenomenologia da simpatia, resulta que é preciso situar o caráter histórico e antropológico da alteridade, firmado mediante os conflitos inerentes à luta pelo reconhecimento. Por último, evidencia-se que a luta, a violência e o desprezo constituem formas de reconhecimento do outro, que negam a alteridade e ocultam o desejo de solidão mediante a sua morte. Como alternativa ao reconhecimento pela luta, apresenta-se o modelo de reconhecimento pacífico que se estabelece por meio da generosidade e da gratidão, próprios da dinâmica da troca de dons.

Dans le cadre de la relation de soin, l'action soignante du prendre soin est souvent associée à la recherche de ce qui serait la juste distance professionnelle. Les problématiques habituelles de l'identification d'une limite objective opérant une séparation entre deux intériorités afin de garantir l'espace d'une intimité, relèvent d'une conception réductrice fondée sur une représentation où intériorité et extériorité s'excluent mutuellement. Le concept de tact relationnel, permet de sortir de cette impasse par le fait qu'il pose le problème sous l'angle d'un espace corporel qui se constitue dans une relation duale sans cesse réinventée dans un art du faire. Cette habileté tactilaire combinant un art pratique qui mobilise des savoirs et des manières d'être spécifiques, se fonde sur un sens esthétique (tactilairité) qui sait subtilement toucher les espaces de l'intériorité mouvante du soi. Elle parvient à appréhender l'aire de l'intime grâce à un art de l'appréciation de l'intouchable, par une plasticité des espaces symboliques du corps et par une activité de la pensée qui ne sauraient être dissociées. Ainsi le tact relationnel est moins en lien avec le toucher comme le suggère sa parenté étymologique et métaphorique avec le tact sensoriel, qu'avec la recherche habile et délicate d'une reconnaissance mutuelle au fondement des interactions intersubjectives dont le corps et sa gestuelle constituent le support le plus explicite. Le tact comporte ainsi des principes informels spécifiques qui ne peuvent se confondre avec les seules règles de la politesse / The concept of tact is usually associated with the idea of touching, which is the genuine etymology. However, relational tact concerns a very special aspect of touching, because it is a none physically touching act regarding a kind of attitude trying to preserve anyone from the humiliation of being taken as an object rather than as a subject. Healthcare relationships especially have to be examined thoroughly by the way of tact in order to understand the fundamental human need for respect hidden in tact. Different from politeness, tact is the specific art of respecting others without conventional and formalized rules. It needs a capacity of building an area in which the partnerships can find a mutual respect of each other. According to interactionism sociology tact is really a face work that needs an ability never really taught in medical studies. Thanks to interactionism we can emphasize the base of these relationship attitudes. They depend on the frame in which interactions take place. This area must be though together with other concepts because of the weakness of the former ones. So, tactilairity could translate the capacity of making an informal area in every meeting and especially in healthcare relationships. Tactilairian ability is one of the ways to efficiently succeed in pacified relationships

<p>Борба против најтежих облика прекограничног криминалитета захтевала је успостављање тешње сарадње између држава чланица Европске уније. У том циљу је установљен принцип узајамног признавања судских одлука, који се огледа у чињеници признавања и извршења страних судских одлука са што мање контроле и у кратком року, као да је у питању одлука домаћих правосудних органа. На основу овог принципа усвојен је велики број инструмената којима се остварује ближа сарадња парвосудних и полицијских органа држава чланица ЕУ и овај принцип операционализује у пракси.<br />Предмет докторске дисертације су управо ти савремени облици сарадње правосудних и полицијских органа у кривичним стварима на нивоу ЕУ који се реализују кроз примену принципа узајамног признавања и њихова усаглашеност са основним људским правима окривљеног лица. Предметна проблематика обухвата Европску унију, као територијални ентитет у оквиру којег је принцип узајамног признавања најразвијенији, кроз велики број инструмената који на њему почивају. Основни проблем који се јавља у вези са предметом дисертације је у успостављању баланса између потребе за безбедношћу и ефикасношћу кривичног поступка, ради којих је и установљен читав инструментаријум који ће се проучавати и међународно признатих људских права, која су у овом процесу занемарена, а све у циљу што веће сарадње и пуног међусобног поверења у кривичноправне системе држава чланица ЕУ.<br />Циљ истраживања предметне проблематике је настојањe да се укаже на досадашња достигнућа у овој области на нивоу ЕУ, идентификују проблеми који у овој области постоје, анализира положај окривљеног на нивоу ЕУ, стандарди заштите права окривљеног према Европској конвенцији о људским правима и пракси Европског суда за људска права. Као крајњи циљ жели се дати одговор на питање какав је положај окривљеног лица у поступцима пружања разних облика међународне правне помоћи у кривичним стварима на нивоу ЕУ у зависности од инструмената сарадње и да ли баланс између безбедности и заштите људских права на нивоу ЕУ постоји или како се може постићи.<br />VI<br />У раду је представљен принцип узајамног признавања и одабрана су четири инструмента која почивају на овом принципу, као типични представници: Европски налог за хапшење, Европски налог за спровођење истраге, Европски налог за вршење надзора и инструмент који регулише узајамно признавање мера пробације и алтернативних санкција. Анализом правних основа на којима почивају, стања имплементације у националним законодавствима и праксом примене, дошло се до сазнања о предностима и недостацима принципа узајамног признавања. Поред тога, уочен је велики пропуст твораца ових инструмената да заштите основна људска права окривљеног у кривичном поступку. Стога је приступљено анализи стања људских права окривљеног на нивоу ЕУ и могућих правних путева заштите права окривљеног у случају повреде права у поступку примене савремених облика институционалне сарадње у кривичним стварима. Осим ЕУ, нагласак је у раду стављен и на поступак пружања међународне правне помоћи у кривичним стварима по прописима Републике Србије и извршено је поређење са системом узајамног признавања који је на снази у ЕУ. У закључним разматрањима су изнети закључци спроведеног истраживања, предлози de lege ferenda за унапређење принципа узајамног признавања и положаја окривљеног на нивоу ЕУ, као и став о усаглашености потребе за ефикасношћу кривичног поступка на нивоу ЕУ и заштите основних људских права окривљеног.</p> / <p>Borba protiv najtežih oblika prekograničnog kriminaliteta zahtevala je uspostavljanje tešnje saradnje između država članica Evropske unije. U tom cilju je ustanovljen princip uzajamnog priznavanja sudskih odluka, koji se ogleda u činjenici priznavanja i izvršenja stranih sudskih odluka sa što manje kontrole i u kratkom roku, kao da je u pitanju odluka domaćih pravosudnih organa. Na osnovu ovog principa usvojen je veliki broj instrumenata kojima se ostvaruje bliža saradnja parvosudnih i policijskih organa država članica EU i ovaj princip operacionalizuje u praksi.<br />Predmet doktorske disertacije su upravo ti savremeni oblici saradnje pravosudnih i policijskih organa u krivičnim stvarima na nivou EU koji se realizuju kroz primenu principa uzajamnog priznavanja i njihova usaglašenost sa osnovnim ljudskim pravima okrivljenog lica. Predmetna problematika obuhvata Evropsku uniju, kao teritorijalni entitet u okviru kojeg je princip uzajamnog priznavanja najrazvijeniji, kroz veliki broj instrumenata koji na njemu počivaju. Osnovni problem koji se javlja u vezi sa predmetom disertacije je u uspostavljanju balansa između potrebe za bezbednošću i efikasnošću krivičnog postupka, radi kojih je i ustanovljen čitav instrumentarijum koji će se proučavati i međunarodno priznatih ljudskih prava, koja su u ovom procesu zanemarena, a sve u cilju što veće saradnje i punog međusobnog poverenja u krivičnopravne sisteme država članica EU.<br />Cilj istraživanja predmetne problematike je nastojanje da se ukaže na dosadašnja dostignuća u ovoj oblasti na nivou EU, identifikuju problemi koji u ovoj oblasti postoje, analizira položaj okrivljenog na nivou EU, standardi zaštite prava okrivljenog prema Evropskoj konvenciji o ljudskim pravima i praksi Evropskog suda za ljudska prava. Kao krajnji cilj želi se dati odgovor na pitanje kakav je položaj okrivljenog lica u postupcima pružanja raznih oblika međunarodne pravne pomoći u krivičnim stvarima na nivou EU u zavisnosti od instrumenata saradnje i da li balans između bezbednosti i zaštite ljudskih prava na nivou EU postoji ili kako se može postići.<br />VI<br />U radu je predstavljen princip uzajamnog priznavanja i odabrana su četiri instrumenta koja počivaju na ovom principu, kao tipični predstavnici: Evropski nalog za hapšenje, Evropski nalog za sprovođenje istrage, Evropski nalog za vršenje nadzora i instrument koji reguliše uzajamno priznavanje mera probacije i alternativnih sankcija. Analizom pravnih osnova na kojima počivaju, stanja implementacije u nacionalnim zakonodavstvima i praksom primene, došlo se do saznanja o prednostima i nedostacima principa uzajamnog priznavanja. Pored toga, uočen je veliki propust tvoraca ovih instrumenata da zaštite osnovna ljudska prava okrivljenog u krivičnom postupku. Stoga je pristupljeno analizi stanja ljudskih prava okrivljenog na nivou EU i mogućih pravnih puteva zaštite prava okrivljenog u slučaju povrede prava u postupku primene savremenih oblika institucionalne saradnje u krivičnim stvarima. Osim EU, naglasak je u radu stavljen i na postupak pružanja međunarodne pravne pomoći u krivičnim stvarima po propisima Republike Srbije i izvršeno je poređenje sa sistemom uzajamnog priznavanja koji je na snazi u EU. U zaključnim razmatranjima su izneti zaključci sprovedenog istraživanja, predlozi de lege ferenda za unapređenje principa uzajamnog priznavanja i položaja okrivljenog na nivou EU, kao i stav o usaglašenosti potrebe za efikasnošću krivičnog postupka na nivou EU i zaštite osnovnih ljudskih prava okrivljenog.</p> / <p>The fight against the hardest forms of cross-border crime required the establishment of a closer cooperation between the Member States of the European Union. In the light of that aim, the principle of mutual recognition of judicial decisions was established, which is reflected in the fact of recognition and enforcement of foreign court decisions with less control and in a short term, as if it was a decision of the national judicial authorities. On the basis of this principle a large number of instruments was adopted, which enable closer cooperation of judical and police authorities of the EU Member States and allow this principle to operate in practice.<br />The subject matter of the doctoral thesis are these modern forms of cooperation between judicial and police authorities in criminal matters at the EU level that are implemented through the application of the principle of mutual recognition and their compliance with fundamental human rights of the defendant. The subject matter also includes the European Union, as a territorial entity where the principle of mutual recognition is most developed, through a number of instruments that are based on it. The main problem that arises in connection with the subject matter of the dissertation is to establish a balance between the need for security and efficiency of the criminal proceedings for which the entire instrumentation to be studied was established and internationally recognized human rights, which are ignored in this process, all in order to achieve a greater cooperation and full mutual trust in the criminal justice systems of the EU Member States.<br />The aim of this research is in an attempt to highlight the previous achievements in this area at the EU level, identify the problems that exist in this field, analyze the position of the defendant at the level of EU and standards to protect the defendant&#39;s rights under the European Convention on Human Rights and according to the practise of the European Court of Human rights. The ultimate aim would be to provide an answer to the question concerning the position of the defendant in the proceedings of providing various forms of mutual legal assistance in criminal matters at the EU level, depending on the instruments of cooperation and whether there is balance between security and human rights protection at the EU level or how it may be achieved.<br />VIII<br />The paper presents the principle of mutual recognition and the following four instruments based on this principle, were selected as typical representatives: The European Arrest Warrant, The European Investigation Order, The European Supervision Order and an instrument that regulates mutual recognition of probation measures and alternative sanctions. By analysing the legal basis of this instruments, state of their implementation in national legislations and their enforcement in practise, we learned about the advantages and disadvantages of the principle of mutual recognition. In addition, a major failure was observed of the creators of these instruments to protect the basic human rights of the defendant in a criminal proceedings. Therefore, it was necessary to analyse the state of human rights of the defendant at the EU level and possible legal ways of protecting the rights of the defendant in case of infringement of rights in the process of the applying contemporary forms institutional cooperation in criminal matters. Besides the EU, the emphasis is put on the procedure of providing mutual legal assistance in criminal matters under the regulations of the Republic of Serbia and it was compared with the system of mutual recognition which is in force in the EU. In final considerations the conclusions of the research are presented, as well as the proposals de lege ferenda to improve the principle of mutual recognition and position of the defendant at the EU level, along with the opinion regarding the compliance of the need for effective criminal proceedings with the EU level protection of fundamental human rights of the defendant.</p>