201 |
FN-stadgan och Europarätten : En studie av fallet Somaliasvenskarna och de mänskliga rättigheterna beträffande genomförandet i EU av säkerhetsrådets resolutioner om intelligenta sanktionerDenikson, Daniel January 2007 (has links)
Vilket rättssystem har enligt folkrätten företräde vid konflikt mellan folkrätten från FN, Europakonventionen och gemen-skapsrätten, beträffande giltigheten av säkerhetsrådets resolutioner för bekämpande av den internationella terrorismen, i förhållande till mänskliga rättigheter? Säkerhetsrådets resolutioner har ändrat karaktär när det gäller att bekämpa världens terrorism. Genom så kallade intelligenta sanktioner är säkerhetsrådets mål nu att frysa egendom för enskilda individer och företag, utan att de drabbade har någon rätt till rättvis rättegång, efter att dessa svartlistats som knutna till terroristorganisationer. Svartlistningen sker på mer eller mindre godtyckliga grunder som inte finner stöd inom folkrättens regler om jus cogens och säkerhetsrådet har förklarat att i kampen mot terrorismen är det nu tillåtet att med alla medel slå tillbaka hot mot fred och säkerhet. Mänskliga rättigheter utvecklades inom FN och dess stadga tillkom före Europakonventionen och torde i princip ha företräde framför konventionen och Europadomstolens praxis, vid tillämpning av principen lex posterior derogat priori. Dock har det tillskapats ett rättssystem av nytt slag (sui generis) inom gemenskaps-rätten, med ett starkare skydd för mänskliga rättigheter; i synnerhet egendomsrätten och rätten till rättvis domstolsprövning. Vid tillämpning av principen lex specialis legi generali derogat, torde dessa regler ha företräde framför de generella reglerna från FN. EG-domstolens förstainstansrätt har i fallet Somaliasvenskarna (T-306/01) förklarat sig själv och unionen som bunden av FN:s stadga och säkerhetsrådets resolutioner och därmed åsidosatt egendomsskyddet och rätten till rättvis rättegång för unionsmedborgare. I fallet går rätten emot tidigare praxis från EG-domstolen, genom att förklara unionen som bunden av FN-stadgan och genom att tilldela EU-rådet en kompetens som inte står att utläsa i fördragen. En oroväckande fråga är vilka rättigheter som kommer att inskränkas framledes. För framtiden bör unionen sätta en tydlig gräns för när de mänskliga rättigheter som man under så lång tid byggt upp skall kunna inskränkas. Medlemsstaterna bör anta en gemensam ståndpunkt där man deklarerar att gemenskapens grundläggande rättigheter och friheter inte kan inskränkas på godtyckliga grunder.
|
202 |
FÖRESTÄLLNINGAR OCH INTRESSEN : En fallstudie utifrån Advocacy Coalition Framework av en lokal policyprocess om expropriationBlomqvist, Fredrik January 2016 (has links)
This paper examines the viability of the Advocacy Coalition Framework(ACF) by applying it in a single case study. The aim is to advance the framework’s theoretical understanding of the policy process and its usefulness for analyzing local policy contexts. The case addressed is a long-spun policy conflict regarding the use of compulsory acquisition of real estate by a Swedish municipality for the sake of local business development. Analyzed data consisted of the municipality diary on the issue, correspondence between actors, public statements, official and internal documents and interviews with actors and non-actors. The ACF is a good starting point for understanding this local policy process, largely because of the great flexibility of its concepts. However, its basic assumptions on beliefs cannot fully explain observed events. Relating to this, the paper has five main findings. First, although beliefs play an important role in forming policy action, so does interests. Second, a conjunction of beliefs and self-interest is an important condition for some actors’ actions. Third, coalition formation is not dependent on similarity of beliefs but on similarity of policy objectives. Fourth, policy objectives are resultant of beliefs for some actors, of self-interest for others and for yet others the result of both. Therefore, actors in coalition act to achieve the same policy objectives but not necessarily for the same reasons. Fifth, one non-actor refrained from policy action in spite of strong policy core beliefs due to the policy process not being a zero sum game for this non-actor. This paper supports recent studies proposing the incorporation of interests into the ACF. For further development of the ACF the paper suggests further research to answer two generic questions: What is the relationship betweeninterests and beliefs? Are potential actors more likely to take policy action inzero sum game policy processes? For the ACF to cope with certain conditionsin local contexts the paper suggest further research into the question: Is the level of abstraction of policy issues key in understanding the involvement of legal and natural persons and their basis for policy action?
|
203 |
De grundläggande rättsprinciperna vid direktupphandling : HFD 2018 ref. 60 och EU-rätten / The General Principles of Swedish Direct Awards : HFD 2018 ref. 60 and EU LawLignell, Elias January 2022 (has links)
This thesis examines the general principles in European Union (EU) public procurement law, as they apply to Swedish direct awards of low value, outside the scope of the EU procurement directives. A combination of Swedish and EU legal methodology is used to investigate two overarching themes. Firstly, the two different legal bases of the general principles, in the light of the Court of Justice of the EU’s definition of cross-border interest, as well as the Swedish implementation. Secondly, the central substantive consequences imposed by the principles on direct awards. The only national precedent on the subject, HFD 2018 ref. 60 of the Supreme Administrative Court, is both utilised and criticised against the backdrop of EU law to paint a picture of the principles’ inner workings in a direct award context. Pertaining to the first theme, an analysis of the applicability of EU primary law on direct awards is undertaken in order to distinguish the legal bases of the principles. If a contract is of certain cross-border interest, the general principles flow directly from EU law. In the absence of such an interest, the principles are exclusively based in Swedish law, which nationally extends the EU principles to all procurement (gold-plating). Overall, contracts valued below a quarter of the applicable EU directive threshold usually lack certain cross-border interest, unless there are concrete indications of the opposite. As a result, most direct awards fall outside the scope of EU law. An awareness of the legal bases of the principles is relevant to avoid breaches of EU primary law. It is argued that the Swedish gold-plated implementation of the general principles causes unnecessary uncertainty, and that separate national principles should be introduced outside the scope of EU primary law. As for the second theme, a thorough analysis concludes that the principles do not prohibit direct awards given without any exposure to competition, as long as the contracts are of low enough value. Direct awards can therefore be conducted through direct contact with a single supplier, in accordance with the legislative aims of the procedure. This may not be the case for social and other specific services of relatively high value. Nonetheless, the principles still affect direct awards, for instance in prohibiting flagrant cases of differential treatment without objective justification, based in arbitrary or corrupt decision-making. Unfortunately, these requirements are able to be circumvented due to the wide discretion given to procuring entities. On the other hand, if a direct award procedure is voluntarily advertised, the principles have greater practical significance. Still, the requirements in such cases are more lenient than in ordinary procurement procedures.
|
Page generated in 0.0235 seconds