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.

L’étude repose sur l’hypothèse que les aides d’État fiscales sont autonomes, se singularisant par rapport aux autres règles du droit fiscal de l’Union. Cela est dû au fait que la véritable nature de l’intégration, la véritable finalité du contrôle des aides fiscales, n’est pas facilement perceptible.Le régime des aides fiscales dépasse son cadre initial de contrôle des systèmes fiscaux pourintégrer celui d’élaboration de règles juridiques communes. Les autorités de l’Union, par le biais du régime des aides fiscales, contrôlent les systèmes fiscaux nationaux ; en même temps, elles parviennent à jouer un rôle important pour la coopération interétatique au regard de la lutte contrela concurrence fiscale dommageable. Plus important encore, elles réussissent à coordonner les systèmes fiscaux nationaux, procédant d’une instrumentalisation du contrôle des aides fiscales,contrôle étant conçu comme un succédané de l’harmonisation fiscale. La démonstration des finalités protéiformes de ce contrôle repose d’abord sur la méthode d’identification d’une aide fiscale, identification qui correspond aux finalités recherchées. La vérification de l’hypothèse initiale de singularisation des aides fiscales pose également la question de sa finalité. Ce contrôle est-il susceptible de façonner la structure même du droit fiscal de l’Union et, d’une manière plus substantielle, la répartition des compétences entre les autorités européennes et nationales ? Une technique comme celle du contrôle des aides fiscales peut-elle potentiellement contribuer à redéfinir la ligne de démarcation entre souveraineté fiscale des États membres et limitation tolérable de celle-ci par le droit de l’Union ? / This thesis is based on the premise that tax state aids differentiate themselves from other tax law related rules of the European Union. This is due to the fact that the true nature of the integration, the true purpose of the regulation of tax state aids, is not so easily discernible. The legal status oftax state aids outreaches its original scope—the scrutiny of fiscal systems—to integrate that of creation of common legal rules. The authorities of the Union, through the tax aids regime, monitor domestic tax systems; at the same time, they come to play an important role in the context of the interstate cooperation tackling harmful tax competition. More importantly, they manage to coordinate domestic tax systems as a result of the “instrumentalization” of the regulation of taxaids. The latter is then regarded as a substitute to tax harmonization. This manifestation of themultifarious objectives of tax state aids regulation is firstly based on the technique ofcharacterization of a tax aid, a characterization corresponding ultimately to the goals as expected.The proof of the initial hypothesis of the self-containment of tax aids raises the question of its purpose. Is this regulation likely to weave the very structure of Union tax law and, more substantially, the division of competences between European and domestic authorities? Is a technique like the one related to tax state aids regulation likely to contribute to redefining the dividing line between member States tax sovereignty and its tolerable limitation by Union law?

In 1948 the international community in reaction to the horrors of the holocaust sought to eradicate genocide forever by creating the 'Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide'. This Convention criminalised the preparation and act of genocide by international law, making all individuals accountable irrelevant of status or sovereignty. But the Convention has not been enough to deter the act of genocide from occurring again, and again, and again. Worst, the international community has been slow to react to cases of genocide. The problem with preventing and punishing genocide is hindered by the power and right of veto held by permanent members of the UNSC. The UNSC has been given the responsibility to maintain international peace and security and is the only entity that can mandate an intervention that overrides the principle of non-intervention. The aim of this thesis is to show that the veto has been a crucial factor in stopping the prevention of genocide, thus it is imperative that the veto change. This study argues that to effectively prevent and punish genocide the veto needs to be barred from use in cases of genocide. It looks at different cases since the Armenian genocide during WWI through to the Darfur genocide which is still in process. The case of Armenia is significant because for the first time, members of the international community were prepared to hold leaders of another state accountable for their treatment of their own citizens. However the collective will to bring justice to those accountable waned coming to an abrupt end in 1923. The holocaust followed in WWII; six million Jews died, and numerous other groups were targeted under the Nazi's serial genocide. The shock of the holocaust led to the Genocide Convention. But thirty years later during the Cold War, Cambodia became embroiled in a genocide perpetrated by the Khmer Rouge. The international community silently stood by. The USSR, China, and the US all had their reasons to stay out of Cambodia, from supporting a regime with a likeminded political ideology to war weariness from Vietnam. In the 1990s, genocides in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia (Bosnia and Kosovo) followed. The former was neglected by the US's unwillingness to be involved in another peacekeeping disaster. The two genocides in the former Yugoslavia were affected by Russia and China's reluctance to use military force even after the clear failure of serial negotiations. Finally, in 2003 Darfur became the latest tragedy of genocide. Again, Russia and China have been timid of calling the conflict genocide thus avoiding any affirmative action to stop it. These cases all show that where one state is unwilling to be involved in stopping genocide, their right and power to the veto stops or delays the international community from preventing and punishing genocide, regardless of whether the veto is used or merely seen as a threat. Therefore, for future prevention of genocide, the veto needs to be changed to prevent its use in times of genocide.

歐洲聯盟共有27個會員國，克羅埃西亞將於2013年成為第28個歐盟會員國，歐洲聯盟自1952年成立後，已替歐洲帶來了半世紀的和平、穩定及發展，並榮獲2012年度諾貝爾和平獎，在第二次世界大戰後的重建工作及在1989年柏林圍牆倒下後，長期擔任團結凝聚歐洲、促進和平、和解、民主及人權的角色，除發行歐洲單一貨幣歐元外，並逐步建立歐洲單一市場，撤除歐盟內部邊界，讓人員、商品、服務和資金能自由流動，卻也導致非法移民可利用其邊境管制的疏忽而進入歐盟境內，造成歐洲各國的社會治安問題。不論是合法移民或非法移民，「移民」對歐洲聯盟各國的社會治安、種族文化及民族融合確實帶來不可小覷的影響，隨著歐盟內部人員可以自由在各國間移動，歐洲聯盟各會員國開始重視移民政策，穩定歐盟內部安全、加強歐盟外部邊界管制及打擊非法移民也日益重要，移民已經不再只是單一國內的問題，它廣泛的牽涉到跨國移民問題的類型，歐盟各國除將移民問題提高到歐盟層次的議題上，共同協商統籌規劃更詳盡的移民政策外，並成立歐盟外部邊境巡防協調管理局，共同管理歐盟外部邊境安全，透過結合各國的警力，提高邊境管制和緝捕的效力，改善非法移民或難民所產生的問題（例如跨國犯罪、毒品、人口販賣等），以達遏止非法移民入境的效果。本文將透過瞭解歐盟移民政策制定的發展過程及因素，藉以窺探歐洲移民政策目前現況，並透過研析其政策內容及成立歐盟外部邊境巡防協調管理局之政策法源，探討歐盟外部邊境巡防協調管理局於歐盟移民政策實際執行面上扮演之角色、功能與其重要性，以了解歐盟外部邊境安全共同管理之成效。 / European Union is composed of 27 member states. Croatia will become the 28th of the Europe Union (EU) member state in 2013. The European Union established in 1952 has brought Europe peace, stability and development for fifty years, and was awarded the 2012 Nobel Peace Prize. During the period of the post-World War II reconstruction and the fall of the Berlin wall in 1989, the EU serves as an important role to bring Europe together and to promote peace, reconciliation, democracy and human rights. The creation of European single currency and the formation of single market develop the free flow of goods, services and capital around the EU. However, it raises security issues while illegal immigrants exploit freedom of movement within the EU. Whether legal immigrants or illegal immigrants do bring underestimated impact on security and cultural and ethical integration issues. With the free movement of people within the EU, the member states have started to focus on the immigration policy in order to stabilize the internal security, to enhance the control of the external border and to fight against illegal immigration. Immigration issues are no longer just single domestic problems, but it is widely involved in the type of transnational migration. The EU member states see immigration issues at the EU level and coordinate the planning of the immigration policy, and establish the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union (Frontex) to co-manage the EU external border security. The support of the national police force to improve the effectiveness of border control and the warrant of arrest ease the problem of illegal immigrants or refugees (such as transnational crime, drugs, human trafficking, etc.) to achieve the effect of curbing illegal immigration. This paper observes the current situation of the European immigration policy based on the study on the development of EU immigration policy-making process and factors. Through the analysis of policy and the law and treaties of founding the Frontex, this paper also examines the role and function of Frontex on the implementation of the EU immigration policy to understand the effectiveness of the co-management of the EU external border security.

Aux lendemains des indépendances, les Etats de l’Afrique de l’Ouest ont constitués entre eux des organisations d’intégration économique dans le but de favoriser leur développement économique et social.Ces organisations conçues pour la plupart à partir du modèle Européen dispose d’une personnalité juridique autonome et d’un corps de règles propres ayant vocation à s’insérer de façon uniforme dans l’ordre juridique interne des différents Etats membres. Le fonctionnement harmonieux de ce système suppose l’existence d’un organe indépendant chargé, entre autres, de veiller à l’équilibre général du dispositif et d’assurer une interprétation uniforme des normes communautaires.Dans le cadre de l’UEMOA comme de La CEDEAO, cette fonction de protection est exercée par des organes juridictionnels intégrés dont la mission principale consiste à veiller au respect du droit dans l’interprétation et dans l’application des Traités constitutifs.L’objectif visé, à travers cette contribution, est de faire observer que le dispositif de protection mis en place fonctionne, d’une part, par les mécanismes de coopération institués entre les cours de justice et les autres composantes du système communautaire et d’autre part par le contrôle juridictionnel exercé sur les organes communautaires et les Etats membres. / After being freed from colonization, the West African States have set up commonly economic integration organizations to promote their economic and social development.The creation of the majority of those organizations is based on the European example and they have an independent legal personality and a body with specific rules in charge of integrating uniformly the internal legal environment of the different Member States.The harmonious functioning of the system requires, among others, the existence of an independent structure designed to take control of the general balance organization and achieve a uniform interpretation of the Community norms. Within the framework of the WAEMU as well as in the ECOWAS, this protective function is delegated to integrated judicial bodies whose main mission consists in making sure that a submission to the law related to the interpretation and compliance with Treaties is effective.The goal of such a contribution is to point out that the settled protection device is functioning, on the one hand, by the cooperation mechanisms introduced by justice courts and the other components of the Community system and, on the other hand, by the judicial control over the community structures and the Member States.

Cette étude repose sur l’hypothèse selon laquelle, de l’adoption de la constitution fédérale à la Première Guerre Mondiale, l’expansion territoriale des États-Unis d’Amérique, de même que le projet fédéral, ont appelé une « construction » des règles et principes du droit international au sein même des frontières américaines. Car, en 1789 déjà, tant les États-Unis,que les États membres de la Fédération ou les Nations indiennes, revendiquent sur tout ou partie de cet espace la souveraineté que reconnaît le droit international à tout « État ». C’est alors en définissant, en aménageant, en repensant, les notions d’ « État » ou de « souveraineté » sur un territoire, les conditions de détention et de formation d’un titre territorial, ou encore en fixant la valeur juridique interne du droit international, que ces revendications seront – ou non –satisfaites. Fondé sur l’analyse de la pratique, de la doctrine et de la jurisprudence américaines durant le « long XIXe siècle », ce travail a ainsi pour objet d’interroger la question du territoire telle qu’elle se pose au sein de cet « État fédéral » territorialement souverain que constitueraient les États-Unis. Il espère ce faisant mettre au jour des constructions du droit international dont l’actualité tient à leur objet : la question du territoire aux États-Unis entre 1789 et 1914interroge en effet les principales notions et problématiques de ce droit – au premier rang desquelles celle de l’articulation spatiale des compétences. / This study is based upon the hypothesis that, from the entry into force of the federal constitution to the First World War, the United States territorial expansion, as well as the federal project, called for a « construction » of international law’s rules and principles within the American boundaries. It is to be remembered that, in 1789, the United States, the member States and the Indian Nations claimed for themselves, on parts or the whole of that space, the sovereignty that every « State » is entitled to according to international law. It is therefore by defining, adapting, or rethinking the notions of « State » or « territorial sovereignty », the conditions required for a territorial title to be held or formed, and by setting the legal status of international law, that those claims have been enforced – or not. Grounded upon the analysis of the American doctrine, practice and case law, the purpose of this study is thus to inquire about territorial issues as raised within what is usually described as a « federal State », sovereign on its territory. Because those issues, and mainly jurisdictional ones, are fundamental to international law, this work hopes to bring to light constructions of international law which are still relevant today.

This PhD thesis aims at exploring price convergence in the European Union with a particular emphasis paid to the Czech Republic and new EU member states. Fundamental issues are discussed in the first chapter, starting with the notion and term `convergence' since many alternative definitions have been proposed in the literature. Apart from that, main indicators utilized when investigating price convergence are defined (for example purchasing power parity/purchasing power standard, PPP/PPS, comparative price level, CPL) and a brief review of the literature is added. The second chapter deals with several issues accompanying price convergence in general and in transforming countries in particular such as the club convergence hypothesis, issues of tradability, availability of datasets and their strenghts and weaknesses, the link between price levels and rates of inflation, and determinants. Both `standard' and `modern' approaches are utilized in the last chapter so that several hypotheses can be verified. For the sake of comparability, individual CPLs for EU-27 countries for the period 1995(9)-2011 are employed. Firstly, stylised facts for both old EU and NMS are presented (including effects stemming from the on-going financial crisis). Secondly, the club convergence hypothesis is examined with help of two different ways - cluster analysis and the Phillips-Sul test (both for the EU and its `subgroups'). Both of them do confirm the existence of convergence clubs in the EU (including its old and new part). Following the previous findings, a somewhat broader and richer view on price level dynamics is supplemented via utilization of the so-called Stochastic kernel (Quah, 1993). This methodology shows both convergence and divergence (divergence/polarization/stratification) in the EU. Finally, the last section of this chapter is focused on a thorough search for determinants of price levels in the EU. The Bayesian approach is employed (Bayesian model averaging, BMA) and our results confirm both the importance of both `traditional' determinants such as labour costs and output gap and new ones such as broadly defined institutional factors. Main findings of this thesis are summarized and commented in the conclusion aiming at providing implications for policymakers and some guidance for future research.

This master thesis The emergence of the Common energy policy of the EU in the context of the EU-Russia energy cooperation aims to answer the question of whether Russia with its aggressive energy policy (gas crisis, gas pipeline projects) stands behind the EU's inability to advance a strong Common energy policy despite all its efforts. By analysing the member states' behaviour in relation to the key development in the energy field, we will be able to assess Russia's influence. The thesis will then demonstrate that it is the divergent national policies of the member states that stand behind the EU's inability to push forward a Common energy policy. The member states, in the pursuit of the maximization of benefits, support the Common energy policy only if it aligns with their national interests. The categorization of the member states based on their dependence on Russian gas and the size of their gas markets in relation to Russian gas exports will provide broadly representative conclusions about the member states behaviour towards the Common energy policy based on these two variables.

Ausgangspunkt dieser Studie stellt die sog. „Patientenrichtlinie“ 2011/24/EU dar. Diese beruht auf der Rspr. des EuGH, wonach für die Inanspruchnahme grenzüberschreitender Gesundheitsleistungen die Dienstleistungsfreiheit Anwendung findet. Bezogen auf den Bereich des Gesundheitswesens steht die Dienstleistungsfreiheit jedoch in einem Spannungsverhältnis zu der Organisationshoheit der Mitgliedstaaten für ihre Gesundheitssysteme. Diese Arbeit widmet sich daher zunächst dem Begriff der Gesundheitsleistungen und führt das Bestehen des Spannungsverhältnisses auf die historische Entwicklung der Sozialregelungen in den Verträgen zurück. In einem weiteren Schritt wird dann die tatsächliche Anwendbarkeit der Dienstleistungsfreiheit für den Bereich der Gesundheitsleistungen untersucht. Im Anschluss daran erfolgt eine Analyse der Rechtsprechung des EuGH. Dieser versucht das Spannungsverhältnis auf der Ebene der „Rechtfertigung“ zu lösen. Letztlich führt jedoch dieser Ansatz nicht zur Lösung dieses Spannungsverhältnisses, da durch die Auslegungsbedürftigkeit des Primärrechts rechtliche Unsicherheiten entstehen. Auch die Patientenrichtlinie, welche auf der Rechtsprechung des EuGH beruht, kann daher nur bedingt zur Beseitigung der bestehenden Unsicherheiten bei grenzüberschreitenden Gesundheitsleistungen beitragen. Ebenso können weitere in der Literatur vorgestellte Alternativen das Grundproblem nicht lösen. Notwendig wäre vielmehr eine klarere Abgrenzung der Regelungszuständigkeiten im Primärrecht selbst. / The starting point for this study is the so-called „Patient Directive“ 2011/24/EU. This is based on the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice, according to which when using cross-border healthcare services the free movement of services finds application. Referring to the area of healthcare the free movement of services however is in a relationship of tension with the organisational sovereignty of member states for their healthcare systems. For this reason this work addresses itself firstly to the concept of healthcare services and leads the existence of a relationship of tension back to the historical development of social regulations in the contracts. In a further step then the actual applicability of the free movement of services for the area healthcare services is examined. Following this an analysis of the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice takes place. This attempts to solve the relationship of tension at the level of „justification“. In the end however this starting-point does not lead to solving this tension relationship, for through the need for interpretation of primary law legal uncertainties arise. Also the patient directive, which is based on the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice, can for this reason only partially contribute to the removal of uncertainties existing with cross-border healthcare services. Equally further alternatives presented in literature cannot solve the basic problem. Rather a clearer delimitation in the primary law itself would be required.

La perspective européenne a renouvelé l’intérêt de la question du maintien ou de la suppression du dualisme juridictionnel en France à travers deux approches : la résistance aux modèles concurrents d’organisation juridictionnelle d’une part, le crible des standards européens d’autre part. Considéré comme un modèle d’organisation juridictionnelle, le système français a inspiré la majorité des Etats européens. Le phénomène a néanmoins été temporaire. Désormais, la plupart des Etats européens ont un système d’organisation juridictionnelle qui se rattache à un autre modèle. Engager le système français dans une telle voie est juridiquement faisable mais peu opportun en pratique. Le système français en tant que modèle – quoique minoritaire – d’organisation juridictionnelle a donc vocation à perdurer. Sur un autre front, l’alignement du système français sur les standards européens a également fait émerger l’hypothèse de sa suppression. Les condamnations, réelles ou potentielles, de la juridiction administrative et du procès mené devant elle, ainsi que du Tribunal des conflits et de la procédure suivie devant lui, ont montré que les réformes étaient inévitables et imposé de revenir sur des pratiques séculaires bien établies. Elles ont également contribué à rapprocher la juridiction administrative de la juridiction judiciaire et le procès administratif du procès civil. « Sauvé » au prix de nombreuses transformations, le système n’en est pas moins parvenu à préserver ses caractéristiques essentielles, prouvant sa capacité d’adaptation. Un temps affaibli, le dualisme juridictionnel n’a, en définitive, pas été altéré. Mieux, son fondement technique, justification contemporaine du dualisme juridictionnel, en est sorti renforcé. / The European perspective has shed new light on the question of whether maintaining or ruling out jurisdictional dualism in France through two main approaches: on the one hand, the resilience of substitutable models and, on the other hand, the scrutiny of European standards. Considered as a model, the French system has inspired the majority of states in Europe. This wave of inspiration has nevertheless been short-lived. Indeed, most states in Europe have established a judicial system, which is different from the French model. Bringing the French system towards the one adopted by most states in Europe is juridically feasible but raises several issues in practice. As a result, the French system, albeit minor amongst the European states, is probably prone to live on. Furthermore, bringing the French system towards European standards raised the question of a likely end of it. In fact, the French system came under critics, whether effective or potential, of its administrative courts and legal proceedings, together with critics concerning its so-called “Tribunal des conflits” and the legal proceedings. These critics point to the fact that reforming the French system was inevitable. Such reforms led the French system back on some of its secular anchored practices. Eventually, reforms also contributed to bring closer both the administrative court and the administrative legal proceedings to both civil court and civil legal proceedings. Saved at the cost of numerous reforms, the French system nevertheless managed to preserve its basic structures. This in turn provides evidence that the French system is able to adapt itself to an evolving European environment. Finally, the technical founding principles of jurisdictional dualism have been reinforced.