Search

Copyright of Selcuk Law Review / Selçuk Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi is the property of Selcuk Law Review and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Kırıkkale Law Journal (KLJ) is the property of Kirikkale Law Journal and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

With the Constitutional amendment dated April 16, 2017, the President, who is the sole executive organ, was given the authority to issue a Presidential decree, which includes the primary and first-hand regulatory authority, similar to the legislative power. Unlike other administrative regulations, the Constitutional Court has the authority and duty to examine the claims of unconstitutionality of presidential decrees. The Constitutional Court has the authority to audit Presidential decrees both in terms of form and substance within the scope of an abstract review of norms, but only in terms of substance within the scope of concrete norm control. Starting from its first decision on January 23, 2020, the Constitutional Court has reviewed 153 separate provisions in 43 decisions and has annulled approximately 40% of them. Another point that draws attention in the decisions given by the court is that the unanimous decisions are less in number than the decisions made by the majority of the votes. In the study, the subjects discussed such as the legal nature and scope of the Presidential decrees, whether they create a protected area, their place in the hierarchy of norms, and the forms and types of supervision by the Constitutional Court, the statistical data of the decisions made by the Court and the important decisions determined are examined. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Evaluation of the use of glyphosate and legumes in valencia orange (Citrus sinensis L. Osbeck), in the north of Veracruz: case study. The objective of the case study was to contribute to the knowledge of herbicides (mainly glyphosate) and legumes of valencia orange producers in northern Veracruz. The study was carried out in the year 2021, with producers from three municipalities located in the north of Veracruz: Papantla, Álamo Temapache and Ixhuatlan de Madero. A total of 55 interviews were carried out. The interview that was conducted was structured around three sections: personal information of the interview respondent, information about herbicides, and information about legumes. The characteristics found in this study indicate that the majority of producers continue to use herbicides, 80% do not know the term glyphosate even though it turns out to be the main active ingredient of several of the herbicides that they apply and despite knowing that these can be very dangerous due to various reasons, they continue to use them without any protective equipment, due to how easy, fast and cheap their application is. However, regardless of everything, the producers are in the best disposition to know and cultivate leguminous plants in their plots to observe their characteristics, benefits and advantages in weed control. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Türkiye Adalet Akademisi Dergisi is the property of Justice Academy of Turkey and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Optimum: Journal of Economics & Management Sciences / Ekonomi ve Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi is the property of Optimum: Journal of Economics & Management Sciences and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The new government system of Turkey can be described as hyper-presidentialism, this is because the president then becomes the arbiter of all powers. In another word, the power to enact decrees, appoint bureaucrats and judicial officials into offices, and the power to dissolve a parliament belongs solely to the president. As strong presidency fuse with disciplined party system as well as concurrent elections and 10 percent electoral threshold, the president possibly poses a great danger to the separation of powers. Additionally, with regards to the presidential term, the president constitutionally holds the power to be elected only for two terms in Turkey. However, Erdoğan and his supporters believe that the 2017 constitutional amendments that changed the system of government has reset the agenda. Thus, the 2017 amendments offered Erdoğan a secret opportunity to join the presidential election race for a third, and even a fourth term. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Inonu University Law Review / İnönü Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi is the property of Inonu University Law Review (IULR) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Türkologiya is the property of Presidium of the National Academy of Sciences of Azerbaijan and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The declaration of the state of emergency in 2020, in the context of curbing the effects of the COVID-19 crisis, issued public debates referring to the constitutional and legal limits of presidential powers, the effectiveness of parliamentary and judicial control, the shape of constitutional relations between the legislative and executive powers. Several decisions of the Constitutional Court were issued concerning the constitutional powers of public authorities during crisis situations and the imperatives of limitation of fundamental rights and exercise of freedoms. The analysis of these decisions was the first trigger of the research. The first approach tries to identify the compatibility of constitutional texts to international law imperatives, to principles of rule of law and separation of powers in the context of limitation of the exercise of fundamental rights and freedoms, during emergency states. The study proposes the analysis of constitutional instruments of public authorities to put into practice an efficient management of crisis situations. The conclusions reveal the requirement of clarification and unification of the Constitutional Court jurisprudence regarding the emergency ordinances, the need to clarify fundamental law texts related to limitations of the fundamental rights and exercise of freedoms during crisis situations, as well as the necessity to strengthen the judicial control on measures issued during emergency states.

Copyright of Selcuk Law Review / Selçuk Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi is the property of Selcuk Law Review and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This article investigates the place of presidential decree in the hierarchy of norms, which has inserted into the Constitution by amendments that came into force in 2018. With the constitutional amendments, the executive body has been granted primary regulatory power and exclusive power on the matters that are explicitly regulated by the Constitution. What will determine the place of presidential decree in the hierarchy of norms is its relation with law. According to Kelsen's conceptualization of a hierarchical structure of norms, the recognition of a norm as superior requires the determination of the enforcement procedure and/or the content of sub-norm. Considering the relevant provisions, law does not specify the enforcement procedure and/or the content of presidential decree as superior norm. By deriving directly from the Constitution, presidential decree, as an instrument of primary regulatory power, first handedly enforces a norm regarding the matter it regulates and thus, it comes out substantively in the form of a norm act independent of law. On the other hand, the rules contained in Article 104/17 of the Constitution can be defined as conflicts rules, not as rules establishing a superior-subordinate relationship between law and presidential decree. Therefore, it can be concluded that presidential decree ranks as a norm equivalent to law in the hierarchy of norms.

Copyright of Selcuk Law Review / Selçuk Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi is the property of Selcuk Law Review and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The premises for the adoption of the Decree No 195/2020 on the establishment of the state of emergency in Romania were the evolution of the epidemiological situation in Romania and the assessment of public health risk for the next period, which indicates a massive increase in the number of people infected with SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus, having regard to the fact that failure to take urgent, exceptionally social and economic measures to limit SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus infection among the population would have a particularly serious impact, mainly on the right to life, and, in the alternative, on the right to health of individuals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The core of being who we are is our family and setting us an example demonstrates the view of tomorrow. In what kind of conditions are we growing up, what kind of education are giving our parents and certainly which direction they are showing us is vital for becoming who will be in future. Furthermore, what kind of generation would we have after us, certainly depends on us! [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Akademi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi is the property of Akademi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Abstract This article aims to explore the history of the existence of the Presidential Decree ("Perpres") in the hierarchy of laws and regulations in Indonesia. Inspired by the controversy over the position of the Perpres which had become a heated debate in the Special Committee Meeting (Draft Bill) concerning the Establishment of Invitation Laws. In fact, the House of Representatives (DPR) had proposed the abolition of Perpres from the hierarchy of laws and regulations. This is a normative legal research that uses statute approach, historical approach, and conceptual approach. This research attempts to find the history of the existence of Perpres in Indonesia. Which was then followed by an analysis of the position of the Perpres in the hierarchy of laws and regulations, both as a regulation of delegation (delegated legislation), and as "Independent Perpres", along with the problems of the test. Abstrak Artikel ini bertujuan untuk menelisik sejarah keberadaan Peraturan Presiden (“Perpres”) dalam hierarki peraturan perundang-undangan di Indonesia. Terinspirasi dari kontroversi kedudukan Perpres yang sempat menjadi perdebatan yang cukup hangat dalam Rapat Panitia Khusus (Pansus) Rancangan Undang-Undang (RUU) tentang Pembentukan Peraturan Perundang Undangan. Dengan menggunakan penelitian hukum normatif yang menggunakan pendekatan peraturan perundang-undangan, pendekatan sejarah, dan pendekatan konsep, penelitian ini berusaha untuk menemukan sejarah eksistensi Perpres di Indonesia. Kemudian dilanjutkan dengan analisis tentang kedudukan Perpres dalam hierarki peraturan perundang-undangan, baik sebagai peraturan delegasi (delegated legislation), maupun sebagai “Perpres Mandiri”, beserta problematika pengujiannya.

As of July 9, 2018, Turkey abandoned the parliamentary system and has adopted a sui generis kind of presidential system of government. The said new governmental system provides the President, the Executive Organ of the Turkish State, with the authority to issue presidential decrees on matters relating to executive function, and such authority that is conferred directly by the Constitution “is neither dependent on a prior parliamentary mandate nor subject to any subsequent approval”. On the other hand, the principle of legality, an important constitutional principle relating to “the rule of law” states that the Legislative power is “original/primary”, and that, as a rule, the Executive Organ possesses a secundum legem authority. As such, the prospective effects of the presidential decrees on the constitutional principle of legality will be reviewed in this study based on various discussions made by Turkish public law academics.

Copyright of Selcuk Law Review / Selçuk Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi is the property of Selcuk Law Review and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In this article, I shall examine the legal nature of presidential decrees for instituting and prolonging the state of emergency. Despite their content, which provides various restrictions on fundamental rights and liberties, in fact, they remain true normative administrative acts issued in order to execute legal provisions of Emergency Ordinance no. 1/1999 concerning the regime of the state of siege and the regime of the state of emergency, approved by the Parliament through organic law no. 453/2004.

Copyright of Ankara University SBF Journal / Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi is the property of Ankara University SBF Journal and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The declaration of the state of emergency in 2020, in the context of curbing the effects of the COVID-19 crisis, issued public debates referring to the constitutional and legal limits of presidential powers, the effectiveness of parliamentary and judicial control, the shape of constitutional relations between the legislative and executive powers. Several decisions of the Constitutional Court were issued concerning the constitutional powers of public authorities during crisis situations and the imperatives of limitation of fundamental rights and exercise of freedoms. The analysis of these decisions was the first trigger of the research. The first approach tries to identify the compatibility of constitutional texts to international law imperatives, to principles of rule of law and separation of powers in the context of limitation of the exercise of fundamental rights and freedoms, during emergency states. The study proposes the analysis of constitutional instruments of public authorities to put into practice an efficient management of crisis situations. The conclusions reveal the requirement of clarification and unification of the Constitutional Court jurisprudence regarding the emergency ordinances, the need to clarify fundamental law texts related to limitations of the fundamental rights and exercise of freedoms during crisis situations, as well as the necessity to strengthen the judicial control on measures issued during emergency states. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of OPUS - International Journal of Society Researches is the property of OPUS - International Journal of Society Research and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The premises for adopting Decree no. 195 of March 16, 2020 regarding the establishment of the state of emergency on Romanian territory were the evolution of the epidemiological situation in Romania and the assessment of public health risks for the next period. This indicated a massive increase in the number of people infected with the SARS-CoV coronavirus 2, and considering the fact that failure to take urgent, exceptional social and economic measures to limit the infection with SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus among the population would have had a particularly serious impact, mainly on the right to live, and, alternatively, on the individuals' right to health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

TIn Venezuela a severe economic crisis beginning in 1983 provoked a progressive reduction of the quality and quantity of food consumed by the low socioecnomic strata of the population. The lowest adequacy percentages with respect to Venezuelan RDAs were for iron, vitamin A and to a lesser extent, for vitamin B complex. Being precooked corn flour, PCF, responsible for 40 % of the Calories derived from cereals and for 15 -16 % of the total calories intake in the diet, an excellent and unique vehicle for enrichment, the National Institute of Nutrition, NIN, started the investigations toward its fortification with iron (as ferrous fumarate), vitamin A, thiamin, riboflavin and niacin. In 1992 a fortification profile was developed in such a way that 50 g of PCF (amount needed for a 110 g ready-to-eat arepa) covered approximately 25 % of the RDAs for the mentioned nutrients, after taking into consideration the losses due to the cooking process. The announcement of this measure as an official policy, provoked some adverse reactions among the private sector. In August 1992, by Presidential Decree No 2.492, the Commission for the Nutritional Enrichment of Foods, CENA, was created with the specific task of reconciling efforts and carry forward the enrichment of the PCF. With the attendance of key representatives of the corn and wheat industries, the government and the media, the CENA announced the official fortification profile of the PCF (per kg): vitamin A: 2,700 RE; thiamin: 3.1 mg; riboflavin: 2.5 mg; niacin: 51 mg; iron: 50 mg. Official Venezuelan Bureau of Standars (COVENIN), mandatory Standard No 2135-1996. Since February 1993 all the PCF sold in Venezuela must be enriched. Wheat flour. WF. The Venezuelan Wheat Producers Association, VWPA, presented in november 1992 a tentative and non compulsory fortification profile. In march the CENA voted against the non compulsory character of the fortification of WF and upon agreement with the VWPA, set in force the mandatory fortification profile as follow (per kg): thiamin: 1.5 mg; riboflavin: 2.0 mg; niacin: 20 mg; iron: 20 mg (as ferrous fumarate). COVENIN mandatory Standard No 217:2001. Since august 1993 all the WF sold in Venezuela must be enriched. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Pandectele Române is the property of Wolters Kluwer Romania and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Inonu University Law Review / İnönü Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi is the property of Inonu University Law Review (IULR) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Journal of Judgments by the Court of Jurisdictional Disputes / Uyusmazlik Mahkemesi Dergisi is the property of Court of Jurisdictional Disputes of the Republic of Turkey and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

As of July 9, 2018, Turkey abandoned the parliamentary system and has adopted a sui generis kind of presidential system of government. The said new governmental system provides the President, the Executive Organ of the Turkish State, with the authority to issue presidential decrees on matters relating to executive function, and such authority that is conferred directly by the Constitution "is neither dependent on a prior parliamentary mandate nor subject to any subsequent approval"2. On the other hand, the principle of legality3, an important constitutional principle relating to "the rule of law" states that the Legislative power is "original/primary", and that, as a rule, the Executive Organ possesses a secundum legem authority. As such, the prospective effects of the presidential decrees on the constitutional principle of legality will be reviewed in this study based on various discussions made by Turkish public law academics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]