Search

The article explores the fundamental principles of law and the principle of social security for ensuring a decent standard of living for individuals, viewed through the lens of implementing foundational ideas that form the basis of the legal system. These ideas are reflected in the guiding requirements for shaping the foundations and legal values that ensure an individual's right to social security at a level that guarantees dignified living conditions. The emphasis is placed on the fact that everyone's right to social security, as a natural human right, is a category of subjective rights and, at the same time, aligns with the fundamental principles of law. The interconnection between the fundamental principles of law and the principle of social security ensuring a decent standard of living for individuals is reflected in a legal relationship, according to which: 1) the fundamental principles of law embody socially and genetically formed values, which, interacting with each other, form the basis for the general regulation of social relations, acquiring sectoral interpretation within social security legal relations; 2) the principle of social security ensuring a decent standard of living is a fundamental principle of the corresponding branch of law. It stems from the fundamental principles and serves as the foundation for the entire field of social security law, with its social-value orientations regarding the value of human dignity and its materialized standards for meeting social needs and achieving social well-being for indivi duals. The interaction between the principle of social security ensuring decent living conditions and the fundamental principles of law is reflected in the following: 1) the principle of humanism is based on the recognition of human dignity as an inherent natural and social value, emphasizing the fundamental nature of the right to social protection as an objectively social right; 2) the principle of the rule of law is characterized by the recognition that the right to social security is a defining factor and criterion for the state's activities aimed at guaranteeing and protecting human rights and freedoms. The realization of this right should take into account a reasonable balance between the interests of the individual and the state as guarantor; 3) the principle of freedom envisions the social self-realization of individuals, including the fulfilment of obligations in the field of social security, ensuring inclusivity and barrierfree access to the right to shape one's own social well-being; 4) the principle of equality prohibits any discriminatory restrictions that may affect the content and scope of an individual's right to social security; 5) the principle of justice/social justice is oriented towards the solidarity-based distribution of public funds allocated for social purposes, with the exclusive application of objective criteria. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Digital Markets Act (DMA) and the EU Merger Control Regulation (EUMR) are complementary tools that could apply concurrently to mergers involving gatekeepers. Yet, potential tensions between the DMA and the EUMR have been unexplored. It is this paper's objective to shed light on the interplay between the EUMR and the DMA, in the context of commitments design for gatekeeper acquisitions. This paper argues that the DMA could influence the EUMR in designing remedies, since these tools may be taking a similar approach to addressing the harmful effects of gatekeepers’ practices. Accordingly, the new DMA obligations could impact future commitments design under the EUMR in two ways. First, at the theory of harm stage, because of the DMA's deterrent effect. Second, at the remedy design stage, because of the principle of proportionality. Therefore, the DMA could restrict the EUMR's power to design merger commitments, in the context of gatekeeper acquisitions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article is devoted to the peculiarities of the principle of proportionality of measures of forced execution of decisions and the volume of claims on decisions in enforcement proceedings. It is determined that the principle of proportionality of measures of forced execution of decisions and the volume of claims on decisions in enforcement proceedings finds its manifestation in a number of provisions of legislation. The article cites these provisions of the legislation on enforcement proceedings and analyzes them. It is pointed out that the essence of the principle of proportionality of measures of compulsory execution of decisions and the volume of claims on decisions is always associated with the need to ensure and respect the rights of the debtor. However, in the author’s opinion, this principle should also reflect another important aspect of enforcement proceedings – sufficiency of enforcement measures for the actual execution of the decision. This side should also be enshrined in the content of the principle of proportionality of measures of forced execution of decisions and the volume of claims under the decisions. It is concluded that the principle of proportionality of measures of forced execution of decisions and the volume of claims under decisions should not be considered narrowly enough. Scientific positions concerning the legal regulation of the principle of proportionality of measures of forced execution of decisions and the volume of claims under decisions are studied. The opinion is supported that in the legislation on enforcement proceedings it is necessary to formulate a separate article devoted to the content of the principle of proportionality of measures of forced execution of decisions and the volume of claims on decisions. Separate aspects of determining the criteria of proportionality of measures of compulsory execution of decisions and the volume of claims under decisions and judicial practice have been studied. On the basis of the analysis it is concluded that an important general criterion of proportionality of measures of forced execution of decisions and the volume of claims on decisions is the criterion of legality of the executor’s actions developed by the judicial practice of the Supreme Court. The criterion of proportionality should be the focus of the executor’s actions to ensure the fulfillment of the final court decision. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Global drug policy is in a period of change. Human rights can play an important role in such change, but more work is needed to understand the how rights work and why they might come to matter. Drawing on insights from a major study on drug policy and human rights, I argue that important new dynamics in respect of how drugs are thought to relate to health are emerging, including a conceptualisation of some drugs as capable of generating or improving health, rather than undermining it. Drugs are in some cases coming to be understood not as the origin of social problems but as the solution for them. I introduce the concept of 'solutionisation' as a tool for understanding the mechanisms by which human rights shapes ontologies, positioning 'solutionisation' as corollary and counterpart to Carol Bacchi's work on policy 'problematisation' (Bacchi [2009]. Analysing Policy: What is the Problem Represented To Be? Pearson). I argue that both 'problematisation' and 'solutionisation' have value for sociological analyses of human rights and that we need to pay careful attention to the co-constitutive dimensions of drugs and human rights, to understand how norms about health, self and subjects are made, sustained, and brought under pressure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the article 'How to be absolutely fair, Part I: the Fairness formula', we presented the first theory of comparative and absolute fairness. Here, we relate the implications of our Fairness formula to economic theories of fair division. Our analysis makes contributions to both philosophy and economics: to the philosophical literature, we add an axiomatic discussion of proportionality and fairness. To the economic literature, we add an appealing normative theory of absolute and comparative fairness that can be used to evaluate axioms and division rules. Also, we provide a novel definition and characterization of the absolute priority rule. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We present the first comprehensive theory of fairness that conceives of fairness as having two dimensions: a comparative and an absolute one. The comparative dimension of fairness has traditionally been the main interest of Broomean fairness theories. It has been analysed as satisfying competing individual claims in proportion to their respective strengths. And yet, many key contributors to Broomean fairness agree that 'absolute' fairness is important as well. We make this concern precise by introducing the Fairness formula and the absolute priority rule and analyse their implications for comparative fairness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this study employing a qualitative approach, we explore and compare the mathematical reasoning of active primary school teachers and individuals with limited education when tackling problems involving false proportionality and lack of authenticity. The research is justified by the importance of understanding how these issues are addressed in various educational groups and how teaching strategies in this area can be enhanced. An individual questionnaire containing five problems was administered to five participants in each group. The results indicate that teachers tend to more frequently succumb to the illusion of linearity, incorrectly applying linear relationships to non-proportional problems compared to individuals with lower educational attainment. This suggests a greater influence of algorithmic approaches and clauses of the didactic contract on their mathematical reasoning. This tendency could be attributed to a greater exposure to algorithmic approaches during the formative stages, as well as certain clauses in the experimental contract. Conversely, individuals with limited education approached problems with greater flexibility, linking their responses to everyday experiences. The study concludes that it is imperative to implement educational strategies aimed at overcoming limitations such as the illusion of linearity and fostering meaningful problem-solving skills from the early stages. It is recommended to developteacher training programs that promote a more contextualized and flexible approach to mathematics teaching, as well as the include contextualized and meaningful problems in the school curriculum. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The win ratio has been increasingly used in trials with hierarchical composite endpoints. While the outcomes involved and the rule for their comparisons vary with the application, there is invariably little attention to the estimand of the resulting statistic, causing difficulties in interpretation and cross-trial comparison. We make the case for articulating the estimand as a first step to win ratio analysis and establish that the root cause for its elusiveness is its intrinsic dependency on the time frame of comparison, which, if left unspecified, is set haphazardly by trial-specific censoring. From the statistical literature, we summarize two general approaches to overcome this uncertainty—a nonparametric one that pre-specifies the time frame for all comparisons, and a semiparametric one that posits a constant win ratio across all times—each with publicly available software and real examples. Finally, we discuss unsolved challenges, such as estimand construction and inference in the presence of intercurrent events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the European Union (EU) has adopted a vast range of unilateral sanctions (or 'restrictive measures') targeting almost every facet of the Russian economy. These events mark a turning point in the EU's approach to sanctions. In a brief timespan, the EU's sanctions practice has expanded significantly in its scope, reach, and hard-line political discourse, aligning more closely with the assertive stance of the United States. The collateral effects of these sanctions have reverberated globally, raising questions about their proportionality. This article explores the legal boundaries framing EU sanctions, examining the principle of proportionality across EU law, World Trade Organization (WTO) law, and customary rules on State responsibility. Through a detailed analysis of the various proportionality standards present in these legal regimes, it seeks to determine the adequacy of existing legal safeguards against a potential misuse of sanctions and addresses key challenges in regulating EU sanctions within the framework of proportionality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

I explore the question of how to ground the responsibility of agents in some tricky cases involving multiple agents who act in a non-coordinated fashion. These are scenarios where no single agent has the individual ability to make a difference to a harmful outcome, but where the outcome would have been avoided if they had all acted as they should have (thus, the agents collectively made a difference to the outcome's occurrence). I argue that an important source of the problem is that it's hard to motivate a concept of cause that can be behind the agents' responsibility in these cases. I illustrate the problem with a particular example: Yablo's proportionality criterion on causation. I then sketch a possible solution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) may develop into elevated anxiety or depression symptoms, but few risk factors for this development are known. Objective recurrence risk estimation is possible in some cancers. Using theories of risk communication and phobias, we examined whether the proportionality of FCR to known objective recurrence risk influences the development of anxiety and depression symptoms. Method: Uveal melanoma (UM) patients can opt for reliable prognostic testing. Patients experience either a 'good' or 'poor' prognostic outcome, whereby 10‐year mortality due to metastatic disease is, respectively, low or high. In a five‐year prospective study of a consecutive sample of 589 UM survivors, we used random intercept cross lagged panel analyses to examine whether proportionality differentially influences whether FCR progresses to anxiety and depression. Results: Positive cross paths predicting anxiety from FCR were stronger in the poor prognosis group than the good prognosis and not tested groups. Prognostic group differences were not evident for depression. Conclusions: FCR was more likely to progress to elevated anxiety symptoms when proportionate to the known objective recurrence risk. Objective evidence may play a prominent role in the development and structure of fear because it assumes a high epistemic weight that activates a wide range of emotional and cognitive responses. Interventions that assist survivors to tolerate FCR in the presence of higher recurrence risks may be important in reducing anxiety symptoms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This Article explores the connections between human rights and the rights of nature. Rights of nature is emerging as a global movement to rethink and move away from dominant anthropocentric approaches to law. As it is based on the idea that nature has inherent rights, rights of nature is often labelled as the "human rights of nature." However, this association with human rights, which are by nature anthropocentric, is also paradoxical. In exploring this paradoxical association between human rights and the rights of nature, this article argues that despite the anthropocentric nature of human rights, there are some strong alignments developing around the evolution of the right to a healthy environment. As analyzed in this Article, there is an emergent jurisprudence linking human rights law and the rights of nature which offers new perspective to understand how rights of nature might work in practice notably when rights are competing or clashing. One interest in associating human rights and the rights of nature is that human rights law is enriched by decades of legal developments, a diverse jurisprudence, and abundant campaigning and advocacy tools. With rights of nature being much "younger," there might be lessons to be learned from the "older" human rights movement. The argument put forward is that there are some legal principles that have been developed under international human rights law that could serve as a catalyst to support future rights of nature advocacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Considering that neither customary international law nor international treaties have specifically addressed the legality of autonomous weapons from the point of view of international humanitarian law, the law on autonomous weapons should be analyzed under the fundamental principles of international humanitarian law. The first purpose of this study is to explain the autonomous weapons and then to analyze the legality of such weapons through the lens of international humanitarian law. The basic question of the paper is whether the deployment of autonomous weapons is legal in light of technological and legal limitations? On the other hand, the paper also seeks to examine the legalization of autonomous weapons. In fact, the findings of our study will show that although autonomous weapons currently violate international humanitarian law, they have the potential to be more consistent with the principles of international humanitarian law in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines the essence of the principle of proportionality in the field of taxation, analyzes the components of the principle and the specifics of their application with regard to protection of rights and legitimate interests of taxpayers. The author establishes that the essence of the principle of proportionality in the field of taxation is that taxes and fees established with the aim of financial support of the State's activities should be consistent with the possibility of taxpayers to exercise their fundamental rights and freedoms. According to the principle of proportionality, the actions of the state must be strictly adapted to the legitimate goals and objectives to be achieved, and the measures applied must not go beyond what is necessary to achieve the established goals and objectives. It is established that the principle of proportionality in the field of taxation is characterized by several key components: 1. Access to rights and freedoms should not depend on: payment or non-payment of taxes and fees by a person; the amount of taxes and fees paid; 2. The tax burden should not be excessive, and the taxes themselves should not be too burdensome. The application of the principle of proportionality in the field of taxation is one of the key aspects of protecting human and civil rights and freedoms. It requires that the tax burden be distributed fairly, transferred to the taxpayer in an economically justified manner, and reflect their capabilities. Failure to comply with proportionality can lead not only to violations of fundamental human and civil rights and freedoms, but also to the de-shadowing of the economy, thus undermining the economic foundations of the state, leading to economic decline and destabilization of the country, contributing to the growth of crime, etc. 3. Tax restrictions and measures relating to taxpayer rights should not be excessive, and sanctions should not be too burdensome. In this context, it is important to assess not only the immediate consequences of sanctions for achieving the goals of the legal provision and protecting public order, but also possible long-term effects on the offender, including his economic condition, social status and the possibility of correction. Such an approach requires a balance between the need for effective law enforcement and prevention of repeated violations, on the one hand, and the prevention of excessive punishment, which may lead to disproportionate infringement of individual rights and freedoms, on the other. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As trainees resist social harm and injustice in medicine, they must navigate the tension between pushing too hard and risking their reputation, or not enough and risking no change at all. We explore the discernment process by examining what trainees attend to moments before and while they are resisting to understand how they manage this tension. We interviewed 18 medical trainees who shared stories of resisting social harm and injustice in their training environments. Interviews were analyzed using open and focused coding using Vinthagen and Johansson's work, which conceptualizes resistance as a dynamic process that includes an individual's subjectivity within a larger system, the context in which they find themselves, and the interactions they have with others. We framed these acts as an individuals' attempt to undermine power, while also being entangled with that power and needing it for their efforts. When deciding on how and whether to resist, trainees underwent a cost-benefit analysis weighing the potential risk against their chances at change. They considered how their acts may influence their relationship with others, whether resisting would damage personal and programmatic reputations, and the embodied and social cues of other stakeholders involved. Trainees undergo a dynamic assessment process in which they analyze large amounts of information to keep themselves safe from potential retaliation. It is by attending to these various factors in their environment that trainees are able to keep their acts professional, and continue to do this challenging work in medical education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Crónica Tributaria is the property of Instituto de Estudios Fiscales, Ministerio de Hacienda y Funcion Publica 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 relevance of the subject lies in the formation of a scientifically based concept of proving the legality of restrictions on rights and freedoms during pre-trial investigation, which is based on a three-stage test of the justification of interference formulated in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. The purpose of the study was to establish general criteria for the legality of restriction of rights and freedoms during pre-trial investigation with their explication of specific procedural actions and decisions characterised by a high degree of intrusiveness. The main research methods were anthropological, axiological, dialectical, systemic, formal, legal, and the method of expert assessments. Was is proved that algorithmisation of the decision on the restriction of human rights in a pre-trial investigation should be conducted according to the methodology of a three-part test: foresight in the law; the purpose of interference, which should be legitimate; whether such interference was required in a democratic society. This test is applicable to all intrusive measures in criminal proceedings but has its own characteristics depending on the measure and the nature of the intensity of restriction of rights. It is argued that the elements of the three-part test when applying measures to ensure criminal proceedings are objectified in the local subject of proof, which has three levels: 1) General (Article 132 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine); 2) Group, for preventive measures; 3) Special, for certain measures to ensure criminal proceedings, including preventive measures. On the example of regulatory regulation of individual investigative (search) actions, it is established that ensuring the proportionality of their application is conducted by determining by the investigating judge the limits of restriction of rights and freedoms during such a procedural action and preventing arbitrariness to a person. The most detailed proof of the legality of restricting rights in measures to ensure criminal proceedings has specifics depending on the measure and the person to whom it is applied. The practical importance of the work lies in the possibility of using the algorithms given in it when establishing elements of the local subject of proof by investigating judges

Drug distribution is considered one of the most serious crimes in general and the most serious drug offense in particular. Drug distribution may cover behavior of very different levels of seriousness, ranging from the social supply of small quantities of illicit drugs in friend circles to international drug trafficking organized by powerful global crime syndicates. The article explores the criminological contexts of less serious drug distribution and penal frameworks of the relevant countries in the Baltic region. The article argues for a more nuanced penal approach to such offenses in the Lithuanian penal law.

(Series Information) European Papers - A Journal on Law and Integration, 2024 9(1), 131-144 | European Forum Insight of 18 June 2024 | (Table of Contents) I. The citizenship of the Union: an evolving, slippery ground. - II. The case-law concerning the loss of the EU citizenship. - ii.1. Case-law overview: characterization and main features. - ii.2. Legal principles of EU citizenship law established by the Court. - III. The proportionality test and its effectiveness. - iii.1. Individual examination. - iii.2. Effective possibility to recover the nationality ex tunc. - IV. Individual examination and due process rights: information and reasonable time. - V. Concluding Remarks | (Abstract) The judgment in Stadt Duisburg, concerning the loss of German (and, thus, EU) citizenship in the context of naturalization proceedings, adds a new chapter to the “judicial saga” of loss of a Member State’s citizenship and compatibility of its national measures with EU law. This Insight focuses on such a case-law of the Court of Justice (“ECJ” or “the Court”), which reflects the compromise between the “untouchable” State sovereign competence in nationality matters and the gradual consolidation of a “procedural armour” assisting the loss of the EU citizenship and the rights attached thereto. Building on this assumption, the Insight retraces and examines the main principles of EU citizenship law elaborated by the Court via its case-law, inaugurated with its 2010 leading case Rottmann, and complemented with the latest additions of the 2024 judgment in Stadt Duisburg. The main idea emerging from this jurisprudence is that, essentially, the competence to establish criteria for the loss of nationality is, and remains, firmly in the Member States’ hands. Its exercise, though, is increasingly made contingent on the respect of basic, legal principles of EU procedural law, i.e., proportionality, effectiveness and due process of law. In other words, the ECJ does not intervene on the substantial side of the Member States’ competence (the “if”), but rather on the procedural one (the “how”), thereby influencing its concrete exercise.

I examine how the proportionality principle shapes state responses to a cyberattack. I do so by investigating variation in the effects of the principle of proportionality on the state response. The variation accounts for four types of state response. First, if states respond to a first strike in a proportionate manner, they are in compliance with the principle, and attackers are likely to take it as an indication of willingness to honor the principle. Second, states may react to attackers with an excessive response in violation of the principle, which would force attackers to react as or more harshly. Third, states may accidentally make a proportionate response when they in fact seek to impose excessive harm on attackers. Finally, states may generate an excessive response by error when they in fact seek to comply with the principle. Related Articles: Glen, Carol. 2021. "Norm Entrepreneurship in Global Cybersecurity." Politics & Policy 49(5): 1121–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12430. Glen, Carol M. 2014. "Internet Governance: Territorializing Cyberspace?" Politics & Policy 42(5): 635–57. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/polp.12093/full. Zeng, Jinghan, Tim Stevens, and Yaru Chen. 2017. "China's Solution to Global Cyber Governance: Unpacking the Domestic Discourse of 'Internet Sovereignty.'" Politics & Policy 45(3): 432–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12202. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article has a theoretical and research character, and its main aim is to determine the legal nature of the principle of proportionality as an institutional mechanism for the coordination of interests in environmental conflicts from the standpoint of national Ukrainian legislation and law enforcement practice. The issue is analyzed by conducting a theoretical legal analysis of the principle of proportionality as a general legal principle. As the basis of environmental law, proportionality contributes to the implementation of the principle of sustainable development, as it determines the mechanism for the coordination and balancing of diverse interests. The study of international and Ukrainian legislation, which defines the normative grounds for the application of the principle of proportionality in legal relations, demonstrates that in national environmental legislation, in the regulation of environmental relations, the principle of proportionality is used to establish limitations on rights in order to protect the public environmental interest or to determine the proportionality of the right to an environment safe for life and health with other rights. The article analyzes the judicial practice of the European Court of Human Rights in environmental cases and the relevance of its application by the judicial institutions of Ukraine. This made it possible to verify the effectiveness of the proportionality criteria in the settlement of environmental conflicts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Modern constitutional rights law is often criticised for delineating rights too broadly while resolving their regular conflicts with competing considerations through open-ended balancing procedures. A basic theme underlying criticisms of this expansionist trend is that it expresses utilitarian ideas, foreign to the domain of rights. This article replies to two main critiques: that rights can only extend to cases in which they defeat all competing considerations; and that conflicts involving rights should be resolved with categorial rules. The article builds on contractualist moral theory and the interest theory of rights to present an account of constitutional rights as relational value-based reasons to recognise duties. This account goes beyond central justifications of the expansionist trend, that erode the action-guiding and relational aspects of constitutional rights. It shows that including in their scopes defeasible reasons is not only conceptually possible but also morally desirable as it can better realise their underlying values by providing systematic guidance to state agents as part of the basic structure of society; and that while rights-based duties are peremptory and categorical, constitutional rights-based reasons for regulation invite a dynamic and incremental comparison of claims on a social scale, of the kind that proportionality analysis structures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rule of proportionality strikes a bargain in launching attacks. It demands that military commanders suspend or cancel operations if collateral damage anticipated from an attack exceeds the potential military advantage offered. The definitional phrase military advantage has been the subject of a rich debate, varyingly interpreted to expand or limit the scope of attacks. This paper participates in the debate, advocating that military advantage must be limited to exclude attacks on objects that indirectly contribute to military potential, such as, economic, social, psychological or political advantage, which invariably target civilians or civilian enterprises. It critically engages with the principles and precedents invoked to legitimise a broader understanding of military advantage. It posits that such attacks disregard belligerents’ privileges, and render unbound categories of civilian objects susceptible to destruction. Pursuantly, the rule of proportionality, originally articulated to nuance and improve the rule of distinction, is usurped to violate the latter. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Community Protection Notices (CPNs) were created and introduced in England and Wales through the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act (2014). They are used to prevent and/or require specific actions by an individual or organisation, where existing behaviour has 'a detrimental effect on the quality of life of those in the locality'. A wide range of criminal justice actors can issue Community Protection Notices, and they require a low/no standard of evidence to do so. Breach of a Community Protection Notice results in a Fixed Penalty Notice of £100 or a possible criminal conviction. Using procedural justice theory as an analytical framework, our research is the first to investigate how Community Protection Notices are constructed, evidenced and monitored by the authorising bodies. The findings highlight divergent local practices, which sometimes lack procedural safeguards and adherence to Home Office statutory guidance. We propose 10 empirically based recommendations for policy and legislative changes to Community Protection Notice issuing practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Applying a critical rhetorical approach to law, this article revisits the proportionality discourse of the European Court of Human Rights and the socio-political tendencies it reveals in the case of Garib v the Netherlands (2017). The work focuses on the rhetorical management of the conflict between socio-economic public policies and the social rights indirectly protected under the European Convention on Human Rights and its Protocols. The rhetorical construction of proportionality discourse identified is driven by the re-elaboration of themes constitutive of the normative rationality of post-austerity neoliberalism, in particular the individual responsibilisation and sacrifice for the negative consequences of neoliberal socioeconomic policies. The discourse is also supported by elements announcing an authoritarian turn in the deployment of such policies through the connection between economic goals and public order. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Developments in international legislation and the growing digitalization of tax law support the advancement of global networks between tax authorities. We are witnessing an integration of databases that will lead to increasingly intense coordination of the fight against tax evasion at a supranational level. As in social networks and digital commerce, databases are gradually enriched, contain progressively precise information on the individual taxpayer and use common languages that allow for automated exchanges of information. While waiting for the creation of a global database - not conditioned by the constraints of reciprocity and abstractly usable by all authorized entities who need it - the first risks of limitation of the taxpayer's rights are emerging. In fact, these phenomena have dark sides that are starting to emerge in use, at a national level and with respect to individual taxpayers, of interpolated databases. Moreover, a growing amount of information flows from heterogeneous and increasingly widespread sources, sometimes not protected by the requirements of professionalism, legality and public trust since data collection and entry can be delegated to economic entities, intermediaries and consultants. The absence of an authority responsible for the unitary management of global databases and for the resolution of their conflicts, the slow and timid affirmation (only in some national systems) of the taxpayer's right of access to information concerning them, the difficult configuration of the faculty to request the correction of erroneous data and of the specular public power to remove the reported inaccuracies, weaken the system of protections gradually erected to protect the taxpayer's position. In this way, the coordination of national systems that contemporary tax law creates is strongly unbalanced on the side of the protection of tax interests. International and European tax law should instead provide greater guarantees in favor of the taxpayers, defending their right to fair taxation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Digital de Derecho Administrativo is the property of Universidad Externado de Colombia 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.)

It is inherent to the fundamental right to property that far from being absolute, the owners' rights may be limited in the general interest. As exemplified recently by unprecedented closures of restaurants and other businesses due to the COVID-19 pandemic, also large-scale and far-reaching limitations are broadly deemed justified. The outer boundary of these limitations appears to be the essence of the right, which may not be impinged upon. Yet, both this very term and its scope are fiercely contested. This article, thus, revisits the "essence" of a fundamental right in the context of the European Convention on Human Rights. Drawing on the example of the right to property under Art 1 of Protocol 1 (P1-1) to the ECHR, this contribution expounds the prevailing approaches to the essence of fundamental rights and highlights the discrepancies between the formally adopted absolute approach to the essence as a purportedly inviolable core and the relative understanding of this concept which sees it as part of the fair-balance test. As the ECtHR case law makes room for virtually any interference with P1-1 including expropriation without any compensation, it will be argued that an untouchable or pre-established essence is not a concept attributable to the right to property under the Convention. It is maintained, however, that the limited scope of the essence is consistent with the underlying principles of the Convention as well as the intrinsic social function of private property. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

I argue that it may be time to abandon the likelihood of success principle, a relative newcomer to the just war tradition. First, I am unconvinced of the normative value of the concept, especially when applied to states participating in defensive wars. Second, and more pragmatically, our lack of knowledge about what determines the outcomes and durations of wars, the application of a scientific-sounding concept to what is essentially a judgment of art may distort our moral reasoning. Estimating the chance that a particular war (or use of force) will generate the outcomes one hopes for is fiendishly difficult, and to be accurate, requires a knowledge of military and political science that few theorists possess. In its current form, the likelihood of success principle serves to reify existing power disparities and to render defensive wars apparently illegitimate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Conflicting results from 2 randomized clinical trials of transcatheter mitral valve edge-to-edge repair in secondary mitral regurgitation (SMR) have led to the recognition that SMR is a heterogeneous disease entity presenting with different functional and morphological phenotypes. This review summarizes the current knowledge on SMR caused primarily by atrial secondary mitral regurgitation (aSMR) and ventricular SMR pathology. Although aSMR is generally characterized by severe left atrial enlargement in the setting of preserved left ventricular anatomy and function, different patterns of mitral annular distortion cause different phenotypes of aSMR. In ventricular SMR, the relation of SMR severity to left ventricular dilation as well as the degree of pulmonary hypertension and right ventricular dysfunction are important phenotypic characteristics, which are key for a better understanding of prognosis and treatment response. [Display omitted] • Secondary mitral regurgitation (SMR) is a heterogeneous disease entity presenting with different clinical phenotypes. • Differentiation of SMR phenotypes (aSMR vs vSMR) and their subentities might facilitate our understanding of treatment response to medial and interventional SMR treatment. • Further studies are needed to further improve our understanding of the disease and optimize treatment of SMR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Criminal and disciplinary liability are not mutually exclusive. Both criminal and disciplinary liability can be applied for the manipulation of sports competitions. That being the case, this article discusses the issue of compliance with the ne bis in idem principle in the situation of cumulative liability. This principle is incident in criminal matters, in a broad sense. To provide a thorough answer, first of all the Engel test is analyzed. Through the lens of this test, which is contained in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, it was concluded that the disciplinary sanctions applicable in the case of manipulation of sports competitions are criminal rather than civil. Under these conditions, problems arise when similar sanctions (e.g., fine) are applied both according to disciplinary regulations and according to criminal law. Thus, it was shown that in order to comply with the ne bis in idem principle, the reasoning in the judgment A and B v. Norway should be taken into account. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Necmettin Erbakan University School of Law Review is the property of Necmettin Erbakan University School of 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.)

All countries in the world are currently witnessing a dramatic increase of organized criminality, the consolidation of national criminal structures and, what is worse, their international merger for criminal syndicates. In such circumstances, the use of state institutions to deal with the increasing force and spreading of crime in the world becomes inevitable. Under these conditions, the respect for the human being, the respect for his or her dignity and value, freedom of thought and action, and other fundamental rights and freedoms - all these are the general premise for the achievement of the goals of a contemporary world society and the foundation of the universal progressive development of any state, because the free person, as the axiom of development, can offer something more to society than the suppressed one. The last argument is what makes the idea of the freedom of the individual and the primacy of human rights relevant, including in the context of evidence proceedings in criminal trials. Each time when criminal proceedings are authorized, the limits on the rights of both the subjects of the proceedings and other persons will be considered and decided. In this context, the principle of proportionality is of major and undeniable relevance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Marmara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Hukuk Araştırmaları Dergisi is the property of Marmara University 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 Commercial & Intellectual Property Law (TFM) / Ticaret ve Fikri Mülkiyet Hukuku Dergisi is the property of Ankara Yildirim Beyazit University, Facult of Law 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 Antalya Bilim University Law Review is the property of Antalya International University 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.)

Suppose that a defendant's conviction would amount to an interference with their right to peaceful protest, protected by articles 10 and 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Is a court then obliged to make a conviction turn on a fact-sensitive proportionality assessment justifying the interference? Drawing on the jurisprudence of the domestic and Strasbourg courts, this article argues that the case law has crystallised into two paradigms that provide distinct answers: the 'justificatory paradigm' in European human rights law and the 'offence-centric' paradigm in domestic law. The article exposes how and why this divergence has developed, what is at stake at the level of constitutional values and how this conflict might be resolved. It is argued that compliance with Strasbourg now depends on the integration of the justificatory paradigm into domestic law. The article imagines how this might be done in a manner sensitive to domestic constitutional values, using the mechanics on offer in the Human Rights Act 1998. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper investigates and refines the proportionalist solution to the causal exclusion problem developed by Menzies and List. First and foremost, it explores the implications of their inter-level compatibility result. It is highlighted that in theory the inter-level causal compatibility of realizer and realized properties allows for scenarios where the higher-level property is multiply realized. By developing concrete illustrations, the paper proves this to be an empirically plausible option. Further non-trivial implications of the framework are unpacked to show that the sensitivity of causal relations to background conditions is as important in deciding on the existence and the direction of exclusion as sensitivity to the realization of the cause. This insight also opens the way to further refinements: a richer reconceptualization of upwards exclusion and a plausible answer to a critic of the Menzies and List project. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]