Search

Copyright of Journal of Language & Law / Revista de Llengua i Dret is the property of Revista de Llengua i Dret 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 Language & Law / Revista de Llengua i Dret is the property of Revista de Llengua i Dret 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 chapter explains the Catalan evolution since the transition to the current situation and as most of the population has gone from being in favour of autonomy to being sovereigntist. The author tries to answer the question: What happened so that in a little more than forty years the opinion of a good part of the Catalans had changed so much?

Resumen: En este trabajo se analiza la evolución de las competencias compartidas en España, cuando al Estado corresponde establecer las bases en una materia y a las Comunidades Autónomas el desarrollo normativo y la ejecución. La concepción material de las bases fue concebida como una garantía para el ejercicio de las competencias autonómicas en el supuesto de inactividad del Estado. Por ello, tenía un carácter temporal. Sin embargo, se ha convertido en la práctica en un cauce que permite al Estado agotar la regulación de la materia. Esta situación ha resultado consolidada tras la sentencia del Tribunal Constitucional sobre el Estatuto de Autonomía de Cataluña en cuanto se han eliminado los límites que hasta ese momento había puesto al legislador estatal para determinar las bases en una materia de competencia compartida. En este contexto, se propone una reconfiguración de la forma de determinar las bases del Estado, con participación de las Comunidades Autónomas. Abstract: In this paper, the evolution of shared competence in Spain is analyzed, when the State has to establish the bases in a subject and the Autonomous Communities the normative development and execution. The material conception of the bases was conceived as a guarantee for the exercise of autonomic competence in the case of state inactivity. Therefore, it had a temporary character. However, in practice it has become a channel that allows the State to exhaust the regulation of matter. This situation has been consolidated after the judgement of the Constitutional Court on the Statute of Autonomy of Catalonia as soon as the limits that until that moment had put to the state legislator to determine the bases in a matter of shared competence have been eliminated. In this context, a reconfiguration of the way to determine the bases of the State is proposed, with the participation of the Autonomous Communities. Summary: 1. The shared competences bases-development in the Constitution; 2. The material conception of the basics as a guarantee of autonomous regulatory development in the origins of the Autonomous State; 3. The formalization of the basics and its limits; 4. The deformalisation and unlimited expansion of the basics from STC 31/2010; 5. The imposition of the bases on the Statute of autonomy from STC 31/2010; 6. The application of the clause of prevalence for the non-application of autonomous rules contrary to databases which have arisen; 7. Conclusion: the need to modify the way to determine the bases.

Copyright of Journal of Language & Law / Revista de Llengua i Dret is the property of Revista de Llengua i Dret 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 regional emergency rule has shielded local expertise in regional matters that LRSAL reduced, or linked to state funding requirements and actual costs. It is based on the Basic Law does not identify with local expertise, but with minimum homogeneity framework for the free exercise of such powers in matters of regional ownership. It is also based on local autonomy as a right of intervention of local authorities in matters which are of interest graduating the intensity of their participation in terms of the relationship between local and supra-local interests (art. 137 EC). To achieve these guarantees, objectively, is a constitutional amendment necessary to identify the basic rule with a key or principial, guaranteeing a minimum content homogeneity. It is also required a constitutional amendment to establish a right to local autonomy and to identify areas susceptible local intervention; so that the regions can articulate local expertise and administrative levels decide the allocation of the same in matters of regional ownership.

Copyright of Revista de Estudios de la Administración Local y Autonómica is the property of Instituto Nacional de Administracion 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.)

This article examines the powers over the judiciary held by the autonomous communities by analyzing the legal and case-law evolution on the matter, as well as the current situation. Although the Spanish Constitution conferred Central Government with exclusive powers over the judiciary and administering of justice, the autonomous communities, by means of their charts (statutes of autonomy), assumed some minor powers. In 1990, the Spain’s Constitutional Court solved this apparent contradiction by establishing a difference between the judiciary and administering of justice strictly speaking, reserved exclusively to Central Government, and the administrative support required to implement it (staff and material resources), on which the autonomous communities were allowed to hold limited powers, as they did. The 2006 Statute of autonomy of Catalonia attempted to overcome such limitation, although expressively manifesting subjection to the Spanish constitutional law on the Judiciary. Actually,the strictness to this subjection was the principal reasoning the Constitutional Court argued in its 2010 ruling of about the 2006 Statute of autonomy of Catalonia (Ruling 31/2010) to reject the unconstitutionality of these sections of the Statute which aimed at attributing greater powers to Catalonia on the matter. Even more, some recent rulings by the Constitutional Court dismissed the new sections of the Statute that were left after the 2010 ruling. Therefore, the autonomous communities could only have greater powers on the matter by means of a reform of the Spanish constitutional law on the Judiciary, and, from a broader perspective, of a constitutional reform which would change the present unitary structure of judiciary system.

This paper analyses the current status of the different electoral reforms which have been promoted in various regional legal systems after the autonomous elections of 2015. The results of these elections have led to a deeply fragmented political scenario and, largely, debtor of the commitment undertaken by the political parties with the citizenship to make effective the adequate electoral reforms that would guarantee, inter alia, a more equal and fair electoral system. Various standard-setting instruments are analysed and contextualised, as well as the alternative options on which the need for a concrete legal reform rely. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Historia Constitucional is the property of Revista Historia Constitucional 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 Revista de Derecho Politico is the property of Editorial UNED 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 Revista Universitaria de Historia Militar (RUHM) is the property of Centro de Estudios de la Guerra 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 Revista Internacional de Pensamiento Político is the property of Revista Internacional de Pensamiento Politico - Universidad Pablo de Olavide 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 Arbitration Committee is shaped as a singular body within the institutional framework of the Basque Autonomous Community. It is chaired by the President of the High Court of Justice, as it is prescribed in the Statute of Autonomy (art. 39), in sort of surprisingly fashion, with no direct reference to the Judiciary, of whom it is not part, its task is to solve the questions and disputes over the competences that might arise among the two levels of power in the Basque Country, the common institutions, Basque Government and Parliament on the one hand, and the Foral institutions of each Historic Territory, on the other hand. The singularity and significance lies on the fact that the use of this Arbitral Committee is compulsory in order to solve those aforementioned disputes, with no other options for settlement, nor even judicial, and its decisions are binding and final, lacking appeal against them. This makes this body very similar to a judicial one with tasks materially jurisdictional and a first level autonomic filter regarding the control of constitutionality. Against this reality, the Council for Statutory Guarantees envisaged by the Catalan Statute of 2006 strove to take on beyond its classic consultative tasks, a true preventive control about statuteness by means of its binding opinions regarding such a broad area as rights acknowledged by the Statute. The Constitutional Court in its judgment 31/2010 has prevented it without taking into account the Arbitration Committee, which in our opinion is arguably very similar to it.

This article draws a comparison between the different provisions that dealwith the allocation of powers system definition of the amended statutes ofAutonomy. From the analysis of the different regulations we appreciate thatthe statutes of Catalonia, Andalusia and Aragon contain norms regardingthe functional definition of competences. Nevertheless, in the case of theCatalan Statute, this provisions defining the allocation of powers system mustbe modulated according to the restricted adjudication of the decision 31/2010,ruled by the Constitutional Court, from June 28th. This decision would eventuallyhave an impact on the adjudication of the statutes of Autonomy’sprovisions of Andalusia and Aragon. Other amended statutes (such as thepassed in Valencia, Balearic Islands, Castilia-Leon, Extremadura and Navarra)do not change the previous competence framework through a general definition,be it because of the logic of the previous system was kept or, ashappened in the case of Navarra, because the statute’s rules were not amendedin this point. The study also analyzes a specific field in the powers allocatedbetween the State and the Autonomous Community (such as the regulationson professional associations). This allows to conclude that the moreambitious amendment of the statutes of Autonomy concerning the principlesof the competences framework do not have almost any remarkable effectin the state’s legislative powers and the scope of decisions adopted by theAutonomous Community powers.

As far as the allocation of powers is concerned, the 31/2010 ruling by the constitutional Court, from June 28th, about the Statute of Autonomy of Catalonia, opens the door to the possibility that the Statute norms modulate the competences framework between the State and the Autonomous Community despite the theoretical prominence awarded to the Statute provisions for the articulation of the block of constitutionality and the assumption of competences. As the doctrine from the 31/2010 ruling by the Constitutional Court states, the Constitutional Court enhances its interpretative monopoly on the general categories regarding the functional definition of competences (the so called by the author hiperconstitutionalization of the competences framework) wakening down the concept of exclusivity applied to the competences recognized to the Autonomous Communities, renouncing to a general material-formal concept for the State basic legislation and restricting the scope of the executive competences of the Autonomous entities.

The article analyzes the pronouncement of the STC 31/2010 about the foreseen rights to the Statute of 2006. Although he has refused that this the option is unconstitutional, its juridical foundation is incoherent and drives to a degradation of the Statute as a juridical rule. To justify this thesis, arguments favorable to the constitutionality are brought that statutes of autonomy can foresee a bill of rights: the singularity of the statute in front of the other laws; the diverse contents of the statutory booking and the linking of the statutory rights to the competences recognized by the Statute. Next the jurisprudential precedent of the STC 247/2010, related to the reform of the Statute of the Comunitat Valenciana, is analyzed. The third section approaches the elements of continuity and the changes of criterionthat the STC 31/2010 shows with respect to the former one, as long as it does not solve the dilemma in a clear way about the nature of the rights (mandatesor subjective rights). Finally, he justifies the weakness of the declaration of unconstitutionality about the character linked of the issued judgement by the Board of Statutory Guarantees about the legislative initiatives on the subject of rights.

The Constitutional Court Ruling 31/2010, of 28 June has authenticated the limitations and possibilities for the development of a constitutional model of justice that inevitably has to adapt to the reality of a politically decentralized State. The Ruling has therefore taken a reading that consolidates the validity of the most regressive principles of that model, failing to take the opportunity that was offered to require the legislator to exhaust the possibilities for achieving a perfect articulation of the principles of jurisdictional unity and political autonomy, as a preparatory condition for desirable constitutional reform. However, despite the Ruling, those possibilities still exist, encouraged by the federal dynamic of the State itself, which demands their continual exploration. The Statute is therefore built on the regulatory programme of deferred compliance over time, which signals the path it needs to take, and that path has to follow channels that are necessarily federal.

The object of analysis for this article is the judgment carried out by the Constitutional Court in Ruling 31/2010 of the challenges to Section III of the Statute of Autonomy of Catalonia, in relation to the Judicial Power in the Community. After briefly identifying the lines of the argument of this appeal,as well as the response to it by the public prosecutor and the autonomous government and parliament, the theoretical bases on which the Courtwill base its decision are examined, analysing the debatable elements involved in those bases. This is followed by a consideration of the particular understanding that the Constitutional Court has of the relationship betweenthe Statutes and the Organic Law of Judiciary (LOPJ), on the basis of which it has declared a large number of the points being challenged to beconstitutional. It also shows how this understanding varies when articles related to the Council of Justice are indicted, some of which are declaredunconstitutional in a very curious manner.

This article analyses the effect of the Constitutional Court Decision 31/2010 on the statutory formulation of the relations between the Generalitat and the State, and attempts to offer a balanced view which, while not denying the dysfunctions that the Ruling may bring about and the regressive nature of its general pronouncements, also takes into account the broad validation of the techniques and mechanisms anticipated in the Statute on this matter.The Decision maintains the general discourse with respect to GEneralitat-State relations: mistrust of the statutory precepts, which provokes debatable statements, such as the appeal to a decontextualised superiority of the State, or the inclusion of unnecessary cautions to the safeguarding of state powers. It also establishes some limits, which are insuffi ciently explained and difficult to put into practice. However, at the same time, the Ruling supports the statutory formulation of relations between the Generalitat and the State, thereby consolidating a model that will be projected in the future onto the legal system and the political dialectics produced between the two bodies.

In this article, after identifying the basic objectives of statutory reform in languages, the general characteristics of the pronouncement of the Constitutional Court in Constitutional Court Ruling 31/2010 and its effects on the statutory linguistic regime. Specifically, the object of critical analysis will be the arguments and interpretative declarations formulated by the Court in relation to the statutory principles of autochthonous language and official status and the sectorial linguistic prescriptions that cover the rights andprinciples related to institutions and public bodies, as well as the authorisation of their staff to use official languages, teaching and the socio-economicsphere. The final reflections will include a transversal reading of the Ruling,within the necessary context in which it is inscribed, from the perspective of self-governance of Catalonia in terms of language.

After the statutory reforms of the period 2006-2011, initiated in the Autonomous Community of Valencia and that, recently, has reached to Statute of Autonomy of Extremadura, and once entered into force the Treaty of Lisbon of 13 December 2007 on December 1 2009, Law 8/1994 of May 19, has needed two reforms: Law 24/2009 of 22 December and Law 38/2010 of 20 December, approved to strengthen the functions of the Parliament and regional parliaments in the early warning system for the control of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality; the Parliament has processed twenty-two reports during 2010. Also, the XIV Conference CALRE has adopted the Declaration of Trento on 3 to 5 October 2010, under the rubric How to become Subsidiarity Actors, in order to build a coherent system of multilevel governance in which the regional or regional level can reach full democratic legitimacy and correct parliamentary functioning. As result of this new configuration of the Statutes of Autonomy, the European Treaties and the Parliamentary Law, emerges a new scenario of gradual redefinition of the constitutional structure of the state, with four levels of power and interparliamentary relations, which allow to define the European Union as an autonomous and supranational community.

The new Catalan Statute of Autonomy contains a novelty: detailed regulationsfor local government. These regulations require the appropriate legislativeimplementation. Within this implementation of the Statute the futureact regulating Catalan local authorities is of central importance. The ultimateaim of this paper is to analyse the problems raised by describing this act asa law for basic implementation of the Statute. Such laws for basic implementationof the Statute are a special type of law which exist in some autonomousstructures, among them that of Catalonia, and now enjoy explicit statutoryrecognition. Despite having existed for so many years and being of suchimportance, it is a type of law which lacks sufficient categorical definition.The first part of the paper should be seen as a contribution to remedyingthis gap. The main issues raised by this special type of autonomous law areexamined in detail: its name, nature, concept, material component (reservedareas), formal features (joint initiative and reinforced quorum), relationshipwith other laws and the statutory limits surrounding it.

In this article the distribution of jurisdictions over housing is analyzed, takinginto account the 2006 Statute of Autonomy of Catalonia and the new Rightto Housing Law 18/2007, of 18 December. It is divided into three parts. Firstly,the jurisdictional framework that was in place regarding this area before the2006 Statute came into force is studied, examining connections between townplanning, organization of land-use and housing, as well as the most relevantrulings of the Constitutional Court and Supreme Court. Secondly, the articleconsiders the impact that the Statute of Autonomy of Catalonia has had onthis pre-existing situation and the prospects for its future evolution. Also analyzed,further to this, are: the new Right to Housing Law, its relationship withCentral Government jurisdictions, and the regulation laid down in the articlesof the new law of relationships between the Catalan Government andlocal bodies. One of the most notable conclusions regarding this area is thelack of Central Government adaptation to the situation derived from the existenceof a decentralized state, as well as the need to move towards goodgovernance of the housing situation.

The aim of this study is to examine articles 7 to 10 of ruling 247/2007 of theConstitutional Court, in which the role of the Statutes of Autonomy in thedivision of jurisdictions between the Central Government and the AutonomousCommunities is analysed, and the impact that the ruling in this case may haveon the future ruling on the Catalan Statute. To link ruling 247/2007 withthe future ruling on the Catalan Statute, on one side the appellant parties –the Partido Popular and the ombudsman, and the Parliement of Catalonia,on the other, the Constitutional Court makes its arguments regarding theextent to which the Statutes of Autonomy limit its jurisdiction. Public knowledgeof the appellants’ arguments and the Constitutional Court’s decisionregarding this case, which are included in a ruling from previous appealsthat pronounces on many of the issues covered in the mentioned appeals,allows the study to close with a series of considerations about the future rulingof the Constitutional Court on the part of the Catalan Statute relatingto the new model for distribution of jurisdictions.

This article examines the impacts that recent normative changes happenedboth at domestic and European spheres, have had upon the participation ofthe Autonomous Communities in the decision-making process within theEuropean Union’s institutions. These changes refer to the approval of theLisbonne Treaty, to the approval of several statutes of autonomy and to the2004 agreement made at the Spanish Intergovernmental Conference ofEuropean Union Affairs (Conferencia para asuntos relacionados con lasComunidades Europeas). The article analyses how the changes have enlargedthe individual and collective channels the Autonomous Communities haveto participate within the different European Union institutions: their collectiveparticipation as representatives of the Autonomous Communities asa whole within the commitology bodies and within the Council through theSpanish delegation; their individual representation in the Committee of theRegions, the European Parliament and the European regional network. Inthis sense, the article also pays attention to the analysis of the representationoffices of the Autonomous Communities in Brussels since they play a crucialplay as institutional links and coordination bodies between their respectiveAutonomous Communities administrations, the Permanent SpanishRepresentation and the different European institutions.

The Statute of Autonomy of Catalonia has on the one hand reinforced theidea of exclusive powers, and on the other, is clearly committed to promotingmechanisms of co-operation and participation in the exercising of powers.The article focuses on a study of the Catalan Autonomous RegionalGovernment's technique of participation in exercising state powers. This participation,unlike inter-governmental co-operation, respects the state-basednature of the power but introduces a mechanism of flexibility in exercisingit. It is based on a bilateral agreement, expressed by the Statute as an agreedregulation and refers the specification of the mechanism (reports, agreements,bilateral bodies, associations) to the State. At the same time, it reflectsthe democratic principle linked to the right to representation and apublic hearing which pertains to the Catalan Autonomous Regional Governmentinsofar as the exercising of state powers may affect its sphere ofpowers.The Statute of 2006 elaborates on the use of this mechanism, and in particular,on powers relating to transport infrastructures, where instead of rigidity in the application of constitutional criteria (classification as of generalinterest, territorial scope and effect on another Autonomous Region)formulas that are more respectful of autonomous regional powers areproposed and these are those that in many cases had been applied in practice.

Legal institutions for the public protection of minors are at present regulatedby regulations enacted as civil legislation. This study looks at the reasonswhy this was the case. Catalan legislators continued down the road that Spanish state legislators had travelled beforehand. In fact, by this meansSpanish state legislators sought, and to a large extent succeeded in, unifying,standardising and including the regulations in this area into commonlaw. This process of "making civil" a task of the government had createddistortions, ranging from some decreases in citizen's guarantees when dealingwith the Government to considerable legal uncertainty. That is why itwould be wise to retrace our steps to make the government's work interms of the protection of minors more administrative. It is the right timeto do so. A process reforming the legislation for public protection of minorsis now under way in Catalonia. First, the Department of Justice is producinga draft law which will approve the second book of the Catalonia CivilCode, which regulates the protection of minors. At the same time, theDepartment of Social Action and Citizenship has begun the process to enacta new Law regulating childhood and adolescence. These legal texts willtherefore regulate the public and private institutions protecting minors anda legal regime will be established for them. The Civil Code should regulatethe legal/private institutions for the protection of minors, under the jurisdictionof civil legislation (art. 129 of the Statute of Autonomy of Catalonia).However, the legal and public institutions for the protection of minors shouldbe regulated within a governmental framework, as social services and publicprotection of minors (art. 166 of the Statute of Autonomy of Catalonia).Despite this, to the extent that the private and public institutions for theprotection of minors are interrelated, the two regulations must complementeach other. This is beside the fact that a civil law contains administrative regulations;this is not the problem. The issue is clearly establishing the legalregime of the legal/public institutions for the protection of minors. TheGovernment's work in terms of the public protection of minors must besubject to administrative law, insofar as the Government acts as a publicauthority, i.e. by exercising the prerogatives that the regulation confers onit to satisfy public interests, such as the protection of children.

The consequences of Spain’s membership of the European Union are not wellreflected in the Constitution. The Autonomous Communities are not mentionedin article 93 of the Constitution, which refers explicitly to Europeanaffairs.The aim of this article is to examine, in current practice, two of the Europeanissues arising from Spanish membership that are of concern to the AutonomousCommunities, insofar as their political autonomy is significantly affected. Thefirst is the locus standi of the Autonomous Communities in terms of the jurisdictionalinstitutions of the European Union, since they cannot defend theirpowers judicially when affected by an EU regulation as easily as the centralpowers of the State can. This is because they have no legitimate status as partiesin the European appeal process, which in turn makes it very difficult forthem to take issue with measures which are not aimed at them. The otherissue is the responsibility of the Autonomous Communities for non-compliance with EU law at internal level, because it is they who have to deal withthe consequences arising this such non-compliance.The final section considers how these two areas have been regulated in thereforms to the statutes of the Autonomous Communities which are either inforce or in the process of being enacted. Particular reference is made to theCatalan case, in order to determine how far the provisions of the statutescorrespond to the legal regime and practice followed in these two areas.

One of the most significant new features that is included in the new statutesof autonomy are the so-called territorial declarations or charters of citizens'rights. The aim of this study is to analyse this from two different but complementaryperspectives. From a more general point of view, it is a synthesis ofthe arguments that have been used by Spanish nationalist constitutionalistdoctrine in favour of or against the new contents of the statutes, in an attemptto highlight how neither of them are the key to a decision on whetheror not the declarations of rights in the statutes are inappropriate or unconstitutional.From a more specific point of view, there is a more detailed examinationof the contents of these charters – the regulatory framework in whichthe new texts of the statutes is included, which rights are proclaimed and whatare the guarantees surrounding the proclamation in the recent statutes. Inits conclusions, the study clearly shows that first, the charters are in full agreementwith the nature and function of the statutes in the Spanish autonomousregional state. Second, that these charters are regulations which as faras the citizen is concerned, complement constitutional rights and bring themup to date them with new content.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the effect of the recent reforms of theAutonomous Statutes on the electoral system of the Autonomous Communities,based on the material rules (gender equality, electoral debates, etc.) and proceduralrules (a qualified majority to approve the electoral bill) which theyincluded. The new Autonomous Statutes display a twofold mistrust. First,there is mistrust of the Central Parliament and its General Electoral Bill, dueto its heavy regulation of regional elections. Second, there is mistrust of theParliament of the Autonomous Community, which is restricted in two ways:a) by including the subjects that should be in an electoral bill in the AutonomousStatute; b) by means of the “consensus trap”, which requires a high level ofagreement among Parliamentary groups in order to pass the electoral bill,which in all likelihood will prevent the changes from being made, as the politicaland institutional future of the groups involved is at stake.If we add two further factors (the application of 116 articles the GeneralElectoral Bill to the autonomous elections and the Autonomous Statute regulation on electoral matters), and we discount one factor (the lack of innovationin the autonomous regional system), it is clear that the Electoral Billsof the Autonomous Communities will be redundant, too detailed and willcover too little. In conclusion, we have new Autonomous Statutes but oldelectoral systems.

This article analyses the constitutional and statutory proposals that allowautonomous communities to create their own assessment organisations inorder to set a fair price in the process of forced expropriation. It focuses onthe provisions of the new Catalan statute of autonomy established in 2006,the statement made by the constitutional court in ruling 251/06, of 25th July,and other agreements. It further analyses the main criticisms from differentsectors of autonomous jurisdiction both from the point of view of theircomposition and presidency and in light of the supposed equality gap betweenthe citizens of the various state territories as a consequence of thefoundation of these organisations. In conclusion, the author proposes thatthese criticisms would be neither exclusively applicable to the autonomousjurisdiction nor affect the guarantees that the constitution establishes forthose affected by a process of forced expropriation.

One of the politically more controversial areas of distribution of powers betweenthe Autonomous Communities and the Spanish central government,has been that related to social security, most particularly its economic regime.In contrast, actual constitutional conflicts and their corresponding ruling bythe Spanish Constitutional Court—unlike its political counterpart—have beenrather lacking, and are reduced to three rulings that mark the progress froma highly restrictive posture for the Spanish Autonomous Communities to onethat is somewhat more favourable to the possibilities that these have fortaking action, by recognising certain responsibilities of an instrumental character.At all events, beyond this discrete progress, the final bases supportingeach of the Constitutional Court’s rulings are essentially the same, andare yet to resolve many of the questions surrounding the distribution of powersin this field, especially in the economic regime. The purpose of this articleis to analyse the situation existing prior to the approval of the new CatalanStatute of Autonomy, the position of the Constitutional Court, and ananalysis of the changes brought about by the new Statute, as well as of itspossible future effects.

The article is an analysis of previous unconstitutional appeal, reintroduced as the Spanish Constitutional Court attribution decades after it was repealed, although now restricted exclusively to draft Statutes of autonomy or amendments thereto. The main reason for its restoration (the referendum of the Statutes approved by way of art. 151); indistinction of the Statutes of autonomy as an object thereof; maintain consistency of its optional character and not turn it into an imperative procedure; non-extendible deadline for sentencing; and relative skepticism that the previous unconstitutional appeal serves to achieve what is assumed that the legislature pursues the same time, it is the essential aspects addressed in the work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Language Problems & Language Planning is the property of John Benjamins Publishing Co. 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, its author analyzes some of the top current issues on the politicaland legal definition of the Spanish territorial model of state. From thisperspective, the author considers that there are some aspects of the territorialorganization of the state that have neither been tackled properly, norhave been approached from a problem-solving perspective. As a consequence,these aspects have ended up generating structural resistances to the full developmentof political decentralization in Spain. Thus, first of all, the authorsustains that there have been no significant changes on the territorial modelof state since its foundation in 1978; according to the author, thus, the1978 territorial status quo has hardly changed over all this period. Under thispremise, the author studies what he calls the “re-foundation” of the territorialdistribution of power in Spain, that is, the re-definition of the Stateof the Autonomous Communities.Secondly, he advocates for the need to provide a detailed definition of thede facto territorial model of State. In this sense he strongly criticizes theterritorial model of State that would result from both the process leadingto the reform of the Statute of Autonomy of Catalonia and the constitutionalreform proposed by Central Government. Thirdly, he states the importance of dealing with the different political and legal challenges arising fromthe current political debates on the territorial matter, as well as the need tofurther develop a federal paradigm which could serve as a reference for thefuture.

Copyright of Cuadernos de Historia Contemporanea is the property of Universidad Complutense de Madrid 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.)

En los últimos cuatro años, el sistema político español ha adquirido una nueva configuración jurídica como consecuencia de las reformas estatutarias del periodo 2006-2010 y del Tratado de Lisboa de 13 diciembre de 2007, en vigor desde el 1 de diciembre de 2009. Junto a la participación autonómica en el proceso decisorio europeo, en el ámbito parlamentario, el Tratado de Lisboa y dos de sus Protocolos han justificado, asimismo, la aprobación de la Ley 24/2009, de 22 de diciembre, de modificación de la Ley 8/1994, de 19 de mayo, por la que se regula la Comisión Mixta para la Unión Europea, y el derecho de los Parlamentos a participar en el procedimiento de control de la subsidiariedad. Se trata, además, de tres conjuntos normativos que abren un nuevo campo de estudio a la relación entre poderes y, conforme a una interpretación sistemática y un entendimiento integrador del Estado, permiten fundamentar y ampliar las competencias y funciones parlamentarias al proceso decisorio europeo, a la cooperación descentralizada y a las relaciones interparlamentarias. Conforme a este planteamiento, y a la luz de la doctrina del Tribunal Constitucional (STC 31/2010, de 28 de junio), en este trabajo analizamos tres aspectos fundamentales de las competencias y funciones europeas del sistema parlamentario español: a) La configuración legal de estas competencias y funciones; b) La participación orgánica de las Comunidades Autónomas en las fases ascendente y descendente del proceso decisorio europeo; y c) Las funciones de los Parlamentos autonómicos en sistema de alerta temprana para el control de los principios de subsidiariedad y proporcionalidad. During the last four years, the Spanish politic system parliamentary ha acquired a new configuration as a result of the reforms of the Statutes of autonomies (2006-2010) and the Treaty of Lisbon of 13 December 2007, that entered into force on 1 December 2009. Furthermore, the Treaty of Lisbon and two of its Protocols have justified also the adoption of Law 24/2009, of December 22, which amends the Law 8/1994, of May 19, regulating the Joint Congress-Senate Committee for EU matters, and the right of the Autonomous Parliament to participate in the monitoring principles of subsidiarity and proportionality. This body of rules has opened a new field of study on the relationship between powers and, according to a systematic and inclusive understanding of the State, can increase autonomic functions to the participation in the European decision-making, the decentralized cooperation and cross-border and to interparliamentary relations. In this paper we analyze three key aspects of european competences and functions of the Autonomous Comunities, following the doctrine of the Constitutional Court (STC 31/2010, of 28 June): a) The configuration of these parliamentary competences and duties; b) The organic participation of the Autonomous Communities in the European decision-making, and c) The functions of th spanish parliamentary system in the early warning system for monitoring the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality in accordance with the Organic Law 1/2008, of July 30, which authorizes the ratification by Spain of the Treaty of Lisbon, and the Law 24/2009, of December 22, which amends the Law 8/1994, of May 19, regulating the Joint Congress- Senate Committee for EU matters. We propose an integrative and conceptual reconstruction of the parliamentary law, oriented to be a relational order of different legislative powers: the State, the European Union and the Autonomous Communities.

Copyright of Aposta is the property of Aposta 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 work provides an overwiew on the Spanish literature published on the new Statute of Autonomy of Catalonia. Special focus is placed on studies on Public Law [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]