Security cooperation, counterterrorism, and EU–North Africa cross-border security relations, a legal perspective
The EU is clearly in the process of developing an external dimension to the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ). This paper focuses on ex. Police and Judicial Cooperation in Criminal Matters (PJCCM) provisions. These developments pose specific legal basis issues for the EU, given its complex EU–member state legal relationship, and the inter-institutional balance, all reflected in the treaty framework post-Lisbon. New Court of Justice rulings are now emerging which will assist in this issue. Equally the approach to be taken in developing these relationships will be crucial. This paper proposes the adoption of an Onuf style constructivism in order to best capture the reality of the process that is developing, and has developed for the ex. PJCCM measures internally. This then needs to be allied with a constitutionalism model to ensure a balanced development of all three aspects of the AFSJ.
The external dimension of justice and home affairs: a different security agenda for the European Union?
or cultural references or a lack of empathy are also likely to encourage the outbreak of armed conflicts’ (p. 40). In his explanation, the author particularly analyses the post-9/11 exchanges among international actors. The feeling of ‘being offended’ is perhaps more convincing than violation of international law in explaining the post-9/ 11 discourse to justify some armed conflicts. This hypothesis has further explanatory capacity in the civil wars of multi-cultural or multi-ethnic entities. Then, this hypothesis becomes intertwined with the second hypothesis: even when specific identities are denied, armed conflicts can be prevented if there are strong shared identities. In other words, all four hypotheses are able to co-exist next to each other in the causal mechanism of war from the recognition point of view. Following the presentation of these four hypotheses, part II of the book deals with the case studies. First, Chapter 3 deals with the case where armed conflicts are intended to gain respect and to avoid shame regardless of the expected outcomes of the war. Unlike utilitarian approaches, the ‘‘‘symbolic’’ approaches to war’ the title of part I explain even seemingly irrational decisions to engage in armed conflict. Thus, the second half of part II, Chapter 4, explores the ‘politics of recognition’ that implies a normative approach to prevent wars by saving one’s face: international institutions, then, become a recognition mechanism to prevent armed conflicts. Once again, the author never declares that his analysis is the solo authoritative understanding of war. He admits various conditions and effects in deciding armed conflicts. However, clearly identified hypotheses as well as thoroughly well-written case studies are able to combine a wide range of scholarly thoughts in understanding modern ideology, culture, diplomacy and war. Regardless of one’s academic and professional background, the author succeeds to capture the readers’ curiosity and to defend his four hypotheses. The reviewer hopes Lindemann’s work to be continued, perhaps using econometric analysis to systematically defend the robustness of his hypotheses.
La inseguridad jurídica en normas de contratación estatal
It is established by different studies that the issue of government procurement has been marred by several factors, the test objective to publicize these factors, we take as starting point the constant conflict between the branches of government to try and organize this subject; will collect and analyze diverse regulatory and case material in order to achieve evidence and demonstrate the different concepts of constant change that produces excessive regulation of the subject procurement and is in turn causing rapid changes that result in legal uncertainty for our law on the Contract Status.