Pub Date : 2021-05-27DOI: 10.1163/15730352-BJA10035
A. Kazun
Little is known about the motives of lawyers who provide free legal assistance in countries that lack both a developed professional community and developed institutions related to the rule of law. Based on a survey of 3,317 criminal defense lawyers (advokaty) in 35 regions of Russia, we analyze the provision of two types of free legal services: participation in legal proceedings “on appointment” (po naznacheniyu) and the provision of pro bono legal assistance. We show that work on appointment usually involves lawyers with low social capital and a lack of regular clients. In contrast, pro bono legal assistance is encouraged by lawyers’ organizations. It is typically provided by professionals with a high level of social capital and with values aimed at maintaining an excellent professional reputation. We conclude that the provision of free legal services might best be stimulated within the professional community rather than by the government.
{"title":"Institutional Determinants for Representation of Indigent Defendants: Evidence from Russia","authors":"A. Kazun","doi":"10.1163/15730352-BJA10035","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15730352-BJA10035","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Little is known about the motives of lawyers who provide free legal assistance in countries that lack both a developed professional community and developed institutions related to the rule of law. Based on a survey of 3,317 criminal defense lawyers (advokaty) in 35 regions of Russia, we analyze the provision of two types of free legal services: participation in legal proceedings “on appointment” (po naznacheniyu) and the provision of pro bono legal assistance. We show that work on appointment usually involves lawyers with low social capital and a lack of regular clients. In contrast, pro bono legal assistance is encouraged by lawyers’ organizations. It is typically provided by professionals with a high level of social capital and with values aimed at maintaining an excellent professional reputation. We conclude that the provision of free legal services might best be stimulated within the professional community rather than by the government.","PeriodicalId":42845,"journal":{"name":"Review of Central and East European Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87214496","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-02-24DOI: 10.1163/15730352-BJA10046
F. Feldbrugge, W. B. Simons
{"title":"In Memoriam Aleksandr L. Makovskii","authors":"F. Feldbrugge, W. B. Simons","doi":"10.1163/15730352-BJA10046","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15730352-BJA10046","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":42845,"journal":{"name":"Review of Central and East European Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72902065","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-02-24DOI: 10.1163/15730352-BJA10043
Jan Podkowik
The article discusses the concept of personal autonomy as a constitutional fundamental right protected by the Polish Constitution of 1997. Autonomy is not only a constitutional value of an unspecified character but also a right with its own specific normative content. Personal autonomy, also called the right to self-determination, is rooted in natural law. The scope of its constitutional protection is determined and – simultaneously – limited by constitutional standards of an absolute character such as human dignity, non-discrimination, and the like. Autonomy as a constitutional right may be subjected to further restrictions imposed by the legislator in accordance with the principle of proportionality. The legal status of an individual’s right to self determination is thus determined by all the prohibitions and orders resulting directly from the Constitution as well as sub-constitutional statutory provisions which respect the principle of proportionality requirements.
{"title":"Personal Autonomy and its Direct Constitutional Limits – a Polish Perspective","authors":"Jan Podkowik","doi":"10.1163/15730352-BJA10043","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15730352-BJA10043","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000The article discusses the concept of personal autonomy as a constitutional fundamental right protected by the Polish Constitution of 1997. Autonomy is not only a constitutional value of an unspecified character but also a right with its own specific normative content. Personal autonomy, also called the right to self-determination, is rooted in natural law. The scope of its constitutional protection is determined and – simultaneously – limited by constitutional standards of an absolute character such as human dignity, non-discrimination, and the like. Autonomy as a constitutional right may be subjected to further restrictions imposed by the legislator in accordance with the principle of proportionality. The legal status of an individual’s right to self determination is thus determined by all the prohibitions and orders resulting directly from the Constitution as well as sub-constitutional statutory provisions which respect the principle of proportionality requirements.","PeriodicalId":42845,"journal":{"name":"Review of Central and East European Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83046706","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-02-24DOI: 10.1163/15730352-BJA10042
E. Craig
The precise form of internalization of the provisions of the Council of Europe’s Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities in domestic law is crucial in ensuring its long-term effectiveness. Experiences in the Western Balkans raise important questions about the role of minority (or community) rights legislation in deeply divided societies. This article uses the case-studies of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo and the Republic of North Macedonia to highlight key themes and limitations that have emerged. Comparative analysis reveals a surprising divergence of approaches to internalization in the region. The article further demonstrates that the ‘nation-cum-state paradigm’ remains prevalent, despite the premise of universality. It argues that such legislation can play an important symbolic and practical role, but that legal internalization needs to be seen as an ongoing process. It concludes that attention needs to be given to ensuring the continued particularization and adaptation of such legislation in light of both the limitations and changing circumstances, providing a key lesson also for other divided societies.
{"title":"The Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities and Internalization: Lessons from the Western Balkans","authors":"E. Craig","doi":"10.1163/15730352-BJA10042","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15730352-BJA10042","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000The precise form of internalization of the provisions of the Council of Europe’s Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities in domestic law is crucial in ensuring its long-term effectiveness. Experiences in the Western Balkans raise important questions about the role of minority (or community) rights legislation in deeply divided societies. This article uses the case-studies of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo and the Republic of North Macedonia to highlight key themes and limitations that have emerged. Comparative analysis reveals a surprising divergence of approaches to internalization in the region. The article further demonstrates that the ‘nation-cum-state paradigm’ remains prevalent, despite the premise of universality. It argues that such legislation can play an important symbolic and practical role, but that legal internalization needs to be seen as an ongoing process. It concludes that attention needs to be given to ensuring the continued particularization and adaptation of such legislation in light of both the limitations and changing circumstances, providing a key lesson also for other divided societies.","PeriodicalId":42845,"journal":{"name":"Review of Central and East European Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79881533","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-02-24DOI: 10.1163/15730352-BJA10024
G. Mészáros
This paper discusses the Hungarian constitutionalism and the emergency model which can be called an ‘autocratic’ emergency model in which the government’s main aim is to create an emergency regime without real threat. That was the case in Hungary before 2020, but as the new coronavirus flourished the Hungarian constitutionalism and the rule of law withered. As the article asserts the declaration of the state of danger was unconstitutional because human epidemic is not involved in the listing of the constitution. The constitutional concerns have become even more complicated after the acceptance of the “Enabling Act” which gave unconstrained power for the Government. The spirit of Carl Schmitt’s theory is again emerged. As the coronavirus and its immediate effect necessitated extra-legal measures, the threshold between the rule of law and exceptionalism was fading swiftly and legal constitutionalism became a pleasant memory.
{"title":"Carl Schmitt in Hungary: Constitutional Crisis in the Shadow of Covid-19","authors":"G. Mészáros","doi":"10.1163/15730352-BJA10024","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15730352-BJA10024","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000This paper discusses the Hungarian constitutionalism and the emergency model which can be called an ‘autocratic’ emergency model in which the government’s main aim is to create an emergency regime without real threat. That was the case in Hungary before 2020, but as the new coronavirus flourished the Hungarian constitutionalism and the rule of law withered. As the article asserts the declaration of the state of danger was unconstitutional because human epidemic is not involved in the listing of the constitution. The constitutional concerns have become even more complicated after the acceptance of the “Enabling Act” which gave unconstrained power for the Government. The spirit of Carl Schmitt’s theory is again emerged. As the coronavirus and its immediate effect necessitated extra-legal measures, the threshold between the rule of law and exceptionalism was fading swiftly and legal constitutionalism became a pleasant memory.","PeriodicalId":42845,"journal":{"name":"Review of Central and East European Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77734983","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-02-24DOI: 10.1163/15730352-BJA10041
Violeta Beširević
Ever since it was announced in Madison v. Marbury, and articulated in Baker v. Carr, the political question doctrine that tends to exclude ‘mega politics’ from judicial check has been a controversial tool of judicial abstention. Not only that it is not universally applied, but it seems also to be losing significance even in countries of its usual influence due to extensive judicialization of ‘mega politics,’ which implies that there is no claim which the courts will not hear. Based on the judicialization of the Kosovo conflict, this paper shows why the doctrine deserves to be revived and even transplanted in jurisdictions outside its usual reach, particularly in disputes regarding real-life unilateral secession.
自从在麦迪逊诉马布里案(Madison v. Marbury)中宣布并在贝克诉卡尔案(Baker v. Carr)中阐明这一原则以来，倾向于将“大政治”排除在司法检查之外的政治问题原则一直是一种有争议的司法弃权工具。它不仅没有被普遍适用，而且由于“大政治”的广泛司法化，它似乎也在失去其通常影响力的国家的重要性，这意味着没有法院不会审理的索赔。本文以科索沃冲突的司法化为基础，说明了为什么该原则值得在其通常范围之外的司法管辖区恢复甚至移植，特别是在现实生活中有关单方面分离的争端中。
{"title":"Making Sense of the Political Question Doctrine: The Case of Kosovo","authors":"Violeta Beširević","doi":"10.1163/15730352-BJA10041","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15730352-BJA10041","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Ever since it was announced in Madison v. Marbury, and articulated in Baker v. Carr, the political question doctrine that tends to exclude ‘mega politics’ from judicial check has been a controversial tool of judicial abstention. Not only that it is not universally applied, but it seems also to be losing significance even in countries of its usual influence due to extensive judicialization of ‘mega politics,’ which implies that there is no claim which the courts will not hear. Based on the judicialization of the Kosovo conflict, this paper shows why the doctrine deserves to be revived and even transplanted in jurisdictions outside its usual reach, particularly in disputes regarding real-life unilateral secession.","PeriodicalId":42845,"journal":{"name":"Review of Central and East European Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88102078","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-02-24DOI: 10.1163/15730352-BJA10044
M. Krimmer
The Crimean conflict has been a challenge to the international community not only politically since the role of international law has now been questioned, especially concerning its interpretation and even applicability. As Crimea now falls into the category of an annexed/occupied territory, it is worth examining whether effective protection is afforded to property rights relating to foreign direct investments (fdi s) on Crimean territory. Foreign Direct Investments are usually protected by bilateral investment treaties (bit s) and this paper examines whether the Russia-Ukraine bit can guarantee an effective protection for property and also what other tools may exist for guarantee this protection. The article shows that there are two different “toolkits” which can protect investors’ property rights. Thus, not only the Russia-Ukraine bit can guarantee effective protection of property protection but also another tool, which is the European Convention on Human Rights. Both tools, the Russia-Ukraine bit and the echr protect the property rights and can co-exist.
{"title":"Protection of Property Rights in Crimea: The Tools of International Investment Law compared to the Mechanism of the European Convention on Human Rights","authors":"M. Krimmer","doi":"10.1163/15730352-BJA10044","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15730352-BJA10044","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000The Crimean conflict has been a challenge to the international community not only politically since the role of international law has now been questioned, especially concerning its interpretation and even applicability. As Crimea now falls into the category of an annexed/occupied territory, it is worth examining whether effective protection is afforded to property rights relating to foreign direct investments (fdi s) on Crimean territory. Foreign Direct Investments are usually protected by bilateral investment treaties (bit s) and this paper examines whether the Russia-Ukraine bit can guarantee an effective protection for property and also what other tools may exist for guarantee this protection. The article shows that there are two different “toolkits” which can protect investors’ property rights. Thus, not only the Russia-Ukraine bit can guarantee effective protection of property protection but also another tool, which is the European Convention on Human Rights. Both tools, the Russia-Ukraine bit and the echr protect the property rights and can co-exist.","PeriodicalId":42845,"journal":{"name":"Review of Central and East European Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82288641","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-12-16DOI: 10.1163/15730352-bja10039
E. Samoilova
With all eyes on the recent global COVID-19 pandemic, another pandemic has been growing in the shadows: violence against women. The Council of Europe’s Istanbul Convention creates a legal framework in order to protect women against all forms of violence. Its ratification process, however, has faced considerable challenges, particularly in the Central and Eastern European Member States. This article discusses the basic elements of the Istanbul Convention, reflects on the ratification process in the EU and its Member States, and sets out the main legal issues raised in the European Parliament’s request for an opinion (A-1/19 of 22 November 2019) to the Court of Justice of the European Union. Special focus is put on the choice of the correct EU legal basis and the practices of ‘splitting’ and ‘common accord’. This article argues that the European Parliament’s request for an opinion provides the perfect opportunity for the Court of Justice of the European Union to further clarify the law and the practice of concluding mixed agreements by the EU and its Member States.
{"title":"The Practices of ‘Splitting’ and ‘Common Accord’ Under Scrutiny: the European Parliament‘s Request for an Opinion of the European Court of Justice on the Istanbul Convention","authors":"E. Samoilova","doi":"10.1163/15730352-bja10039","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15730352-bja10039","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000With all eyes on the recent global COVID-19 pandemic, another pandemic has been growing in the shadows: violence against women. The Council of Europe’s Istanbul Convention creates a legal framework in order to protect women against all forms of violence. Its ratification process, however, has faced considerable challenges, particularly in the Central and Eastern European Member States. This article discusses the basic elements of the Istanbul Convention, reflects on the ratification process in the EU and its Member States, and sets out the main legal issues raised in the European Parliament’s request for an opinion (A-1/19 of 22 November 2019) to the Court of Justice of the European Union. Special focus is put on the choice of the correct EU legal basis and the practices of ‘splitting’ and ‘common accord’. This article argues that the European Parliament’s request for an opinion provides the perfect opportunity for the Court of Justice of the European Union to further clarify the law and the practice of concluding mixed agreements by the EU and its Member States.","PeriodicalId":42845,"journal":{"name":"Review of Central and East European Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2020-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88012307","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-12-16DOI: 10.1163/15730352-bja10037
K. Schmalenbach
This contribution critically analyses the four limbs of the EU’s defence mechanism upholding the rule of law within the Union. The first being the individual post accession rule of law mechanism, introduced by the Commission in 2006 for the two new member states Bulgaria and Rumania. The second, and arguably most powerful limb, involves the EU Court of Justice conducting a judicial review of a member state’s rule of law situation, which is of far greater concern for reviewed members than the so-called “nuclear” last-resort option of Art. 7 teu ’s sanction mechanism (fourth limb) that is politically difficult to enact. With a view to the politically fraught Art. 7 teu, the Commission introduced a new “early warning” rule of law framework in 2014 which pre-emptively enables exploring dialogue-based solutions to rule-of law issues as they emerge (third limb).
{"title":"Defending Democracy and the Rule of Law in the Era of Post-Enlargement","authors":"K. Schmalenbach","doi":"10.1163/15730352-bja10037","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15730352-bja10037","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000This contribution critically analyses the four limbs of the EU’s defence mechanism upholding the rule of law within the Union. The first being the individual post accession rule of law mechanism, introduced by the Commission in 2006 for the two new member states Bulgaria and Rumania. The second, and arguably most powerful limb, involves the EU Court of Justice conducting a judicial review of a member state’s rule of law situation, which is of far greater concern for reviewed members than the so-called “nuclear” last-resort option of Art. 7 teu ’s sanction mechanism (fourth limb) that is politically difficult to enact. With a view to the politically fraught Art. 7 teu, the Commission introduced a new “early warning” rule of law framework in 2014 which pre-emptively enables exploring dialogue-based solutions to rule-of law issues as they emerge (third limb).","PeriodicalId":42845,"journal":{"name":"Review of Central and East European Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2020-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87139279","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-12-16DOI: 10.1163/15730352-bja10038
E. Lantschner
The present article discusses the usefulness of indicators in monitoring not only the legal transposition but also the practical implementation of the two Equality Directives adopted in 2000. It focuses on those provisions of the Directives which have assigned a particular role to ngos, both in reacting to discrimination as well as in preventing discrimination and promoting equality. Indicators have been developed on the basis of a comparative review of transposition and implementation, including case studies on Romania, Hungary and Croatia. Considering the great potential of ngos in contributing to achieve the aims of the Directives and the current worrying trends as to how they are supported in (or obstructed from) taking up their role, the article proposes using these indicators not only in the pre-accession context but also for regular monitoring of all EU member states.
{"title":"Indicators for Monitoring Implementation of EU Equality Directives","authors":"E. Lantschner","doi":"10.1163/15730352-bja10038","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15730352-bja10038","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000The present article discusses the usefulness of indicators in monitoring not only the legal transposition but also the practical implementation of the two Equality Directives adopted in 2000. It focuses on those provisions of the Directives which have assigned a particular role to ngos, both in reacting to discrimination as well as in preventing discrimination and promoting equality. Indicators have been developed on the basis of a comparative review of transposition and implementation, including case studies on Romania, Hungary and Croatia. Considering the great potential of ngos in contributing to achieve the aims of the Directives and the current worrying trends as to how they are supported in (or obstructed from) taking up their role, the article proposes using these indicators not only in the pre-accession context but also for regular monitoring of all EU member states.","PeriodicalId":42845,"journal":{"name":"Review of Central and East European Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2020-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82067935","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：