Academic literature on the topic 'Treaty establishing the European Community'

The Treaty of Rome, establishing the European Economic Community (hereinafter: the Treaty), does not provide for a system of Community-wide merger control and authorization.The anti-trust provisions of the Treaty are only concerned with distortion of competition resulting from certain restrictive agreements (Article 85) and with abusive behavior of undertakings in a dominant position within the common market (Article 86);concentrations like mergers, which may as well affect the internal European market, are not explicitly mentioned. To a certain extent however, the European Commission has in fact won the power to control large-scale mergers as a result of the European Court's decision in Continental Can (1973).

AbstractHaving regard to Article 192 (1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) (ex Article 175 (1) of the Treaty Establishing the European Community, TEC) the European Parliament and the Council have adopted Regulation (EC) No 166/2006 establishing the new European Pollutant Release and Transfer Register (E-PRTR). E-PRTR provides unprecedented environmental information to the public on pollutant releases and has the ambitious purpose of preventing and reducing environmental pollution. This contribution explores the reporting requirements of polluters and delineates approaches to reconcile those requirements as well as areas of possible utilisation of such data.

Opinion 2/94, Accession of the Community to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. 17 Hum. Rts. L.J. 51 (1996).European Court of Justice, March 28, 1996.On April 26, 1995, die Council of the European Union requested an opinion on whether accession of the European Community to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) was compatible with the Treaty Establishing the European Community (Treaty). In its request, the Council of the European Union stated that no decision on opening negotiations could be taken before the Court pronounced on die compatibility of accession with the Treaty. The Council argued that, even though a text of the envisaged agreement did not yet exist, the legal issues regarding accession were sufficientiy clear for the Court to provide an advisory opinion. The Council made clear that accession should not have any effect on the reservations entered by member states, which would “continue to apply in the areas falling within national jurisdiction.” It also explained that the “Community would agree to submit to the machinery for individual petitions and inter-State applications; actions between the Community and its Member States would, however, have to be excluded in recognition of the monopoly conferred in such matters by Art. 219 of the EC Treaty on the Court of Justice.”

The title of this paper comes from the famous ‘Schuman Declaration’ of 1950, which signaled the placing of Franco-German production of coal and steel under a single High Authority. It is quite astonishing that from this humble beginning, evolved the European Union of today. The phrase takes on new relevance as the Treaty of Nice paves the way for the biggest single enlargement of the European Union. The current Treaty, completes the Intergovernmental Conference which began in February, 2000. The founding treaties, signed in Paris and Rome in 1951 and 1957 respectively, and the amending treaties, most notably the Treaty on European Union, (Maastricht), and the Treaty of Amsterdam, form the Constitution of the European Union. It is important to note that while the earlier treaties concentrated on economic integration, the later treaties have shifted towards political questions. Bibliographic references to the various treaties have become quite complicated because the Treaty of Amsterdam brought about a renumbering of the articles to both the Treaty on European Union (EU) and the Treaty establishing the European Community (EC).

The treaties establishing the European Communities (“EC”) are virtually silent on the protection of human rights. Some earlier, more ambitious plans for European integration, the European Defense Community and the draft Statute of a European Political Community, dealt with the issue to some extent. However, these plans had failed and the EC founding fathers wanted to confine the treaty to the bare necessities of an economic community. They probably also thought that as the scope of Community law was essentially limited to economic and technical issues, human rights problems would not occur. Judicial practice would prove the contrary.

The landmark judgment delivered by the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Justice in Case C–176/03 Commission v Council (Environmental Crimes) was significant both constitutionally and for the protection of the environment through criminal law. There was a conflict of competence between the European Community Treaty and the Third Pillar of the Treaty on European Union, namely Police and Cooperation in Criminal Matters. The case resulted in Community competence to require criminal measures for serious environmental offences where necessary for the effective enforcement of environmental rules. Eleven intervening Member States supported the Council’s choice of the Third Pillar as the legal basis for a Framework Decision, showing the strength of resilience against resort to the Community method with its institutional powers of enforcement; preliminary ruling and codecision. This work examines the impact of the Court’s ruling in Environmental Crimes. Case C–440/05 Commission v Council (Ship Source Pollution) will also be evaluated to see whether legal certainty emerges as to the scope and extent of criminal law competence under the Treaties establishing the European Community and Union. The current legal regime will be treated as will that, potentially under the Treaty of Lisbon.

This work is focused in particular on explaining general questions of law in the European Union, which means primarily clarifying the legal nature of the European Community and the European Union, the essence of European law and its sources, as well as explaining the characteristics of both communal and union law. These introductory remarks are crucial for understanding the subsequent definitions regarding the development of the penal aspects of European law and are directed in particular toward the field affected by criminal law. Historically, the development of criminal law and the often related stages of development in international judicial cooperation in criminal matters within a European Union context, may be characterised, for example, by period: (a) Up to the establishment of the European Union; (b) From the establishment of the European Union to the Treaty of Amsterdam; (c) From the Treaty of Amsterdam to the present; (d) After the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe. All three of the aforementioned periods are characterised by the advancement of ideas related to so-called European judicial space in criminal matters as the legal instrument of international judicial cooperation. This originated in the period prior to the establishment of the European Union, but initially developed within its framework. Since the middle of the 1990s, the idea of European judicial space in criminal matters was specified in the requirement for introducing the so-called European territoriality requirement. The significance of European territoriality rests in expressing the fiction of a single European Union territory, in which jurisdiction would be performed for citizens of the European Union or persons in the territory of the Union without hindrance caused by state borders or under the conspicuously simplified valid rules of international judicial cooperation in effect prior to the establishment of the European Union. The period up to the establishment of the European Union is characterised particularly by the conclusion of the so-called Schengen Treaty, particularly the agreement dated June 14, 1985 on the gradual removal of border controls at common borders. This agreement has become the basis for accepting the subsequent document, which is the Implementing Convention, dated June 19, 1990. Although “Schengen” was originally established in the period prior to the Maastricht Treaty, it gradually became clear that the conclusion of the Implementing Convention on Mutual Judicial Cooperation must also affect the European Union itself. In the era from the Maastricht Treaty, prior to the Treaty of Amsterdam, new legal tools were successfully implemented legally for international judicial cooperation in criminal matters and for the protection of the financial interests of the European Community against perpetration of criminal activity of various types noted directly in the Maastricht Treaty itself. In the field of protecting the financial interests of the European Community, the Convention on the Protection of the European Community’s Financial Interests was finally prepared on July 26, 1995, followed by the foundation of the European Judicial Network, and leading to the compilation of an opus on the substance and procedure of European criminal law under the title Corpus Juris. In significance, the last period, beginning with the acceptance of the Treaty of Amsterdam, is further increase in the intensity of cooperation in the field of criminal law. The sitting of the European Council in Tampere provided an impetus to the establishment of a section for coordinating international judicial cooperation in select serious criminal matters of trans-national criminality – EUROJUST. The growing threat of international terrorism and the need to fight organised crime within the territory of the European Union have been the impetus for accepting a framework resolution on a European Arrest Warrant. The discussion has advanced on the theme of establishing a single European public prosecutor and the need for introducing a “European evidentiary order” and a European Criminal Record has also come under consideration. It is taken into consideration possible evolution of criminal law after ratification of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe.

The objective of this thesis is to evaluate European States&rsquo<br>efforts to develop a coherent and effective foreign and security policy in the context of historical evolution of the CFSP. In this thesis, European States&rsquo<br>efforts to develop a coherent and effective foreign and security policy will be evaluated in three international political contexts. First period is Post World War II Period, second one is Post-Cold War Period and third one is Post September 11 Period. In the context of Post World War II period, European States&rsquo<br>efforts to develop a coherent and effective foreign and security policy is shaped by the conditions of Cold War, Bipolar World and threat of Soviet expansionism towards Western Europe and characterized by the attempts such as European Defence Community, Fouchet Plan and European Political Cooperation. In the context of Post-Cold War period, European States&rsquo<br>efforts to develop a coherent and effective foreign and security policy were shaped by ex-Yugoslavian Conflict in early 90s which brought new security challenges such as ethnic conflicts and instability in the ex-Communist States in Central and Eastern Europe. EU&rsquo<br>s attempts were characterized by the CFSP which was launched by the Maastricht Treaty and the CESDP which emerged after Kosovo War with Saint Malo Declaration as defence dimension of the CFSP. In the context of Post September 11 period, European States&rsquo<br>efforts to develop a coherent and effective foreign and security policy were shaped by global fight against international terrorism. EU&rsquo<br>s attempts were characterized by adoption of European Security Strategy which accepted international terrorism, organized crime and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction as key threats towards Europe and aimed at developing a coherent vision of strategic objectives, shared threat assessment for European States in order to prevent divisions among EU States in future international events. The main argument of this thesis is that in order to be an important and effective actor in global politics, EU Member States should act coherently and speak with one voice. Their influence on important international issues is greater if they act as a coherent actor rather than acting individually.

Thesis advisor: James Cronin<br>In 1957, the Treaty of Rome was signed by six West European states to create the European Economic Community (EEC). Designed to foster a common internal market for a limited amount of industrial goods and to define a customs union within the Six, it did not at the time particularly stand out among contemporary international organizations. However, by 1992, within the space of a single generation, this initially limited trade zone had been dramatically expanded into the world's largest trade bloc and had pooled substantial sovereignty among its member states on a range of core state responsibilities. Most remarkably, this transformation resulted from a thoroughly novel political experiment that combined traditional interstate cooperation among its growing membership with an unprecedented transfer of sovereignty to centralized institutions. Though still lacking the traditional institutions and legitimacy of a fully-fledged state, in many policy areas, the European Union (EU) that emerged in 1992 was nonetheless collectively a global force. My dissertation argues that the organization's unprecedented transfer of national sovereignty challenged the very definition of the modern European state and its function. In structure and ambition, it represented far more than just a regional trade bloc among independent states: it became a unique political entity that effectively remodelled the fundamental blueprint of the conventional European state structure familiar to scholars for generations. How did such a dramatic transformation happen so quickly? I argue that three forces in particular were at play: the external pressures of globalization, the search for a new Western European and German identity within the Cold War world and the often unintended consequences of the interaction between member state governments and the Community's supranational institutions. In particular, I examine the history of the EEC's monetary union, common foreign policy, common social policy and the single market to explain the impact of the above forces of change on the EEC's rapid transformation<br>Thesis (PhD) — Boston College, 2014<br>Submitted to: Boston College. Graduate School of Arts and Sciences<br>Discipline: History

This thesis aims at answering two questions under the topic of Harmonisation of Industrial Property Rights Protection Procedures in the European Union. The questions researched are: &ldquo<br>What are the current systems of Industrial Property Rights protection in the world, in the European Union and Turkey?&rdquo<br>and &ldquo<br>Is there a way for Turkey to be included within the EU Industrial Property protection system in the future while still being under the relation of Customs Union?&rdquo<br>. To answer these questions current systems of Industrial Property Rights protection in the world, in European Union and Turkey is briefly analyzed and following this analysis, a proposal for a closer cooperation in Industrial Property protection system of Turkey with the European Union is given backed up with a comparison of statistical data of EU, Turkey and candidate countries.

The aim with this thesis is to find out how one can understand the exceptions not to introduce the euro as the currency of Denmark and the United Kingdom, as well as their attitude to European integration. It has been implemented in a comparative case study using theories in which the case has been the central focus of the investigation. The theories being used is rational actor model that emphasizes rational decision-making and self-interest. In comparison to that theory has a historical institutional perspective been used, which emphasizes path-dependency and critical events. The focus of the study is the time when the countries became members of the European Economic Community in 1973 to the Maastricht Treaty in 1993 where these exceptions not to introduce the euro as the currency was ratified. In the analysis section, one can see portions of both theories to a varying degree. The conclusions of the study is that both countries show a skeptical attitude to European integration and that the exceptions to not introduce the euro as a currency is based on this critical view of moving power to centralized institutions.

After years of intense negotiations between member states of the East African Community (EAC) and the European Union, an interim Economic Partnership Agreement was finally initialled on the 27 November 2007. This interim agreement is intended to be an instrument for development by furthering poverty reduction, sustainable development, regional integration and integration of EAC countries into the world economy. However provisions contained in the interim agreement have raised legitimate concerns as to their ability to address these development issues. The African ministers of trade identified nine contentious provisions which are regarded as both legally and developmentally problematic. One of these issues is the most favoured nation (MFN) clause under which parties are required to extend to each other any better or more favourable treatment granted to other countries, which are either developed countries or major trading economies. The urgency behind the negotiation of Economic partnership agreements between the EU and the African Caribbean and Pacific Countries (within which category fall the EAC member states) was the requirement for a WTO compliant legal regime to govern the relationship between both parties. Previous trade regimes were challenged by other WTO members for being discriminatory. However provisions in the interim agreement such as the contentious MFN clause are more than what is required for WTO compatible regional trade agreements. The inclusion of the MFN clause poses major challenges to the trade and development needs of the EAC countries especially the least developed among them. This dissertation will attempt to critically analyze the potential implications of the MFN clause to the East African countries particularly Uganda as one of the least developed member states in the region.<br>Dissertation (LLM)--University of Pretoria, 2010.<br>Centre for Human Rights<br>unrestricted

Pretendendo evidenciar uma leitura jurídico-política sobre o começo da integração europeia - iniciada por meio da fundação jurídica da CECA, esta Tese visa a responder à pergunta: quando, como e por meio de quais instituições, países europeus tradicionalmente opostos em termos militares estabeleceram entre si, após o término da Segunda Guerra Mundial, de maneira inédita e inaudita em sua História, um novo modo de relações responsável por tornar impossível e impensável a deflagração de nova Guerra regional? Para responder a essa pergunta, o presente trabalho assume a perspectiva de uma Pesquisa interdisciplinar em Direito, recorrendo não apenas ao Direito Positivo, mas também a outras áreas do conhecimento, tais como a Filosofia Política Antiga e Contemporânea e a História Contemporânea da Europa. O objetivo consiste em formular um aparato discursivo racional conceitual a partir de matriz de leitura fornecida pela Filosofia Política Antiga e Contemporânea para, em seguida, aplicá-lo sobre elementos da experiência histórica e jurídico-normativa positiva da CECA. A chave de leitura conceitual formada a partir de contribuições da Filosofia Política tem sua origem principalmente na aproximação das reflexões de POLÍBIO e de Claude LEFORT. O trabalho evidencia a importância de normas jurídicas institucionalmente previstas para lidar com oposições escalares na construção e na manutenção de um sistema de relações jurídico-Politicamente organizado, de maneira a que tensões entre distintas dimensões existenciais - institucionalmente absorvidas e encaminhadas - não possam significar a ruptura violenta desse sistema. Este aparato racional conceitual pode ser aplicado sobre os elementos da experiência histórica e normativa originária (Tratado de Paris de 1951) da CECA, o que permite diferenciar histórica e institucionalmente esta iniciativa em particular dos demais Projetos de Europa Unida do imediato pós-Segunda Guerra Mundial. Para os fundadores da CECA (Konrad ADENAUER, Jean MONNET e Robert SCHUMAN), um regime juridicamente regulado de simples cooperação política (Unionismo Europeu) não era considerado como suficiente para instaurar um novo modo de relações na Europa. Ao mesmo tempo, eles não visavam à construção jurídica de uma Unificação Política da Europa em torno de um Estado Federal Europeu (Federalismo Europeu). Nesse sentido, a CECA pode ser entendida como exemplo histórico singular de organização jurídico-Política de países europeus. Foram criados pelo Tratado da CECA órgãos comunitários supranacionais e intergovernamentais voltados a compartilhar com os Estados-Membros e com os respectivos povos europeus a formação do sentido normativo que deveria ser impresso sobre questões concretas sensíveis tornadas comuns. A nenhum deles foi atribuída uma posição central na nomogênese comunitária. A leitura jurídico-política da integração europeia iniciada com a CECA se mostra possível assim a partir da constatação de que a arquitetura das instituições do Tratado desta Organização Internacional mesmo das instituições que se referiam a normas jurídico-econômicas - foi responsável pela afirmação e pela conservação de um novo modo de relações entre os países europeus. Buscava-se, não um Estado Europeu, nem uma singela cooperação intergovernamental institucionalizada, mas um meio termo de organização jurídico-Política: um sistema de relações estruturado por um engenhoso mecanismo institucional orientado para promover, por meio de freios e contrapesos, de forma ininterrupta, oposições entre os participantes da vida comunitária.<br>Aiming to unveil a legal-political reading of the beginning of European integration - initiated by the legal foundation of the ECSC, this Thesis intends to answer the question: when, how and through which institutions, European countries traditionally opposed militarily established between themselves, after the end of the Second World War - unprecedentedly and unparalleled in their history, a new kind of relationship, which was responsible for making impossible and unthinkable the outbreak of new regional war? In order to answer this question, this study follows the path of an interdisciplinary Research in Law, resorting not only to Positive Law, but also to other fields of knowledge, such as Ancient and Contemporary Political Philosophy and Contemporary History of Europe. The objective is to read experience elements given by ECSCs History and positive legal rules through lens framed according to a rational conceptual apparatus grounded on Ancient and Contemporary Political Philosophy. The hermeneutical key framed according to Political Philosophy has its main origins in the conjoint discussion of POLYBIUS thought and Claude LEFORTs contributions. This work highlights the importance of legal institutions dealing with dimensional oppositions within the construction and maintenance of a legal-Politically organized relationships system, by which tensions institutionally absorbed and addressed - between different existential dimensions do not disrupte violently this system. This conceptual apparatus can be applied to understand ECSCs historical and and normative (Treaty of Paris, 1951) experience and helps differentiating from both a historical and institutional perspective this peculiar initiative from alternative European Union Projects immeadiately proposed after the Second World War. For ECSC founding fathers (Konrad ADENAUER, Jean MONNET and Robert SCHUMAN), a mere legal regime of political cooperation (European Unionism) was not regarded as sufficiently capable of creating a new kind of relationship in Europe. At the same time, they did not pursue a legal Political Unification of Europe within a European Federal State (European Federalism). In this sense, the ECSC can be seen as an unique historic example of a legal-Political organization of European countries. Supranational and intergovernmental community bodies were created by ECSCs Treaty in order to share with its own member-States and their respective peoples the construction of the normative sense which would conduct issues concerning sensitive common problems. To none of them was assigned a central position in Communitys normative process. A legal-political reading of European integration - started with the ECSC - seems possible because the institutional framework whithin its Treaty - even when referred to legal and economic rules - was responsible for the affirmation and preservation of a new kind of relationship between European countries. It was envisaged, neither a European State, nor an institutionalized intergovernmental cooperation, but a middle-way legal-Political organization: a relationship system erecte by an ingenious institutional mechanism conceived to promote - through checks and balances - nonstop oppositions between participants of Communitys life.

AbstractGender equality is an increasingly topical issue, but it has deep historical roots. The principle of gender equality found its legitimacy, even if limited to salary, in the 1957 Treaty of Rome, establishing the European Economic Community (EEC). This treaty, in Article 119, sanctioned the principle of equal pay between male and female workers. The EEC continued to protect women’s rights in the 1970s through equal opportunity policies. These policies referred, first, to the principle of equal treatment between men and women regarding education, access to work, professional promotion, and working conditions (Directive 75/117/EEC); second, to the principle of equal pay for male and female workers (Directive 76/207/EEC); and finally, enshrined the principle of equal treatment between men and women in matters of social security (Directive 79/7/EEC). Since the 1980s, several positive action programmes have been developed to support the role of women in European society. Between 1982 and 2000, four multiyear action programmes were implemented for equal opportunities. The first action programme (1982–1985) called on the Member States, through recommendations and resolutions by the Commission, to disseminate greater knowledge of the types of careers available to women, encourage the presence of women in decision-making areas, and take measures to reconcile family and working life. The second action programme (1986–1990) proposed interventions related to the employment of women in activities related to new technologies and interventions in favour of the equal distribution of professional, family, and social responsibilities (Sarcina, 2010). The third action programme (1991–1995) provided an improvement in the condition of women in society by raising public awareness of gender equality, the image of women in mass media, and the participation of women in the decision-making process at all levels in all areas of society. The fourth action programme (1996–2000) strengthened the existing regulatory framework and focused on the principle of gender mainstreaming, a strategy that involves bringing the gender dimension into all community policies, which requires all actors in the political process to adopt a gender perspective. The strategy of gender mainstreaming has several benefits: it places women and men at the heart of policies, involves both sexes in the policymaking process, leads to better governance, makes gender equality issues visible in mainstream society, and, finally, considers the diversity among women and men. Among the relevant interventions of the 1990s, it is necessary to recall the Treaty of Maastricht (1992) which guaranteed the protection of women in the Agreement on Social Policy signed by all Member States (except for Great Britain), and the Treaty of Amsterdam (1997), which formally recognised gender mainstreaming. The Treaty of Amsterdam includes gender equality among the objectives of the European Union (Article 2) and equal opportunity policies among the activities of the European Commission (Article 3). Article 13 introduces the principle of non-discrimination based on gender, race, ethnicity, religion, or handicaps. Finally, Article 141 amends Article 119 of the EEC on equal treatment between men and women in the workplace. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the Nice Union of 2000 reaffirms the prohibition of ‘any discrimination based on any ground such as sex’ (Art. 21.1). The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union also recognises, in Article 23, the principle of equality between women and men in all areas, including employment, work, and pay. Another important intervention of the 2000s is the Lisbon strategy, also known as the Lisbon Agenda or Lisbon Process. It is a reform programme approved in Lisbon by the heads of state and governments of the member countries of the EU. The goal of the Lisbon strategy was to make the EU the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy by 2010. To achieve this goal, the strategy defines fields in which action is needed, including equal opportunities for female work. Another treaty that must be mentioned is that of Lisbon in 2009, thanks to which previous treaties, specifically the Treaty of Maastricht and the Treaty of Rome, were amended and brought together in a single document: the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). Thanks to the Lisbon Treaty, the Charter of Fundamental Rights has assumed a legally binding character (Article 6, paragraph 1 of the TEU) both for European institutions and for Member States when implementing EU law. The Treaty of Lisbon affirms the principle of equality between men and women several times in the text and places it among the values and objectives of the union (Articles 2 and 3 of the TEU). Furthermore, the Treaty, in Art. 8 of the TFEU, states that the Union’s actions are aimed at eliminating inequalities, as well as promoting equality between men and women, while Article 10 of the TFEU provides that the Union aims to ‘combat discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age, or sexual orientation’. Concerning the principle of gender equality in the workplace, the Treaty, in Article 153 of the TFEU, asserts that the Union pursues the objective of equality between men and women regarding labour market opportunities and treatment at work. On the other hand, Article 157 of the TFEU confirms the principle of equal pay for male and female workers ‘for equal work or work of equal value’. On these issues, through ordinary procedures, the European Parliament and the Council may adopt appropriate measures aimed at defending the principle of equal opportunities and equal treatment for men and women. The Lisbon Treaty also includes provisions relating to the fight against trafficking in human beings, particularly women and children (Article 79 of the TFEU), the problem of domestic violence against women (Article 8 of the TFEU), and the right to paid maternity leave (Article 33). Among the important documents concerning gender equality is the Roadmap (2006–2010). In 2006, the European Commission proposed the Roadmap for equality between women and men, in addition to the priorities on the agenda, the objectives, and tools necessary to achieve full gender equality. The Roadmap defines six priority areas, each of which is associated with a set of objectives and actions that makes it easier to achieve them. The priorities include equal economic independence for women and men, reconciliation of private and professional life, equal representation in the decision-making process, eradication of all forms of gender-based violence, elimination of stereotypes related to gender, and promotion of gender equality in external and development policies. The Commission took charge of the commitments included in the Roadmap, which were indirectly implemented by the Member States through the principle of subsidiarity and the competencies provided for in the Treaties (Gottardi, 2013). The 2006–2010 strategy of the European Commission is based on a dual approach: on the one hand, the integration of the gender dimension in all community policies and actions (gender mainstreaming), and on the other, the implementation of specific measures in favour of women aimed at eliminating inequalities. In 2006, the European Council approved the European Pact for Gender Equality which originated from the Roadmap. The European Pact for Gender Equality identified three macro areas of intervention: measures to close gender gaps and combat gender stereotypes in the labour market, measures to promote a better work–life balance for both women and men, and measures to strengthen governance through the integration of the gender perspective into all policies. In 2006, Directive 2006/54/EC of the European Parliament and Council regulated equal opportunities and equal treatment between male and female workers. Specifically, the Directive aims to implement the principle of equal treatment related to access to employment, professional training, and promotion; working conditions, including pay; and occupational social security approaches. On 21 September 2010, the European Commission adopted a new strategy to ensure equality between women and men (2010–2015). This new strategy is based on the experience of Roadmap (2006–2010) and resumes the priority areas identified by the Women’s Charter: equal economic independence, equal pay, equality in decision-making, the eradication of all forms of violence against women, and the promotion of gender equality and women’s empowerment beyond the union. The 2010–2015 Strategic Plan aims to improve the position of women in the labour market, but also in society, both within the EU and beyond its borders. The new strategy affirms the principle that gender equality is essential to supporting the economic growth and sustainable development of each country. In 2010, the validity of the Lisbon Strategy ended, the objectives of which were only partially achieved due to the economic crisis. To overcome this crisis, the Commission proposed a new strategy called Europe 2020, in March 2010. The main aim of this strategy is to ensure that the EU’s economic recovery is accompanied by a series of reforms that will increase growth and job creation by 2020. Specifically, Europe’s 2020 strategy must support smart, sustainable, and inclusive growth. To this end, the EU has established five goals to be achieved by 2020 and has articulated the different types of growth (smart, sustainable, and inclusive) in seven flagship initiatives. Among the latter, the initiative ‘an agenda for new skills and jobs’, in the context of inclusive growth, is the one most closely linked to gender policies and equal opportunities; in fact, it substantially aims to increase employment rates for women, young, and elderly people. The strategic plan for 2010–2015 was followed by a strategic commitment in favour of gender equality 2016–2019, which again emphasises the five priority areas defined by the previous plan. Strategic commitment, which contributes to the European Pact for Gender Equality (2011–2020), identifies the key actions necessary to achieve objectives for each priority area. In March 2020, the Commission presented a new strategic plan for equality between women and men for 2020–2025. This strategy defines a series of political objectives and key actions aimed at achieving a ‘union of equality’ by 2025. The main objectives are to put an end to gender-based violence and combat sexist stereotypes, ensure equal opportunities in the labour market and equal participation in all sectors of the economy and political life, solve the problem of the pay and pension gap, and achieve gender equality in decision-making and politics. From the summary of the regulatory framework presented, for the European Economic Community first, then for the European Community, and finally for the European Union, gender equality has always been a fundamental value. Interest in the issues of the condition of women and equal opportunities has grown over time and during the process of European integration, moving from a perspective aimed at improving the working conditions of women to a new dimension to improve the life of the woman as a person, trying to protect her not only professionally but also socially, and in general in all those areas in which gender inequality may occur. The approach is extensive and based on legislation, the integration of the gender dimension into all policies, and specific measures in favour of women. From the non-exhaustive list of the various legislative interventions, it is possible to note a continuous repetition of the same thematic priorities which highlights, on the one hand, the poor results achieved by the implementation of the policies, but, on the other hand, the Commission’s willingness to pursue the path initially taken. Among the achievements in the field of gender equality obtained by the EU, there is certainly an increase in the number of women in the labour market and the acquisition of better education and training. Despite progress, gender inequalities have persisted. Even though women surpass men in terms of educational attainment, gender gaps still exist in employment, entrepreneurship, and public life (OECD, 2017). For example, in the labour market, women continue to be overrepresented in the lowest-paid sectors and underrepresented in top positions (according to the data released in the main companies of the European Union, women represent only 8% of CEOs).

The agricultural sector is an important strategic branch of any economy. Food security and food independence of the state are the key to ensuring the national security of the state. This fact became especially evident during Russia's aggression against Ukraine, which, among other things, affected the global food market. The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) is one of the oldest policies of the European Community, as it was launched in 1957 by the Treaty of Rome, signed by six countries (Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg), which were about the creation of the European Union. The goal of �AP has always been a strong and competitive policy in the field of agriculture and ensuring a sufficient amount of food for the population. At the same time, it should be noted that CAP has evolved significantly from the beginning of European integration to the present stage, in addition to the above-mentioned initial goals, new goals have appeared in it. The purpose of this article is to show the evolution of CAP with special emphasis on environmental protection and the role of CAP in climate change. The Common Agricultural Policy for 2023-2027 and its strategic priorities were analyzed. New priorities included in CAP were revealed. General theoretical methods of study were used. Analysis and synthesis, system-functional method, theoretical generalization made it possible to generalize tendencies of the development of the CAP.

This article is explaining the most important milestones in development of European Union’s competence in the field of criminal law. The beginning of European integration starts with the Schuman declaration which was the base of Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community in 1952. Then the economic integration continued and the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community and the Treaty establishing European Atomic Energy Community were signed in Rome in 1957. For the field of criminal law, the most important revisions of founding agreements were the Maastricht Treaty, the Amsterdam Treaty and then the most recent Lisbon Treaty. European Union established few agencies in the field of criminal law which are the Europol, the EUCPN, Eurojust, the OLAF and the newest agency EPPO. At the end we cannot forget to mention European arrest warrant and European investigation order.

The activities of the European Commission (EC) in the field of nuclear energy are governed by the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community (EURATOM). The research activities of the European Union (EU) are designed as multi-annual Framework Programmes (FP). The EURATOM 6th Framework Programme (EURATOM FP-6), covering the period 2002–2006, is funded with a budget of 1, 230 million Euros and managed by the European Commission. Beyond the general strategic goal of the EURATOM Framework Programmes to help exploit the potential of nuclear energy, in a safe and sustainable manner, FP-6 is designed to contribute also to the development of the “European Research Area” (ERA), a concept described in the Commission’s Communication COM(2000)6, of January 2000. Moreover EURATOM FP-6 contributes to the creation of the conditions for sharing the same nuclear safety culture throughout the EU-25 and the Candidate Countries, fostering the acceptance of nuclear power as an element of the energy mix. This paper gives an overview of the research activities undertaken through EURATOM FP-6 in the area of Reactor Systems, covering the safety of present reactors, the development of future safe reactors, and the needs in terms of research infrastructures and education &amp; training. The actions under FP-6 are presented in their continuity of a ctions under FP-5. The perspectives under FP-7 are also provided. Other parts of the EURATOM FP, covering Waste Handling and Radiation Protection, as well as Fusion Energy, are not detailed in this paper.

During the current energy crisis, electricity prices on the markets have reached unprecedented levels, and power utilities in the region are making every effort to reduce citizens' consumption for the purpose of exporting and selling surpluses on international electricity markets, often by encouraging the use of renewable energy sources (OIE). The majority of OIE are connected to the electric power distribution network (EDM), known as distributed generators (DG). In such circumstances, the planning and development of the electric distribution network are conditioned by considering all aspects of EDM operation with a large number of dispersed DG. On the other hand, the EU requirements and international obligations of Southeast European countries in the energy sector are largely contained in the provisions of the Treaty establishing the Energy Community, gradually adopting the EU ACQUIS, i.e., by implementing the relevant directives and regulations of the EU in the field of electricity, renewable energy resources, and statistics. The purpose of this paper is to emphasize the importance of applying technical criteria related to the connection and parallel operation of distributed generators with the distribution network, to which BiH has previously committed, in order to enable planning and proper operation of the ED network in the newly arisen circumstances.

The article explores the evolution of the idea of European federalism and the federalist movement in the first half of the 20th century, highlighting the concept of “Europeanism” as a political and ideological expression of various visions of European unity. The research methods include historical and comparative analysis of documents and writings by theorists such as Immanuel Kant, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and William Penn, alongside the study of contributions from major post-war European political figures. The main findings underscore the role of the Treaty of Paris (1951) and the establishment of the European Coal and Steel Community, the European Atomic Energy Community, and the European Economic Community in shaping contemporary European federalism. The paper emphasizes the challenges of implementing federalism, such as harmonizing national legislations and the competencies of national governments with those of the European Union. Additionally, the success of EU federalization depends on respecting the historical, economic, and cultural traditions of member states and maintaining a balance between Union and national competencies to mitigate centrifugal forces and stimulate cooperation.

Inclusive Strategy for Writing English in International Treaty, Declarations was priority of official, working language in Internationalization and Globalization English in Convention, Agreement, Declarations, Treaty, and its implementation. Writing opening addresses, statements of Heads of Delegations, Statement of Declaration, Conclusion of Conference, of Meeting, Joint Committee, Declaration, Agreement, Treaty, Amendments, Revising, Conditions and Transitional Reserves, Friendly settlement, Unilateral Declaration sigh and ratify, enter in force and implementation. In Council of Europe was organised High-Level Conference on the Implementation of the European Convention on Human Rights, our shared responsibility in Brussels, 2015 and High Level Conference on the Future Proceedings on the European Court of Human Rights Interlaken, 2010. The EU is Moldova’s leading trading partner, foreign investor, aid donor, leadership using a negotiation EU strategy. The Association Agreement between the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community and their Member States establishes a new legal framework for the advancement of relations between Moldova and the EU towards a higher quality level – political association and economic integration with the EU.

Rapid advances in technology-communications, the internet, tele-marketing, travel, etc. are accelerating the globalization of the world’s market places. To facilitate this globalization by eliminating measurement-based barriers to trade, the International Committee on Weights and Measures (CIPM) has, in accord with the authority granted it by the International Treaty of the Meter, produced a Mutual Recognition Arrangement (MRA). This MRA, signed into existence in Oct 1999, has the objectives: 1. to establish the degree of equivalence of national measurement standards maintained by the National Metrology Institutes (NMIs) that have signed the MRA, 2. to provide for the mutual recognition of calibration and measurement certificates issued by the NMIs, and thereby 3. to provide governments and other parties with a secure technical foundation for wider agreements regarding measurements that relate to international trade, commerce, and regulatory affairs. Information on the CIPM, and the MRA can be found on the website: http://www.bipm.org/. Degrees of equivalence between and among national measurement standards are based on the results of Key Comparisons (KCs) conducted within the Consultative Committees of the CIPM. Flow measurement efforts are being addressed by the newly formed Working Group for Fluid Flow (WGFF) of the CIPM Consultative Committee on Mass and Related Quantities (CCM). The WGFF efforts are organized into six, specific measurement areas: water, hydrocarbon liquid, air speed, liquid volume, high pressure gas, and low pressure gas flow. In each of these areas, and according to MRA rules, the efforts are to design and conduct KCs that quantify the equivalence of the flow standards maintained in the participating NMIs. To determine appropriate operating ranges for KC’s, the WGFF is reviewing the Calibration and Measurement Capabilities (CMCs) of the participating NMIs. This presentation will briefly describe the MRA and the current WGFF plans and programs to conduct the KC tests. Specific techniques planned for the KCs will be to design flow meter transfer standards comprised of tandem arrangements of flow meters that are tested in the selected fluid and flow conditions to quantify the performance of NMI flow standards under actual conditions of use. Statistically sufficient and metrologically sound test protocols are being devised to efficiently and effectively produce the required data bases. Youden graphical analysis of variance and other statistical techniques are planned to analyze the resulting data. The results of these WGFF efforts are expected to make it feasible for flow measurements made anywhere in the world to be understood and acceptable anywhere else.

The European Union (EU) is an economic and political union of 28 European countries. The population is 508 million people, 24 official and working languages апd about 150 regional and minority languages. The origins of the European Union come from the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) and the European Economic Community (EEC), consisting of six states in 1951 - Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. These countries came together to put an end to the wars that devastated the European continent, and they agreed to share control over the natural resources needed for war (coal and steel). The founding members of ECSC have determined that this European project will not only be developed in order to share resources or to prevent various conflicts in the region. Thus, the Rome Treaty of 1957 created the European Economic Community (EEC), which strengthened the political and economic relations between The six founding states.

The protection of the European Union's financial interests has recently been one of the main priorities in the Republic of Slovenia. Their abuse, committed with a special form of intent and a motive for acquiring illegal material gain, constitutes a criminal act. Therefore, in Slovenia the criminal act of Fraud to the detriment of the European Community was first criminalized in 2008 by the Criminal Code (hereinafter CC), and after 2012, Fraud affecting the financial interests of the European Communities. In order to combat the latter, interinstitutional cooperation is crucial at international and national level, hence European Anti-Fraud Office, Anti-fraud coordination service, the Office of the Republic of Slovenia for Budgetary Control, Government Office for European Cohesion Policy, and the newly established European Public Prosecutor's Office prosecuting perpetrators of crimes against the abuse of the European Union budget. Adoption and implementation of the Lisbon Treaty, which establishes even stronger transnational connection between the member states, provides additional measures that might take effect in previously described theme. According to the Lisbon Treaty, legal regulation in the field of Criminal Law will be enabled through Regulatives and Directives, which will lead to easier unification of the Law in this area. In addition, the European Public Prosecutor, whose primary task is to shield common financial interests, is established through the Lisbon Treaty Adoption. International standards are increasingly emphasizing the role of the Office for the Prevention of Money Laundering as an intelligence unit, which means that in future the Office will increasingly specialize in data collection and provide the competent institutions with access to it. Some provisions in this regard are already contained in the new Prevention of Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Act, allowing courts, prosecutors, police and Financial Administration access certain data collected by the Office, and also providing the Office with access to financial data in cases when asset status is determined. Since becoming a member of the European Union, Slovenia is entitled to European cohesion policy funds, which creates a necessity to ensure respect for principles such as legality, transparency and economy in the use of these funds. Keywords: legislation, statistics, authorities, European cohesion policy

Background Lung cancer is the number one cause of cancer death worldwide.(1) It is the fifth most commonly diagnosed cancer in Australia (12,741 cases diagnosed in 2018) and the leading cause of cancer death.(2) The number of years of potential life lost to lung cancer in Australia is estimated to be 58,450, similar to that of colorectal and breast cancer combined.(3) While tobacco control strategies are most effective for disease prevention in the general population, early detection via low dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening in high-risk populations is a viable option for detecting asymptomatic disease in current (13%) and former (24%) Australian smokers.(4) The purpose of this Evidence Check review is to identify and analyse existing and emerging evidence for LDCT lung cancer screening in high-risk individuals to guide future program and policy planning. Evidence Check questions This review aimed to address the following questions: 1. What is the evidence for the effectiveness of lung cancer screening for higher-risk individuals? 2. What is the evidence of potential harms from lung cancer screening for higher-risk individuals? 3. What are the main components of recent major lung cancer screening programs or trials? 4. What is the cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening programs (include studies of cost–utility)? Summary of methods The authors searched the peer-reviewed literature across three databases (MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Embase) for existing systematic reviews and original studies published between 1 January 2009 and 8 August 2019. Fifteen systematic reviews (of which 8 were contemporary) and 64 original publications met the inclusion criteria set across the four questions. Key findings Question 1: What is the evidence for the effectiveness of lung cancer screening for higher-risk individuals? There is sufficient evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses of combined (pooled) data from screening trials (of high-risk individuals) to indicate that LDCT examination is clinically effective in reducing lung cancer mortality. In 2011, the landmark National Lung Cancer Screening Trial (NLST, a large-scale randomised controlled trial [RCT] conducted in the US) reported a 20% (95% CI 6.8% – 26.7%; P=0.004) relative reduction in mortality among long-term heavy smokers over three rounds of annual screening. High-risk eligibility criteria was defined as people aged 55–74 years with a smoking history of ≥30 pack-years (years in which a smoker has consumed 20-plus cigarettes each day) and, for former smokers, ≥30 pack-years and have quit within the past 15 years.(5) All-cause mortality was reduced by 6.7% (95% CI, 1.2% – 13.6%; P=0.02). Initial data from the second landmark RCT, the NEderlands-Leuvens Longkanker Screenings ONderzoek (known as the NELSON trial), have found an even greater reduction of 26% (95% CI, 9% – 41%) in lung cancer mortality, with full trial results yet to be published.(6, 7) Pooled analyses, including several smaller-scale European LDCT screening trials insufficiently powered in their own right, collectively demonstrate a statistically significant reduction in lung cancer mortality (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.73–0.91).(8) Despite the reduction in all-cause mortality found in the NLST, pooled analyses of seven trials found no statistically significant difference in all-cause mortality (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.90–1.00).(8) However, cancer-specific mortality is currently the most relevant outcome in cancer screening trials. These seven trials demonstrated a significantly greater proportion of early stage cancers in LDCT groups compared with controls (RR 2.08, 95% CI 1.43–3.03). Thus, when considering results across mortality outcomes and early stage cancers diagnosed, LDCT screening is considered to be clinically effective. Question 2: What is the evidence of potential harms from lung cancer screening for higher-risk individuals? The harms of LDCT lung cancer screening include false positive tests and the consequences of unnecessary invasive follow-up procedures for conditions that are eventually diagnosed as benign. While LDCT screening leads to an increased frequency of invasive procedures, it does not result in greater mortality soon after an invasive procedure (in trial settings when compared with the control arm).(8) Overdiagnosis, exposure to radiation, psychological distress and an impact on quality of life are other known harms. Systematic review evidence indicates the benefits of LDCT screening are likely to outweigh the harms. The potential harms are likely to be reduced as refinements are made to LDCT screening protocols through: i) the application of risk predication models (e.g. the PLCOm2012), which enable a more accurate selection of the high-risk population through the use of specific criteria (beyond age and smoking history); ii) the use of nodule management algorithms (e.g. Lung-RADS, PanCan), which assist in the diagnostic evaluation of screen-detected nodules and cancers (e.g. more precise volumetric assessment of nodules); and, iii) more judicious selection of patients for invasive procedures. Recent evidence suggests a positive LDCT result may transiently increase psychological distress but does not have long-term adverse effects on psychological distress or health-related quality of life (HRQoL). With regards to smoking cessation, there is no evidence to suggest screening participation invokes a false sense of assurance in smokers, nor a reduction in motivation to quit. The NELSON and Danish trials found no difference in smoking cessation rates between LDCT screening and control groups. Higher net cessation rates, compared with general population, suggest those who participate in screening trials may already be motivated to quit. Question 3: What are the main components of recent major lung cancer screening programs or trials? There are no systematic reviews that capture the main components of recent major lung cancer screening trials and programs. We extracted evidence from original studies and clinical guidance documents and organised this into key groups to form a concise set of components for potential implementation of a national lung cancer screening program in Australia: 1. Identifying the high-risk population: recruitment, eligibility, selection and referral 2. Educating the public, people at high risk and healthcare providers; this includes creating awareness of lung cancer, the benefits and harms of LDCT screening, and shared decision-making 3. Components necessary for health services to deliver a screening program: a. Planning phase: e.g. human resources to coordinate the program, electronic data systems that integrate medical records information and link to an established national registry b. Implementation phase: e.g. human and technological resources required to conduct LDCT examinations, interpretation of reports and communication of results to participants c. Monitoring and evaluation phase: e.g. monitoring outcomes across patients, radiological reporting, compliance with established standards and a quality assurance program 4. Data reporting and research, e.g. audit and feedback to multidisciplinary teams, reporting outcomes to enhance international research into LDCT screening 5. Incorporation of smoking cessation interventions, e.g. specific programs designed for LDCT screening or referral to existing community or hospital-based services that deliver cessation interventions. Most original studies are single-institution evaluations that contain descriptive data about the processes required to establish and implement a high-risk population-based screening program. Across all studies there is a consistent message as to the challenges and complexities of establishing LDCT screening programs to attract people at high risk who will receive the greatest benefits from participation. With regards to smoking cessation, evidence from one systematic review indicates the optimal strategy for incorporating smoking cessation interventions into a LDCT screening program is unclear. There is widespread agreement that LDCT screening attendance presents a ‘teachable moment’ for cessation advice, especially among those people who receive a positive scan result. Smoking cessation is an area of significant research investment; for instance, eight US-based clinical trials are now underway that aim to address how best to design and deliver cessation programs within large-scale LDCT screening programs.(9) Question 4: What is the cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening programs (include studies of cost–utility)? Assessing the value or cost-effectiveness of LDCT screening involves a complex interplay of factors including data on effectiveness and costs, and institutional context. A key input is data about the effectiveness of potential and current screening programs with respect to case detection, and the likely outcomes of treating those cases sooner (in the presence of LDCT screening) as opposed to later (in the absence of LDCT screening). Evidence about the cost-effectiveness of LDCT screening programs has been summarised in two systematic reviews. We identified a further 13 studies—five modelling studies, one discrete choice experiment and seven articles—that used a variety of methods to assess cost-effectiveness. Three modelling studies indicated LDCT screening was cost-effective in the settings of the US and Europe. Two studies—one from Australia and one from New Zealand—reported LDCT screening would not be cost-effective using NLST-like protocols. We anticipate that, following the full publication of the NELSON trial, cost-effectiveness studies will likely be updated with new data that reduce uncertainty about factors that influence modelling outcomes, including the findings of indeterminate nodules. Gaps in the evidence There is a large and accessible body of evidence as to the effectiveness (Q1) and harms (Q2) of LDCT screening for lung cancer. Nevertheless, there are significant gaps in the evidence about the program components that are required to implement an effective LDCT screening program (Q3). Questions about LDCT screening acceptability and feasibility were not explicitly included in the scope. However, as the evidence is based primarily on US programs and UK pilot studies, the relevance to the local setting requires careful consideration. The Queensland Lung Cancer Screening Study provides feasibility data about clinical aspects of LDCT screening but little about program design. The International Lung Screening Trial is still in the recruitment phase and findings are not yet available for inclusion in this Evidence Check. The Australian Population Based Screening Framework was developed to “inform decision-makers on the key issues to be considered when assessing potential screening programs in Australia”.(10) As the Framework is specific to population-based, rather than high-risk, screening programs, there is a lack of clarity about transferability of criteria. However, the Framework criteria do stipulate that a screening program must be acceptable to “important subgroups such as target participants who are from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, people from disadvantaged groups and people with a disability”.(10) An extensive search of the literature highlighted that there is very little information about the acceptability of LDCT screening to these population groups in Australia. Yet they are part of the high-risk population.(10) There are also considerable gaps in the evidence about the cost-effectiveness of LDCT screening in different settings, including Australia. The evidence base in this area is rapidly evolving and is likely to include new data from the NELSON trial and incorporate data about the costs of targeted- and immuno-therapies as these treatments become more widely available in Australia.