The EU Restriction of Hazardous Substances Directive: Problems arising from Implementation Differences between Member States and Proposed Solutions

Directive 2002/95/EC, the Restriction of Hazardous Substances or 'RoHS' Directive, restricts the use of environmentally hazardous substances in electrical and electronic equipment distributed and sold in the EU from 1 July 2006. The Directive's objectives are to harmonize EU Member States' national legislation and protect human health and the environment. This article reveals differences in the implementation of the RoHS Directive at the time it took effect. Differences were revealed in the analysis of results obtained from telephone interviews conducted with all but four of the 25 EU Member State RoHS enforcement officials. Differences in implementation created barriers to the achievement of the RoHS Directive's objectives and caused problems for producers of electrical and electronic equipment. The article attributes the principal cause of differences in implementation to insufficiently detailed text in the RoHS Directive. The article also considers how barriers and problems could have been prevented and makes proposals to solve them.     

The European Parliament and Comitology: On the Road to Nowhere?

The European Parliament has generally been deeply distrustful of the comitology system, primarily on the grounds that it allows the national administrations to undermine its supervisory role in the area of implementing legislation. Parliament has therefore sought to use the political, budgetary and jurisdictional means at its disposal to counteract the spread of comitology, or at least to promote the less intrusive forms of committee procedure. These initiatives have not, for the most part, been wholly successful; neither the interinstitutional agreements nor Parliament's arguments before the Court of Justice have produced the results it had hoped for. Parliament has been able, however, to use its Maastricht powers to influence the choice of committee procedure included in legislation adopted under codecision, and its budgetary tactics have forced the Commission to rationalise somewhat the annual expenditure on committees of all kinds and to bring a modicum of transparency into their operation. The imminence of the intergovernmental conference led to a suspension of hostilities towards the end of 1996.     

Interests,Instruments and Institutional Preferences in the EU Comitology System: The 2006 Comitology Reform

This paper seeks to reveal the institutional interests of the Council of Ministers, the European Parliament and the Commission in the comitology system. This is done by an investigation of the 2006 comitology reform, which introduced the regulatory procedure with scrutiny. This reform was the result of developments in four areas: the Lamfalussy reform in the area of financial regulation; the controversial use of comitology in the area of GMOs, food safety and the environment; the failed Constitutional Treaty; and the amending of the 1999 comitology decision. The analysis shows that the reform was the result of a two‐dimensional constitutional struggle. The first dimension concerns the relative supervisory position of the two legislative actors, the Council and the European Parliament. The second dimension concerns the relationship between the legislative and the executive branch of the EU system. In theoretical terms, the analysis demonstrates an example of T.M. Moe's ‘politics of structural choice’. The paper ends by drawing lessons for the negotiations on the new comitology system following the Lisbon Treaty.     

Indigenous Peoples in International Environmental Cooperation: Arctic Management of Hazardous Substances

This article reviews the international legal framework on hazardous substances, with an emphasis on the Arctic and the roles of indigenous peoples. Persistent organic pollutants (POPs) and heavy metals pose significant risks to Arctic indigenous populations, mainly through the consumption of traditional foods. Treaties of particular relevance include the Protocols on Heavy Metals and POPs to the Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (1998) and the Stockholm Convention on POPs (2001). Arctic indigenous groups have exerted considerable influence on hazardous substance management through lobbying of national governments, participation in domestic and international scientific assessments, and direct advocacy in regional and global political fora. Their engagement on environmental issues has also helped to shape circumpolar consciousness and political activism among different indigenous groups. At the same time, there remain important limitations on the independent authority and ability to act of indigenous groups. Challenges for Arctic indigenous groups and States include continuing collaborative abatement work targeting many POPs and heavy metals, as well as addressing linkages between hazardous substances and climate change, which is another issue of great Arctic concern.     

The European Parliament and the Future of Comitology after Lisbon

The history of comitology—the system of implementation committees that control the Commission in the execution of delegated powers—has been characterised by institutional tensions. The crux of these tensions has often been the role of the European Parliament and its quest to be granted powers equal to those of the Council. This process came to a head with the 2006 Comitology reform and the introduction of the regulatory procedure with scrutiny (RPS). After just over three years of experience with the RPS procedure, the Treaty of Lisbon has made it redundant through the creation of Delegated Acts (Article 290 TFEU). This article aims to evaluate the practical implications that Delegated Acts will entail for the Parliament, principally by using the experience with the RPS to better understand the challenges ahead. This analysis will be of interest to those following the study of comitology, formal and informal inter‐institutional relations and also to practitioners who will have to work with Delegated Acts in the future.     

非刑罚化的界限研究

刑罚的流弊引发了西方国家的非刑罚化运动。对于西方国家的非刑罚化运动及其对我国的借鉴意义,国内学者认识不一。目前在我国,非犯罪化是广义的＂非刑罚化＂的内容之一,狭义的＂非刑罚化＂应当包括免予刑事处罚单纯宣告有罪、免予刑事处罚予以非刑罚处罚、对犯罪独立适用的保安处分等内容,对其中存在的问题,我们应当保持清醒的认识。     

有限遏制:一般预防的局限

重刑威吓论与古典功利论对刑罚一般预防作用的夸大与迷信导致了一般预防论曾一度遭到挑战与否定。当代一般预防论者在肯定刑罚具有一般预防功能的同时也承认其局限性。他们普遍认为,一般预防的局限性表现在多方面。本文介述了被当代一般预防论者所公认的一般预防的局限性的5个主要方面,即对不同的人的效果不同、对不同的犯罪效果不同、在不同地域效果不同、对不同的社会群体效果不同与因执法的严肃程度不同而不同。     

论所有权的限制

所有权是一种最为完备、最为充分的物权,所有权制度是物权制度的核心。但任何一项权利都不 是绝对的,所有权也应受到一定的限制。从所有权限制的背景考察和法理基础出发,阐释所有权 应受限制之理由,并对我国所有权限制之状况进行了总结,并指出对所有权的限制与法律规定所 有权制度的目的是一致的,设定所有权的目的是为了解决资源的有限性和人的欲望的无限性引 起的人与人之间对物关系的紧张性,那么对所有权进行限制同样离不开这一目的。     

行政权力的制约与监督刍议

行政权力是国家权力中最动态、最广泛的一种权力,与社会和公民切身利益具有最直接的联系。而任何有效的权力都有强制力的因素,缺乏有效的制约和监督,就会出现强制力的滥用,行政权力更是如此。行政权力具有正负双重效应,它既能够造福于社会,也隐含着腐败的可能性。历史经验证明,权力不受制约和监督,必然导致滥用和腐败。法治的基本理念之一就是一切权力都需要制约和监督,法治发展的过程就是对权力的有效制约和监督的过程。因此,可以通过扩大司法权对行政权审查的范围、行政机关内部的相互制约、行政审批事项的削减等途径对行政权力进行有效的制约和监督。     

论商品化权的行使及其限制

商品化权是内涵独特的知识产权,权利的行使应平衡商品化权所有人和相关利害关系人利益,还应兼顾商品化权所有人对商品化权载体所享有的其他权利。同时,基于社会公共利益的需要,对商品化权的行使还应当进行合理的限制。在我国未来知识产权法律法规中,应当建立完善的商品化权行使及其限制法律制度,以促进我国商品化权的保护和知识经济的发展。     

论公证权的监督制约

早在一百多年前，英国的思想家阿克顿勋爵就提出了“权力导致腐败，绝对的权力导致绝对的腐败”的至理名言。这一有关权力的定律似乎已经内在地包含了“公证权也会导致腐败。因而公证权也应受到监督”的论断。作为一种社会公共权力，公证权的腐败和滥用一方面会导致公证当事人及利害关系人的合法权利受损，另一方面则会摧毁公证制度赖以存在的社会信用基础，导致公证行业自身的毁灭。     

From Intergovernmental Bargaining to Deliberative Political Processes: The Constitutionalisation of Comitology

This article argues that the irresistible rise of Comitology is an institutional response to the deep-seated tensions between the dual supranational and intergovernmentalist structure of the Community on the one hand, and its problem-solving tasks on the other. Comitology has accordingly provided a forum in which problems are addressed through evolving and novel processes of interest formation and decision-making. However, neither legal nor political science have been able properly to evaluate the workings of the committee system, both disciplines remaining trapped within normative structures and traditional methodologies ill-suited to the analysis of these institutional innovations. As a consequence, this article advocates the trans-disciplinary study of Comitology, and furthermore argues that the two disciplines might be drawn together by the concept of 'deliberative supranationalism': being on the one hand a normative approach which seeks both to preserve the legitimacy of national democracies and to set limits upon the traditional Nation State within a supranational community; and on the other, a theoretical tool which is nonetheless responsive to and accomodating of 'real-world' phenomena.     

论学术自由的法律界限

学术自由的法律界限有哲学和伦理学上的依据.历史上有关学术自由法律界限的学说主要有绝对自由说、限制行为说和限制利益说.对学术自由的客观限制主要来自于某些法律价值,即学术自由应以个体权利、公共利益和国家利益为界.个体权利成为学术自由的法律界限主要是指教师的权利、学生的权利和机构的利益对学术自由行为的限制.学术自由权利社会化使学术自由权利主体间的侵权行为日益突出,主要表现于著作权、人格权对学术自由行为的限制.公共利益的界限主要表现在公共秩序与安全对学术自由行为的限制.国家利益的界限主要表现于国家安全利益对学术自由行为提出的必要限制.     

东亚法治秩序的局限与超越维度

近代法治是在市民社会与国家的二元化进程中 ,以社会权利制约和平衡国家权力为基点而得以形成和发展的。东亚国家的现代化进程虽然也出现了市民社会 ,但却因历史传统而呈儒化倾向 ,它既设定了东亚法治秩序的局限 ,也赋予了其一定的超越维度 ,展现了多元现代性的东亚法治走向     

On the Limits of Political Emancipation and Legal Rights

International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique - In this paper I offer a new interpretation of Marx’s essay On the Jewish Question (OJQ)...     

股东优先购买权“穿透效力”的适用与限制

在法定优先购买权之外,股东可以通过特别约定的方式将人合的形式与范围予以相应扩大,此时穿透于法定优先购买权而适用于股东实际控制人之变动的优先购买权就成为股东与股东之间的特别约定,由此成就了股东与股东之间在法定优先购买权之外的穿透效力。此种法定优先购买权之外的权利的穿透乃为私法自治与意思表示的反映,是公司设立之初或设立过程中各方对自身利益的计算已经达成的妥协,从而获得了利益的平衡。因此,当股东之间存在这种对于股权优先购买权穿透适用的明确安排时,不能断然否定当事人之间规则的效力。同理,当股东之间在公司设立初始并未通过契约或公司章程对法定优先购买权以外的优先购买权进行特别约定或者限定时,我们的司法机关不应简单地援引股东可享有的法定优先购买权,以合法形式规避非法目的的理由轻易否定当事人对于股权转让交易结构的安排与设计。     

论民事检察监督的范围

在检察机关的各项职权中,行使最"杂"的莫过于民事检察权了。民事检察的范围,从现行法律的规定看仅是"生效的判决和部分裁定";从检察机关的宪法地位考察包括任何公权力机关对民事法律的适用范围;从法理上评析:检察监督职能的发挥必须规范在与其他国家机关的关系上,行使代表公共利益的国家公权力机关不正确实施国家民事法律,构成了民事检察监督的事实原因。民事检察权力运用是否正确依存于民事审判权力。民事检察监督的范围:在对象上,是代表公共利益的机关(包括事业单位和企业);在内容上,应当围绕民事法律在公权力机关的实施;在阶段上,包括诉前、诉中和诉后的任何阶段。     

论沉默权规则的确立与限制--从刑事司法利益冲突与协调的角度

首先采用刑事诉讼法哲学思考的方法分析刑事司法过程中的利益冲突及其解决 ,认为一个民主、法治国家刑事诉讼中应坚持个人本位的法律价值观 ,因此应该确立沉默权规则。其次 ,分析刑事司法利益间存在着内在的协调一致性 ,得出限制沉默权规则的必要性。最后 ,对沉默权规则在我国的确立与限制作了构想。     

试论法律方法的意义及其局限之克服

对于法律的理解,人们难免会有争议,其原因在于前理解(前见)。为避免法律解释流于恣意,应以法律方法加以制约,但由于各种法律方法并不一致,导致各种解释结果产生矛盾。为此,应引入先例和学说中对有关规范的解释,对法官裁判加以限制。