The evolution of security industry regulation in the European Union

ABSTRACT

The European private security sector has grown from a handful of small companies at the end of the Second World War into a multibillion Euro industry with thousands of firms and millions of security staff. In Europe, the demands for security is not just expressed notionally but also officially in The European Agenda on Security stating the European Union (EU) aims to ensure that people live in an area of freedom, security, and justice. This article will begin by exploring the role of private security in society. It will then move on to consider the main phases in the development of private security regulation in Europe. Following on from this, some of the main areas of policy development will be considered, such as European bodies, initiatives, and standards. Finally, the article will explore some of the potential options for the future in better regulating the European private security sector. From a historical perspective, the evolution of private security regulation can be divided into three phases: the laissez-faire, the centrifugal, and the centripetal era – each with its own distinct characteristics and impact on the concurrent industry. In the EU where there is the legal framework for the development of a single market in services, the key social partners have been at the forefront of developing a series of standards and guidance documents which promote standards across borders at the European level. However, the institutions of the EU have been reluctant to intervene at a European level in setting minimum standards of private security regulation. Thus, the changing terrain of the EU relating to security, regulation, and the private security industry means the current trajectory may be in need of an injection of more radical thought and consideration.     

A Toolbox for European Judges

The forthcoming instrument on European contract law, be it in the shape of an optional code for cross‐border contracts or as an official toolbox for the European legislator, is likely to have a spill‐over effect on private law adjudication in Europe. Judges will have no great difficulty in finding model rules and definitions that might come in handy when dealing with gaps and ambiguities in European private law. However, the question is whether such a role as a toolbox for judges would be legitimate. I discuss three types of possible legitimation strategies: traditional methods of legal interpretation, the new European methods and merely political legitimation. It will often depend on the circumstances of the case at hand and the characteristics of the particular model rule or definition that is being borrowed what mode of legitimation will prove to be more convincing. However, generally speaking legitimation in terms of the ‘general principles of civil law’ that the CJEU has recently been developing seems a particularly promising strategy. On the other hand, it seems unlikely that European courts could come under a duty, following from the principle of sincere cooperation, to use the instrument as a toolbox.     

Legal protection of biotechnological inventions. The European Parliament's perspective]

In 1996, the European Commission put forward a proposal for a Parliament and Concil Directive on the legal protection of biotechnology inventions. The article looks at vicissitudes which characterised the progress of the proposal in the Council and the European Parliament. The future directive will regulate the patentability of biological material, which is a particularly sensitive issue when the material is of human origin. The article also seeks to set the proposed directive in a wider context by referring to forthcoming international Convention Law on biotechnology and to the legal situation in Spain at present.     

Keywords,case law and the Court of Justice: the need for legislative intervention in modernising European trade mark law

Recent preliminary references to the CJEU on online keyword advertising and registered trade mark infringement have exposed the challenges facing EU registered trade mark law in its response to new technologies. These cases and the challenges they pose provide a timely prism through which to examine the European trade mark law-making process and the role of the CJEU within that process. This article will employ an analysis of the way in which the CJEU has developed certain key new aspects of the law on ‘infringing use’ to explore concerns over the CJEU's role and approach. It will be argued that, driven by policy considerations, the CJEU has acted creatively to develop the law of infringement in ways that cannot be sustained by the TMD and CTMR and which are likely to cause increasing uncertainties going forward. With the European Commission currently considering reform of Trade Marks Directive 2008/95/EC and Community Trade Mark Regulation 207/2009/EC, this paper will argue that there is a need for more comprehensive and forward-looking legislative intervention than has yet been proposed and that such intervention will be essential to restoring balance in the European trade mark law-making process.     

Corporate Social Responsibility European Style

Abstract: The concept of corporate social responsibility (CSR) emerged in the official discourse of the EU in 2000. This article explains how, while CSR may have been initially an idea about the scope of the responsibility of companies towards their environment, it has now become a process in which the representatives of the business community have come to occupy the main role, and whose purpose is to promote learning among business organisations, rather than to identify the components of a regulatory framework for CSR. The central question now, therefore, is whether the so‐called ‘business case’ for CSR is strong enough, so that we may hope that the forces of market will suffice to encourage companies to behave responsibly, over and above their obligation to comply with their legal obligations. The article shows, however, that this case rests on certain presuppositions about markets and the business environment, which cannot be simply assumed, but should be affirmatively created by a regulatory framework for CSR. Following the introduction, it proceeds in four stages. First, it examines the development of CSR in the EU. Second, it offers a critical examination of the so‐called ‘business case’ for CSR, taking into account the growing diversity within the enlarged EU. It then discusses, as an alternative, what a regulatory framework for CSR could resemble, highlighting a number of initiatives which have been taken in this regard by the EU. The article finally concludes that, since the failure of the European Multi‐Stakeholder Forum on CSR in 2004, the debate has made a turn in the wrong direction, both because of the mistaken view that the establishment of a regulatory framework for CSR would threaten the competitiveness of European companies, and because of the naive (and contradictory) view that reliance on market mechanisms will suffice to ensure that corporations will seek to minimise the negative social and environmental impacts of their activities, even in circumstances where they are not legally obliged to do so.     

The European Charter of Fundamental Rights A Changed Political Opportunity Structure and its Normative Consequences

The European Community is about to enlarge its de facto constitution by a fundamental rights charter. It is intended to become legally binding, at least in the long run. If it is, it will profoundly change the political opportunity structure between the Community and its Member States, among the Member States, among the organs of the Community and in relation to outside political actors. When assessing the new opportunities, one has to keep in mind the weak democratic legitimation of European policy making and its multi‐level character. The article sketches the foreseeable effects and draws consequences from these insights for the dogmatics of the new fundamental rights, their relation to (other) primary Community law and to other fundamental rights codes. It ends with a view to open flanks that cannot be closed by the dogmatics of the freedoms themselves, but call for an appropriate design of the institutional framework.     

Emergent patterns in the regulation of pharmaceuticals: institutions and interests in the United States,Canada, Britain,and France

Although industrialized nations regulate pharmaceuticals to ensure their safety and efficacy, they balance these concerns with those related to the timeliness of the approval process and the burdens involved in meeting regulatory criteria. The United States, Canada, Britain, and France have adopted different approaches to the regulation of pharmaceuticals that place varying emphases on these competing goals and involve the participation of private interests to different extents. The regulatory approval processes and the government-industry relationships inherent within them are compared in the United States, Canada, Britain, and France by analyzing five features that distinguish the U.S. pluralist from the European corporatist approaches to policy development: representation (internal versus external), process (closed versus open), stance (informal, accommodative versus formal, adversarial), institutional power (fragmented versus centralized), and resources. An institutional framework further characterizes these approaches as based on models of managerial discretion and adjudication (United States), consultation (Canada), and bargaining (Britain, France) to clarify the patterns that emerge. While the approach that most effectively supports product safety involves managerial discretion as occurs in the United States, formal mechanisms for negotiation might be incorporated rather than a reliance on the judicial process. In an era of globalization and regulatory harmonization such divergence has significant implications. First, where harmonization in Europe involves the mutual recognition of one country's product licensing decision by the others, differences in evaluative processes remain important. Second, as harmonization leads to a common set of regulatory criteria, the criteria adopted tend to be those of nations with the least stringent regulatory standards, making evident the need for more responsive systems of post-market surveillance to protect the public interest.     

The Regulation of Public Procurement as a Key Element of European Economic Law

This article aims to investigate the regulation of public purchasing from an interdisciplinary perspective. It endeavours to provide its audience with the broad framework of the function of public procurement and public purchasing in the common market and the Member States, as well as the legal and socio-economic parameters which determine this newly regulated field. It also intends to enable its readers to understand and appreciate the impact of the liberalisation of public markets on the whole process of European integration, as it places the regulation of public procurement within the framework of the four freedoms, as well as within the EU's key policies.     

Accountability, Control and Independence: The Case of European Agencies

This article points at two problematic assumptions made in some of the contemporary European agency literature. It proposes a conceptual framework, integrating accountability, autonomy and control, and aims to demonstrate how this type of conceptualisation contributes to clarifying problematic aspects of the current European agency debate. Empirical evidence from interviews with high-level practitioners is provided to illustrate the relevance of the proposed framework. The empirical information reveals that, at times, the de facto level of autonomy displayed by some European agencies is below the autonomy provided by the formal legal rules as a result of ongoing controls exercised by one (or other) of the principals. The repercussions that flow from these empirical insights for the agency debate in general, as well as for our understanding of agency accountability, will be discussed at length.     

Neo-Voluntarism: A New European Social Policy Regime?

Abstract: The essay begins with a recapitulation of core institutional properties of the European Union as they have evolved over several decades. The leading insight deriving from this exercise is that European social policy will always, for all practical purposes, be made simultaneously at two levels, a supranational one and a national one, and will be shaped by complex interactions between them and among the national systems situated in the integrated market economy of the Union. Proceeding from here, the remainder of the paper examines the two levels of social policy-making, beginning with the supranational and moving on to the national, in an effort to identify the kinds of policies that are most likely to emerge given the constraints and opportunities offered by the institutional framework.     

European Structural Policy: Bend or Break

This article deals with the consequences for the European Structural Policy (ESP) of the extension of the EU with countries from Central and East Europe. It argues that the allocation mechanism of financial assistance from the structural funds must be changed profoundly in order to gain a balanced system of distributing the available funds. In view of the changing Common Agricultural Policy and international trade policy in the framework of the WTO the European Structural Policy will become gradually more important. In order to compensate for the decreasing price support for agricultural products extension of structural assistance in the near future is inevitable.     

After the Crash: A Perspective on Multilevel European Democracy

From a social‐market perspective, European integration has reduced the capacity of democratic politics to deal with the challenges of global capitalism, and it has contributed to rising social inequality. The article summarises the institutional asymmetries which have done most to constrain democratic political choices and to shift the balance between capital, labour and the state: the priority of negative over positive integration and of monetary integration over political and social integration. It will then explain why efforts to democratise European politics will not be able to overcome these asymmetries and why politically feasible reforms will not be able to remove them. On the speculative assumption that the aftermath of a deep crisis might indeed create the window of opportunity for a political re‐foundation of European integration, the concluding section will outline institutional ground rules that might facilitate democratic political action at both European and national levels.     

Competition@eCommerce.eu: An Appropriate European Approach to the Anticompetitive Implications in the Online World

The economic landscape of Europe has undoubtedly been revolutionised over the last few years with the introduction of new technology into business practices. But along with the inevitable benefits a series of antitrust issues have surfaced, which have often disrupted the application of European Competition Law. This article will analyse and discuss the existing legal framework and recent case law with respect to its capacity to pave the way for enterprises to embrace innovation, and argue that – although the current legal system might be satisfactory to a certain extent – the European Commission should make adjustments and promote the idea of self-regulation, if the EU is to be at the forefront of the online world. This revised version was published online in August 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

European Citizenship: Towards a European Identity?

Questions of political identity and citizenship, raised by thecreation of the `new Europe', pose new questions that politicaltheorists need to consider. Reflection upon the circumstances ofthe new Europe could help them in their task of delineatingconceptual structures and investigating the character ofpolitical argument.

Does it make sense to use concepts as `citizenship' and`identity' beyond the borders of the nation-state? What does itmean when we speak about `European Citizenship' and `EuropeanIdentity'?

It is argued that the pluralism that has led theorists tooffer a conception of citizenship based upon principles of right,rather that the common good, applies even more strongly at thelevel of the European political order. Developing a contractariantheory of federation, an account of the basis of a Europeancitizenship will be offered in which federalism emerges out of anoverlapping consensus of European citizens on the terms of theirpolitical association.

`European Citizenship' and `European Identity' are discussedin the context of the so-called `European Union', and not in thewider context of Europe `as a whole', or for that matter on aneven broader `cosmopolitan' scale. However, the gist of the articleis that arguments for concepts of `citizenship' and `identity'that go beyond borders of nation-states and that are applied tothe `European Union', could have implications for an even widerapplication.

Finally, and in conclusion, the (empirical) context will beelaborated in which the normative concept of shared liberalcitizenship identity should be realized on a pan-national,European level.

     

Regulating Science and Technology: The Case of the UK Biotechnology Industry*

This paper considers the current performance and future prospects of the UK biotech industry, particularly the biomedical sector. The central argument is that the performance of the UK biotech industry cannot be understood in isolation from the European system of regulation and, increasingly, the international regulatory environment, and from what is happening elsewhere in the regulation of science – particularly in the U.S. To develop this argument, it adopts as its conceptual framework Kim and von Tunzelmann's network alignment approach following Radosevic. It explores the link between regulatory policies and the biotechnology production system – networks between academic research, biotech firms, and large pharmaceutical companies.     

Vital parameters for patent morality a question of form

Legal context: At the interface between patent law and biotechnology, a debatehas arisen over the application of the morality provision, designedto ensure the future development of society on a principledbasis. This article reviews the provision in its European context,adopting UK and European perspectives for analysis. Key points: Analysis of the provision identifies that there is ambiguityregarding interpretation of the morality provision, which haslead to inconsistent application between the European PatentOffice and the European Patent Boards. This article assessesthe provision in the context of the patent system and offersa legal philosophy framework within which to understand theprovision as conveying: a methodology, a standard of moralityand a source for that standard which can be utilized to describethe possibilities. It then re-centres the debate to its practicalcontext in order to demonstrate that the patent system removesthe options which are inapplicable: advocating valid and achievablemethods for complying with the law both nationally and on aEuropean level. Practical significance: The morality provision has become an accepted ‘wild card’in assessing the patentability of biotechnology: it has cometo rely upon the identification of danger areas in innovationthat may trigger moral objections. This falls far short of thelegal certainty which is so vital to biotechnological growth.In the face of the impending implementation of the unitary patentright across Europe, the importance of achieving a predictableand practical approach to applying the morality cannot be underestimated.     

The citizen‐makers: Ethical dilemmas in immigrant integration

The topic of citizen‐making—turning migrants into citizens—is one of the most politically contested policy areas in Europe. Access to European citizenship is governed by national law with almost no EU regulation. The Article brings to the fore normative concerns associated with citizen‐making policies in Europe (Section 2). It examines ethical dilemmas involved in the process of creating new citizens (Section 3) and promotes the adoption of a European legal framework on access to citizenship (Section 4). The overall claim is that every newcomer will be required to demonstrate, as a prerequisite for citizenship, attachments to the constitution of the specific Member State, yet the test will be functional, flexible and non‐exclusive. As the topic of EU citizenship law is currently at the centre of the European agenda, this article has both theoretical significance and policy implications.     

欧盟转基因生物安全法评析

欧盟对转基因生物安全的管理在世界上一直是最严格的,因其严格,也遭到美国等现代生物技术产品出口大国的质疑.对欧盟管理转基因生物安全的指令和条例进行介绍,对新旧法律进行比较,从中可以看出欧盟这方面法律的一个发展轨迹,并介绍了欧盟及其成员国对这些指令和条例的执行情况.此外,还介绍了著名的美国等国家诉欧共体的转基因生物措施案,并对案件进行了简单的评议,从中可以了解世界贸易组织的争端解决专家对欧盟有关转基因生物的措施的一些意见.     

European Data Protection Regulation and Online New Media: Mind the Enforcement Gap

Data Protection Authorities (DPAs) play a critical role in shaping and applying the regulation applicable to online media expression within the European Economic Area. Drawing on seven ubiquitous types of online new media actors, a comprehensive survey of these authorities was undertaken. It found that European DPAs generally adopt an expansive interpretation of data protection and a constrained understanding of freedom of expression in this space. In contrast, data protection enforcement is weak and lacking in harmonization. Except for street mapping services, each type of online media actor had only faced relevant enforcement action from a minority of these agencies. DPA financial resourcing is very limited. Notwithstanding the development of DPA ‘network governance’, only DPAs with a particularly extensive interpretative stance proved likely to have engaged in extensive enforcement activity. It remains unclear what difference the General Data Protection Regulation will make to resolving this enforcement gap and its related problems.     

English Alternative Business Structures and the European single market

English Alternative Business Structures (ABS) are likely to put the European legal framework on lawyer mobility and cross-border provision of legal services to its first serious test. Continental European bars are defending a reading of the applicable European Directives which would allow them to keep English ABS out of their markets. Whether the European Court of Justice (ECJ) will agree with this protectionist interpretation of the applicable European rules remains to be seen. This paper challenges the legal arguments in favour of protectionism and argues that it will be very difficult for Continental European bars to keep English ABS out of their markets.