Explore the vast range of titles available.

This Article provides an analysis of how the UK's withdrawal from the European Union is going to impact on EU criminal procedural laws. From the EU's perspective, the loss of a \"critical\" partner may lead to more harmonised cooperation between the remaining Member States and thus less intergovernmental features in this area in the long term. More crucially however, the future relationship between the EU and the UK poses certain difficulties as the procedural arrangements to be put in place cannot simply replicate the pre-Brexit status of the UK's membership. According to the Draft Agreement on the New Partnership with the UK, mechanisms such as the European Arrest Warrant are to be replaced by new \"streamlined\" procedures and other \"simplified\" arrangements for the exchange of information and cooperation. This raises questions as regards the possibility for monitoring the UK's compliance as well as the enforceability of any procedural guarantees given. In addition, the inherent danger of the UK's departure comes in the shape of a discontinuity of upholding similar values as those applied by the EU (e.g., fundamental rights) and thus a further drifting apart of both sides. Essentially, it is argued in this contribution that this constitutes the opposite of the relationship with other third countries, which is usually characterised with progressive alignment, and should therefore be approached with great caution from an EU perspective for the conclusion of the negotiations on the future relationship.

(Series Information) European Papers - A Journal on Law and Integration, 2024 9(2), 641-646 | Article | (Table of Contents) I. Introduction. – II. Preparing the ground for another attempt? The judicial dialogue between the CJEU and ECtHR since Opinion 2/13 – III. Negotiating the Revised Draft Accession Agreement. – IV. Appraising the Revised Draft Accession Agreement. - V. Conclusion. | (Abstract) A revised Draft Agreement on the Accession of the EU to the ECHR (revised DAA) was agreed upon in Mach 2023, after three years of (re-)negotiations in the shadow of Opinion 2/13. The contributors to this Special Section of European Papers analyse and assess the revised DAA. Once the EU side has finalised the EU-internal rules that will interface with the accession agreement, the CJEU will for a third time give its opinion on whether an envisaged accession to the ECHR is compatible with the EU treaties. This Special Section opens with an analysis of the immediate context of the negotiations and the accession process: the case law of the CJEU and the ECtHR since Opinion 2/13. Then, some of the key negotiators analyse the negotiations leading up to the revised DAA. Thereafter, three key aspects of the revised DAA are assessed: the co-respondent mechanism, the effect of Opinion 1/17 on the revised agreement, and the yet unresolved Common Foreign and Security Policy issue. The final contribution concludes by interrogating the overarching issues of trust and mistrust, which permeated Opinion 2/13, the accession (re-)negotiations, and the final text of the revised DAA alike.

(Series Information) European Papers - A Journal on Law and Integration, 2024 9(2), 801-817 | Article | (Table of Contents) I. Introduction. – II. Trust and distrust: Delineations and reflections on the protagonists of the EU accession saga. – III. Opinion 2/13 and its aftermath: The politics of distrust. – IV. The mirage of trust: The ECtHR and the draft accession instruments. – V. The road ahead: (Re-)building trust post-accession. – VI. Conclusion. | (Abstract) The EU accession to the ECHR has been a complex and at times politically charged topic. Questions of trust and distrust between the two protagonists, namely the supranational courts that will be called upon to cooperate for the enhancement of human rights protection in Europe (but also more generally between the Union and its Member States), were extremely important for the successful conclusion of this second round of negotiations. Nevertheless, the obsession of control that underpins the CJEU’s Opinion 2/13 and many of the EU proposals in the renewed negotiation do not bode well for the establishment and furtherance of trust between the two institutions. Additionally, the ECtHR is called upon to show blind trust to the EU and its Court under the revised Draft Accession Agreement. Ultimately, trust will be (re)built only if the CJEU and the ECtHR adopt a constructive attitude by, respectively, following due process/rule of law guarantees or showcasing jurisprudential consistency and accommodating mutual trust.

This Highlight compares the EU Commission's Draft Withdrawal Agreement with the UK's Draft Text for Discussion: Implementation Paper. Specifically, it compares the positions of each as they relate to the role of the UK in EU external action post-Brexit. What is demonstrated is that there is considerable consensus among the two documents as to what this role should be.

Road freight transport is indispensable to international economic cooperation and foreign trade. Across all continents, it is commonly used for short and medium distances and in long distance haulage when minimizing time is important. In all instances governments play a critical role in ensuring the competitive advantage of private sector operators. Countries often have many opportunities to minimize the physical or administrative barriers that increase costs, take measures to enhance the attractiveness and competitiveness of road transport, or generally nurture the integral role of international road freight transport in the global trade logistics industry. Road freight transport is critical to domestic and international trade. It is the dominant mode of transport for overland movement of trade traffic, carrying more than 80 percent of traffic in most regions. Generally, nearly all trade traffic is carried by road at some point. Therefore, the cost and quality of road transport services is of critical importance to trade competitiveness of countries and regions within countries. In fact, road transport is fundamental to modern international division of labor and supply-chain management.

This book presents the reflections of a group of researchers interested in assessing whether the law governing the promotion and protection of foreign investment reflects sound public policy. Whether it is the lack of \"checks and balances\" on investor rights or more broadly the lack of balance between public rights and private interests, the time is ripe for an in-depth discussions of current challenges facing the international investment law regime. Through a survey of the evolution in IIA treaty-making and an evaluation from different perspectives, the authors take stock of developments in international investment law and analyze potential solutions to some of the criticisms that plague IIAs. The book takes a multidisciplinary approach to the subject, with expert analysis from legal, political and economic scholars. The first part of the book traces the evolution of IIA treaty-making whilst the other three parts are organised around the concepts of efficiency, legitimacy and sustainability. Each contributor analyzes one or more issues related to substance, treaty negotiation, or dispute resolution, with the ultimate aim of improving IIA treaty-making in these respects. Improving International Investment Agreements will be of particular interest to students and academics in the fields of International Investment Law, International Trade Law, Business and Economics.

Provides Henry Kissinger with guidelines for final negotiations on peace agreement.