ThinkTank logo Az új uniós jogszabályok megalkotását segítő dokumentumok
Közzététel időpontja 08-07-2020

El Derecho de excepción, una perspectiva de Derecho Comparado - España: estado de alarma

08-07-2020

Este documento se integra en una serie de análisis que pretenden, desde la perspectiva del Derecho Comparado, presentar el Derecho de excepción en diferentes Estados, con especial atención a aquellos fundamentos jurídicos en que se basan las medidas de emergencia que se pueden adoptar ante crisis, como puede ser la crisis sanitaria provocada por la pandemia del COVID-19. El presente análisis tiene como objeto el caso de España. Se trata de la segunda edición.

Este documento se integra en una serie de análisis que pretenden, desde la perspectiva del Derecho Comparado, presentar el Derecho de excepción en diferentes Estados, con especial atención a aquellos fundamentos jurídicos en que se basan las medidas de emergencia que se pueden adoptar ante crisis, como puede ser la crisis sanitaria provocada por la pandemia del COVID-19. El presente análisis tiene como objeto el caso de España. Se trata de la segunda edición.

Külső szerző

Gabriel LECUMBERRI BEASCOA

Institutions and foreign interferences

15-06-2020

This study, commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs at the request of the AFCO Committee, assesses the EU responses to counter foreign interferences. It examines in particular the effectiveness of the EU action against foreign interferences in the 2019 European Parliament elections, the COVID-19 crisis and the issue of foreign donations to European political parties. The study concludes with specific policy recommendations to enhance ...

This study, commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs at the request of the AFCO Committee, assesses the EU responses to counter foreign interferences. It examines in particular the effectiveness of the EU action against foreign interferences in the 2019 European Parliament elections, the COVID-19 crisis and the issue of foreign donations to European political parties. The study concludes with specific policy recommendations to enhance the EU’s responses.

Külső szerző

Edoardo BRESSANELLI, Sant’Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa (Principal Investigator) Anna DI PALMA, Sant’Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa Gaetano INGLESE, Sant’Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa Sofia MARINI, Sant’Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa Eric REPETTO, Sant’Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa

Közzététel időpontja 07-07-2020

Amended proposal for the 2021-2027 MFF and 2021-2024 recovery instrument 'Next Generation EU' in figures

07-07-2020

This briefing provides a graphic presentation of the next long-term budget and recovery instrument (Next Generation EU) proposed by the European Commission on 27 May 2020 (COM 2020). By comparing it with the Commission's initial proposal of May 2018 (COM 2018) and the European Parliament's negotiating position, we highlight the changes for the future financing of EU priorities. The preparation of the EU's next Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) started formally in May 2018 with the proposal from ...

This briefing provides a graphic presentation of the next long-term budget and recovery instrument (Next Generation EU) proposed by the European Commission on 27 May 2020 (COM 2020). By comparing it with the Commission's initial proposal of May 2018 (COM 2018) and the European Parliament's negotiating position, we highlight the changes for the future financing of EU priorities. The preparation of the EU's next Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) started formally in May 2018 with the proposal from the European Commission, more than two years ago. The European Parliament adopted its detailed negotiating position on 14 November 2018. The European Council, however, held its first substantial debate on the proposals only on 20 February 2020, failing to find agreement. The coronavirus pandemic has complicated the situation further. Given the new circumstances, on 27 May 2020 the Commission put forward an amended proposal for the 2021-2027 MFF and, linked to it, a recovery instrument, entitled Next Generation EU (NGEU) for the years 2021-2024.

Access to the occupation of road transport operator and to the international road haulage market

07-07-2020

The regulations on admission to the occupation of road transport operator and on access to the international road transport market have been contributing to the functioning of EU road transport and fairer competition between resident and non-resident hauliers since December 2011. Despite the improvements they have brought to the sector, persistent shortcomings such as diverging national application of the rules and uneven enforcement called for a revision of both acts. On 31 May 2017, as part of ...

The regulations on admission to the occupation of road transport operator and on access to the international road transport market have been contributing to the functioning of EU road transport and fairer competition between resident and non-resident hauliers since December 2011. Despite the improvements they have brought to the sector, persistent shortcomings such as diverging national application of the rules and uneven enforcement called for a revision of both acts. On 31 May 2017, as part of a 'mobility package', the European Commission adopted a new proposal to address the main shortcomings affecting the sector, and improve its competitiveness and efficiency. In June 2018, Parliament's Committee on Transport and Tourism (TRAN) adopted its report. After further debates and procedural developments, Parliament adopted its first-reading position on 4 April 2019. The Council, on its side, reached a general approach on this proposal in December 2018, under the Austrian Presidency. After four negotiating rounds, the Council and Parliament reached a provisional agreement on the proposal on 12 December 2019, which was approved by Coreper on 20 December. The Council formally adopted its first-reading position on 7 April 2020, and the TRAN committee recommended on 8 June that Parliament approve it at second reading. The agreed text is thus due to be voted in plenary in July at second reading. If adopted, this would put an end to three years of debate on a complex and controversial proposal. Sixth edition. The 'EU Legislation in Progress' briefings are updated at key stages throughout the legislative procedure.

Road transport: Enforcement and special provisions for posted workers

07-07-2020

The EU has established a range of social measures applicable to the road transport sector, which aim at improving drivers' working conditions, road safety and competition. To give real substance to these measures, compliance is key. The 2006 Enforcement Directive was therefore adopted to effectively implement the social provisions of the Driving Time Regulation. The present proposal, published in the context of the European Commission's 2017 'Europe on the move' initiative, seeks to remedy some shortcomings ...

The EU has established a range of social measures applicable to the road transport sector, which aim at improving drivers' working conditions, road safety and competition. To give real substance to these measures, compliance is key. The 2006 Enforcement Directive was therefore adopted to effectively implement the social provisions of the Driving Time Regulation. The present proposal, published in the context of the European Commission's 2017 'Europe on the move' initiative, seeks to remedy some shortcomings of the Enforcement Directive, such as non-uniform implementation. Additionally, it puts forward specific rules on the posting of workers in the road sector, to respond to concerns raised regarding the inadequacy of the Posting of Workers Directive, when applied to the road transport sector. The European Parliament's Committee on Transport and Tourism (TRAN) adopted its report in June 2018. After further debates and procedural developments, the Parliament adopted its first-reading position on 4 April 2019. The Council agreed a general approach in December 2018, under the Austrian Presidency. After four rounds of negotiations, Parliament and Council reached provisional agreement on the proposal on 12 December 2019, subsequently approved by Coreper on 20 December. The Council formally adopted its first-reading position on 7 April 2020, and on 8 June the TRAN committee recommended Parliament approve it at second reading. The agreed text thus returns to plenary in July for a final vote at second reading. Its adoption would put an end to three years of debate on a complex and controversial proposal. Sixth edition. The 'EU Legislation in Progress' briefings are updated at key stages throughout the legislative procedure.

Road transport: Driving, breaks, rest times and tachographs

07-07-2020

The Driving Time and Tachograph Regulations were adopted to improve drivers' working conditions and road safety, as well as to enhance compliance with the rules, and competition between road operators. In the context of the European Commission's 2017 'Europe on the move' package, the present proposal aims to remedy the shortcomings of these regulations, on which a broad consensus has emerged: lack of clarity, non-uniform implementation, insufficient enforcement and a need for strengthened cooperation ...

The Driving Time and Tachograph Regulations were adopted to improve drivers' working conditions and road safety, as well as to enhance compliance with the rules, and competition between road operators. In the context of the European Commission's 2017 'Europe on the move' package, the present proposal aims to remedy the shortcomings of these regulations, on which a broad consensus has emerged: lack of clarity, non-uniform implementation, insufficient enforcement and a need for strengthened cooperation between Member States and authorities. In June 2018, Parliament's Committee on Transport and Tourism (TRAN) adopted its report. After further debate and procedural developments, Parliament adopted its first-reading position on 4 April 2019. The Council, on its side, reached a general approach on the proposal in December 2018, under the Austrian Presidency. After four negotiating rounds, the Council and Parliament reached a provisional agreement on the proposal on 12 December 2019, which was approved by Coreper on 20 December. The Council formally adopted its first-reading position on 7 April 2020, and on 8 June the TRAN committee recommended approving it at second reading. The agreed text thus now returns to plenary for a vote at second reading in July. If adopted, this would put an end to three years of debate on a complex and controversial proposal. Sixth edition. The 'EU Legislation in Progress' briefings are updated at key stages throughout the legislative procedure.

Amending Budget No 5/2020: Continuation of support to refugees in response to the Syria crisis

07-07-2020

Draft Amending Budget No 5/2020 (DAB 5/2020) accompanies the proposed decision of the European Parliament and of the Council to mobilise the Contingency Margin in order to continue support to refugees and host communities in response to the Syria crisis. Under the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) heading 4, 'Global Europe', €100 million in commitment and payment appropriations is proposed as resilience support to refugees and host communities in Jordan and Lebanon, whereas €485 million in commitment ...

Draft Amending Budget No 5/2020 (DAB 5/2020) accompanies the proposed decision of the European Parliament and of the Council to mobilise the Contingency Margin in order to continue support to refugees and host communities in response to the Syria crisis. Under the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) heading 4, 'Global Europe', €100 million in commitment and payment appropriations is proposed as resilience support to refugees and host communities in Jordan and Lebanon, whereas €485 million in commitment appropriations and €68 million in payment appropriations is proposed as urgent humanitarian support to refugees in Turkey under the Contingency Margin. The European Parliament is expected to vote on the Council position on DAB 5/2020 and the proposal to mobilise the Contingency Margin during its July plenary session.

The EU's public health strategy post-Covid-19

07-07-2020

The coronavirus pandemic has put European health systems under enormous strain, revealing gaps in the way public health emergencies are addressed. The European Commission's proposal for a new EU Health programme, EU4Health, aims to fill these gaps. During the European Parliament's July plenary session, the Commission and the Council are to make statements on the EU's public health strategy after coronavirus, followed by a debate with Members. A resolution is due to be voted later in the week.

The coronavirus pandemic has put European health systems under enormous strain, revealing gaps in the way public health emergencies are addressed. The European Commission's proposal for a new EU Health programme, EU4Health, aims to fill these gaps. During the European Parliament's July plenary session, the Commission and the Council are to make statements on the EU's public health strategy after coronavirus, followed by a debate with Members. A resolution is due to be voted later in the week.

EU-Iran: The way forward - Can the JCPOA survive the Trump presidency?

07-07-2020

Two issues have dominated relations between the EU and Iran in recent years: the nuclear agreement known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) – including efforts to conclude it, followed by efforts to save it – and human rights concerns. Even though the European Union (EU) and Iran have worked together over the past two years to save the JCPOA, relations between the two have deteriorated. Iran accuses EU Member States of not standing up to pressure from the United States of America ( ...

Two issues have dominated relations between the EU and Iran in recent years: the nuclear agreement known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) – including efforts to conclude it, followed by efforts to save it – and human rights concerns. Even though the European Union (EU) and Iran have worked together over the past two years to save the JCPOA, relations between the two have deteriorated. Iran accuses EU Member States of not standing up to pressure from the United States of America (USA) to isolate Iran and of not doing enough to save the JCPOA. The EU, for its part, is concerned about Iran's enrichment activities; growing tensions in the region and Iran's role in this context, including the provision of military, financial and political support to non-state actors in countries such as Iraq, Lebanon, Syria and Yemen; and its ballistic missile programme. In 2011, the EU put restrictive measures in place to react to serious human rights violations in Iran. These remain in force. Nevertheless, the EU has continued to engage with Iran, in marked contrast to the USA. Following the US withdrawal from the JCPOA in May 2018, the Trump administration re-imposed wide-ranging sanctions on Iran and has since then pursued a policy of 'maximum pressure'. The declared goal of the maximum pressure campaign is to push Iran to negotiate a new agreement that would also address Iran's ballistic missile programme, end its support of militant groups in the region, and curb its foreign policy ambitions in western Asia. Instead, the US policy of maximum pressure on Tehran has led to an escalation of tensions in the Persian Gulf region, with potentially direct consequences for Europe. With Iran continuing uranium enrichment to levels far exceeding the levels permitted under the JCPOA, and with the USA threatening to trigger the re-imposition of United Nations (UN) sanctions against Iran, further escalation is likely. Security in the EU is linked to the security situation in western Asia. For that reason, Europe should maintain efforts to preserve the JCPOA and seek to reduce tension between Iran and the USA.

States of emergency in response to the coronavirus crisis: Situation in certain Member States IV

07-07-2020

With the virulence of the coronavirus pandemic gradually diminishing, and in the light of the restrictive measures adopted by Member States, attention remains on the way chosen by the various states to respond to the crisis. With states at various stages of relaxing emergency constraints, the effects of the coronavirus pandemic are likely to last in terms of health, economic, social, psychological and possibly even political impact. Although public attention is now turned towards the widely differing ...

With the virulence of the coronavirus pandemic gradually diminishing, and in the light of the restrictive measures adopted by Member States, attention remains on the way chosen by the various states to respond to the crisis. With states at various stages of relaxing emergency constraints, the effects of the coronavirus pandemic are likely to last in terms of health, economic, social, psychological and possibly even political impact. Although public attention is now turned towards the widely differing measures that states are taking in order to live with the virus, new challenges are emerging as international and domestic traffic, trade and free movement of people are re-established, having been all but frozen. In this context, it is still necessary to complete the overview of Member States' constitutional frameworks in response to the coronavirus pandemic with the hope that this might offer some guidance or insight, should a comparable crisis arise in the future. This is the last in a series of four briefings and completes the comparative overview of Member States' institutional responses to the coronavirus crisis by analysing the legislation of Cyprus, Czechia, Greece, Ireland, Lithuania and Slovakia. The first in the series gave an overview of the responses in Belgium, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Poland and Spain, the second covered Austria, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Malta, Romania and Slovenia, while the third covered Croatia, Denmark, Finland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal and Sweden.

Infografikák

A Think Tank kiadványai

A Think Tank honlapján lévő valamennyi dokumentum tartalmáért kizárólag a szerzők felelősek, és az azokban kifejtett nézetek nem feltétlenül tükrözik az Európai Parlament hivatalos álláspontját. A honlap az EP képviselői és személyzete számára működik parlamenti munkájuk segítése érdekében.

A Think Tank a közösségi oldalakon...