File #2556: "2019_Book_BordersLegalSpacesAndTerritori.pdf"
Testo
1|Foreword|5
1|Acknowledgements|7
1|Contents|8
1|Editors and Contributors|10
1|Borders and International Law: Setting the Stage|11
2|1 Introduction|12
2|2 A Historiography of the Border in International Law|12
2|3 Borders, Legal Spaces and Territories in Contemporary International Law|18
2|4 Synopsis of the Book|22
2|References|26
2|Further Reading|30
1|Part I: Within the Border|31
2|Access to Social Security for Migrants in the European Union: Sedentarist Biases Between Citizenship, Residence and Claims for...|32
3|1 Introduction|33
3|2 From Sedentarist Biases to a Post-national Society: A Critical Analysis|34
4|2.1 A Brief Introduction to the Theory of ``Sedentarism´´|34
4|2.2 The History of Citizenship as an History of Sedentarism|35
4|2.3 From Citizenship to a Globalized Society: The Post-nationalist Critique|38
3|3 Social Security in the International and Regional Law|39
4|3.1 Universal Level|40
4|3.2 Council of Europe|43
4|3.3 European Union|44
3|4 Migrants´ Access to Social Security in the European Union Member States|46
3|5 Analysing Access to Security in the European Union: A Testimony of Sedentarist Biases or the Birth of a Post-national Societ...|57
4|5.1 From Citizens to Legal Residents: Are Nation-States Outdated?|57
4|5.2 The Deep Rootedness of Sedentarist Biases|59
3|6 Is There an Alternative to a Sedentarist Society?|60
3|7 Conclusions|64
3|References|65
3|Further Reading|67
2|Non-refoulement in the Eyes of the Strasbourg and Luxembourg Courts: What Room for Its Absoluteness?|68
3|1 Introduction|69
3|2 Flexibility and Vagueness of the Principle of Non-refoulement|74
3|3 The Principle of Non-refoulement in the Jurisprudence of the Strasbourg and Luxembourg Courts: Differences and Reciprocal In...|78
4|3.1 The Particular Situation of the Applicant and the Principle of Mutual Trust: M.S.S. and N.S. and Others|78
4|3.2 Absence of Systemic Failure and Individual Assurances: The ``Tarakhel Approach´´|84
4|3.3 Critically-Ill Migrants and Dublin Transfers: The Innovative Approach of C.K. and Others|88
3|4 The Strasbourg Court Acting as a Judicial Body Supervising the Implementation of EU Law: The Different Shades of the Absolut...|91
3|5 Conclusions|96
3|References|98
3|Further Reading|100
2|The Pillars of Heracles of European Private International Law: The Frontiers with Third States and Brexit|101
3|1 Introduction|102
3|2 Preliminary Remarks on the ``Communitarization´´ of Private International Law and the Functional Link to the Internal Market|103
3|3 A Photograph of the Spatial Scope of Application of European Private International Law|105
4|3.1 Jurisdiction and Third States|106
4|3.2 Parallel Proceedings in Third States|107
4|3.3 Recognition and Enforcement of Third-Country Decisions|108
4|3.4 Concluding Remarks on the Spatial Scope of European Private International Law: Looking Ahead|109
3|4 Different External Approaches of European Private International Law|110
4|4.1 Multilateralism as a Guarantee of Reciprocity|110
4|4.2 Unilateralism as a Projection of EU Objectives|112
3|5 The Last Frontier of Brexit and Its Effects on Civil Judicial Cooperation: The European Perspective|114
4|5.1 The Special Status of the UK in the Current Framework|115
4|5.2 Possible Solutions to the Brexit Enigma|116
4|5.3 The Future of UK-EU27 Judicial Cooperation Between Bilateralism and Unilateralism|119
3|6 Conclusions|122
3|References|122
3|Further Reading|128
2|The Principle of Territoriality in EU Data Protection Law|129
3|1 Introduction: (Extra)Territoriality as a Matter of International Law|130
3|2 From Extraterritoriality to Territorial Extension|134
3|3 The Scope Ratione Loci of Directive 95/46|135
3|4 The Territorial Element in the GDPR|138
3|5 International Limitations to the Extension of Jurisdiction: The Principle of Proportionality|143
3|6 Conclusive Remarks|146
3|References|147
3|Further Reading|149
1|Part II: Beyond the Border|150
2|Testing the Analogy: The CoE-ECHR System Pioneering Human Rights Protection in the Cyberspace|151
3|1 Framing International Human Rights Law in the Digital Age|152
3|2 The CoE `Activism´ on Internet-Related Issues of Protection and the Relevance of the ECHR|157
3|3 Testing Article 8 ECHR: The Protection of Private Life and Reputation in the Cyberspace|160
3|4 Testing Article 10 ECHR: Freedom of Expression, the Right to Inform and Get Informed Through the Cyberspace|167
3|5 Final Remarks: A Cutting-Edge Model, Not a World Apart|173
3|References|176
3|Further Reading|177
2|The Sky´s Not the Limit: Legal Bonds and Boundaries in Claiming Sovereignty over Celestial Bodies|178
3|1 Introduction: When the Final Frontier Becomes a New Beginning|179
3|2 Setting the Boundaries of the Prohibition of Boundary-Setting|181
4|2.1 The Legal Status of Article II OST|181
4|2.2 The Content of the Non-appropriation Principle|187
3|3 The Homesteader´s Guide to the Galaxy|194
4|3.1 The Accretion of the Territory of a State or the Foundation of a New One|194
4|3.2 OSTracism? The (Non-)Recognition of a Space Nation|200
3|4 Conclusion: Mars Unbound?|206
3|References|209
3|Further Readings|214
2|A Bull in a China Shop: The Exercise of the ICC´s Jurisdiction Over Its Territorial Reach in Situations Involving Non-Party St...|215
3|1 Introduction: The ICC´s ``Territorial Reach´´ in Situations Involving Non-Party States|216
3|2 The Casus Belli: An Illegitimate Expansion of the ICC´s Territorial Reach?|219
3|3 International Tribunals´ Monopoly Over the Definition of the Boundaries of Their Own Jurisdiction|221
3|4 The Legal Basis for the Exercise of Kompetenz-Kompetenz Over Ad Hoc Declarations|224
4|4.1 The Narrow Scope of Article 19(1)|224
4|4.2 The Contextual Interpretation of Article 19(3)|226
4|4.3 The Interpretation of Article 119(1) in Light of the General Principle of Kompetenz-Kompetenz|227
4|4.4 Conclusion: The Specificity of the Jurisdictional Issues Arising from Ad Hoc Declarations|229
3|5 The Exercise of Kompetenz-Kompetenz in Relation to Ad Hoc Declarations: A Chair for Two?|230
3|6 The Dangers of Outsourcing the Determinations Concerning the Preconditions to the Exercise of the Court´s Jurisdiction|232
3|7 The Bull in a China Shop: Reflecting on the Political Impact of the Exercise of the ICC´s Kompetenz-Kompetenz in Situations ...|235
3|8 Conclusion|237
3|References|239
3|Further Reading|240
2|At the Frontier: Values and Borders in the EU´s External Relations|241
3|1 Introduction|242
3|2 On Regulation (EU) No. 230/2014, Regulation (EU) No. 235/2014 and Regulation (EU) No. 236/2014|245
3|3 On Some of the Projects Financed by the EU Under Regulation No. 230/2014 and Regulation No. 235/2014|248
3|4 A Critical Assessment of the `External Projection´ of the EU Model|252
3|5 Some Thoughts on the Internal Coherence of the EU Model|258
3|6 Conclusion|261
3|References|262
3|Further Reading|266
1|Index|267
1|Acknowledgements|7
1|Contents|8
1|Editors and Contributors|10
1|Borders and International Law: Setting the Stage|11
2|1 Introduction|12
2|2 A Historiography of the Border in International Law|12
2|3 Borders, Legal Spaces and Territories in Contemporary International Law|18
2|4 Synopsis of the Book|22
2|References|26
2|Further Reading|30
1|Part I: Within the Border|31
2|Access to Social Security for Migrants in the European Union: Sedentarist Biases Between Citizenship, Residence and Claims for...|32
3|1 Introduction|33
3|2 From Sedentarist Biases to a Post-national Society: A Critical Analysis|34
4|2.1 A Brief Introduction to the Theory of ``Sedentarism´´|34
4|2.2 The History of Citizenship as an History of Sedentarism|35
4|2.3 From Citizenship to a Globalized Society: The Post-nationalist Critique|38
3|3 Social Security in the International and Regional Law|39
4|3.1 Universal Level|40
4|3.2 Council of Europe|43
4|3.3 European Union|44
3|4 Migrants´ Access to Social Security in the European Union Member States|46
3|5 Analysing Access to Security in the European Union: A Testimony of Sedentarist Biases or the Birth of a Post-national Societ...|57
4|5.1 From Citizens to Legal Residents: Are Nation-States Outdated?|57
4|5.2 The Deep Rootedness of Sedentarist Biases|59
3|6 Is There an Alternative to a Sedentarist Society?|60
3|7 Conclusions|64
3|References|65
3|Further Reading|67
2|Non-refoulement in the Eyes of the Strasbourg and Luxembourg Courts: What Room for Its Absoluteness?|68
3|1 Introduction|69
3|2 Flexibility and Vagueness of the Principle of Non-refoulement|74
3|3 The Principle of Non-refoulement in the Jurisprudence of the Strasbourg and Luxembourg Courts: Differences and Reciprocal In...|78
4|3.1 The Particular Situation of the Applicant and the Principle of Mutual Trust: M.S.S. and N.S. and Others|78
4|3.2 Absence of Systemic Failure and Individual Assurances: The ``Tarakhel Approach´´|84
4|3.3 Critically-Ill Migrants and Dublin Transfers: The Innovative Approach of C.K. and Others|88
3|4 The Strasbourg Court Acting as a Judicial Body Supervising the Implementation of EU Law: The Different Shades of the Absolut...|91
3|5 Conclusions|96
3|References|98
3|Further Reading|100
2|The Pillars of Heracles of European Private International Law: The Frontiers with Third States and Brexit|101
3|1 Introduction|102
3|2 Preliminary Remarks on the ``Communitarization´´ of Private International Law and the Functional Link to the Internal Market|103
3|3 A Photograph of the Spatial Scope of Application of European Private International Law|105
4|3.1 Jurisdiction and Third States|106
4|3.2 Parallel Proceedings in Third States|107
4|3.3 Recognition and Enforcement of Third-Country Decisions|108
4|3.4 Concluding Remarks on the Spatial Scope of European Private International Law: Looking Ahead|109
3|4 Different External Approaches of European Private International Law|110
4|4.1 Multilateralism as a Guarantee of Reciprocity|110
4|4.2 Unilateralism as a Projection of EU Objectives|112
3|5 The Last Frontier of Brexit and Its Effects on Civil Judicial Cooperation: The European Perspective|114
4|5.1 The Special Status of the UK in the Current Framework|115
4|5.2 Possible Solutions to the Brexit Enigma|116
4|5.3 The Future of UK-EU27 Judicial Cooperation Between Bilateralism and Unilateralism|119
3|6 Conclusions|122
3|References|122
3|Further Reading|128
2|The Principle of Territoriality in EU Data Protection Law|129
3|1 Introduction: (Extra)Territoriality as a Matter of International Law|130
3|2 From Extraterritoriality to Territorial Extension|134
3|3 The Scope Ratione Loci of Directive 95/46|135
3|4 The Territorial Element in the GDPR|138
3|5 International Limitations to the Extension of Jurisdiction: The Principle of Proportionality|143
3|6 Conclusive Remarks|146
3|References|147
3|Further Reading|149
1|Part II: Beyond the Border|150
2|Testing the Analogy: The CoE-ECHR System Pioneering Human Rights Protection in the Cyberspace|151
3|1 Framing International Human Rights Law in the Digital Age|152
3|2 The CoE `Activism´ on Internet-Related Issues of Protection and the Relevance of the ECHR|157
3|3 Testing Article 8 ECHR: The Protection of Private Life and Reputation in the Cyberspace|160
3|4 Testing Article 10 ECHR: Freedom of Expression, the Right to Inform and Get Informed Through the Cyberspace|167
3|5 Final Remarks: A Cutting-Edge Model, Not a World Apart|173
3|References|176
3|Further Reading|177
2|The Sky´s Not the Limit: Legal Bonds and Boundaries in Claiming Sovereignty over Celestial Bodies|178
3|1 Introduction: When the Final Frontier Becomes a New Beginning|179
3|2 Setting the Boundaries of the Prohibition of Boundary-Setting|181
4|2.1 The Legal Status of Article II OST|181
4|2.2 The Content of the Non-appropriation Principle|187
3|3 The Homesteader´s Guide to the Galaxy|194
4|3.1 The Accretion of the Territory of a State or the Foundation of a New One|194
4|3.2 OSTracism? The (Non-)Recognition of a Space Nation|200
3|4 Conclusion: Mars Unbound?|206
3|References|209
3|Further Readings|214
2|A Bull in a China Shop: The Exercise of the ICC´s Jurisdiction Over Its Territorial Reach in Situations Involving Non-Party St...|215
3|1 Introduction: The ICC´s ``Territorial Reach´´ in Situations Involving Non-Party States|216
3|2 The Casus Belli: An Illegitimate Expansion of the ICC´s Territorial Reach?|219
3|3 International Tribunals´ Monopoly Over the Definition of the Boundaries of Their Own Jurisdiction|221
3|4 The Legal Basis for the Exercise of Kompetenz-Kompetenz Over Ad Hoc Declarations|224
4|4.1 The Narrow Scope of Article 19(1)|224
4|4.2 The Contextual Interpretation of Article 19(3)|226
4|4.3 The Interpretation of Article 119(1) in Light of the General Principle of Kompetenz-Kompetenz|227
4|4.4 Conclusion: The Specificity of the Jurisdictional Issues Arising from Ad Hoc Declarations|229
3|5 The Exercise of Kompetenz-Kompetenz in Relation to Ad Hoc Declarations: A Chair for Two?|230
3|6 The Dangers of Outsourcing the Determinations Concerning the Preconditions to the Exercise of the Court´s Jurisdiction|232
3|7 The Bull in a China Shop: Reflecting on the Political Impact of the Exercise of the ICC´s Kompetenz-Kompetenz in Situations ...|235
3|8 Conclusion|237
3|References|239
3|Further Reading|240
2|At the Frontier: Values and Borders in the EU´s External Relations|241
3|1 Introduction|242
3|2 On Regulation (EU) No. 230/2014, Regulation (EU) No. 235/2014 and Regulation (EU) No. 236/2014|245
3|3 On Some of the Projects Financed by the EU Under Regulation No. 230/2014 and Regulation No. 235/2014|248
3|4 A Critical Assessment of the `External Projection´ of the EU Model|252
3|5 Some Thoughts on the Internal Coherence of the EU Model|258
3|6 Conclusion|261
3|References|262
3|Further Reading|266
1|Index|267