Diversity in Europe: from Pluralism to Populism?

Europe The Council of Europe The Council of Europe was founded in 1949 as a European organisation for encouraging and developing intergovernmental and interparliamentary co-operation. Its aim as laid down in article 1 of the Statute is to achieve a greater unity between member states for the purpose of safe-guarding and realising the ideals and principles which are their common heritage and facilitating their economic and social progress. The principles of the Council of Europe as established in article 3 of the Statute include pluralist democracy, respect for human rights and the rule of law. A Committee of Ministers, consisting of the Foreign Ministers of member states, and a Parliamentary Assembly, consisting of delegations of members of national parliaments, constitute the principal organs of the Council of Europe, together with a Secretary-General and supporting secretariat. There also exists a Standing Conference of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe, consisting of national delegations of local and regional elected representatives. The Council of Europe also maintains a number of support and assistance programmes. The demise of the Soviet Empire in Eastern and Central Europe has been the primary reason for the great increase in member states over the last few years. The process of joining the Council of Europe has provided the Council with some influence over prospective members and this has led both to expert advice and assistance being proffered and to commitments being entered into in the field of human rights by applicants.

The purpose of this research is to investigate the role of international organizations in elections observation as an instrument of ensuring human rights. The objectives are to analyze the notions of democracy and human rights, democratization trends worldwide, current threats to human rights related to elections procedures and the role of international organizations as entities safeguarding human rights in the globalized world. In order to investigate this problem the researcher utilized such scientific methods as deduction and induction, historical and comparative method and the case study one. Historical and comparative methods were used to trace the evolution of international organizations’’ activities with regard to elections observation and compare various organizations’ pertinent processes and procedures. Case study method was used to collect and analyze qualitative data about international organizations’ activity related to elections observation and to define their role in ensuring human rights, in particular, freedom of expression. The notions of democracy and human rights, democratization trends worldwide, current threats to human rights related to elections procedures and the role of international organizations as entities safeguarding human rights in the globalized world were analyzed. As a result, it can be stated that in the increasingly globalized world there are various democratization trends. There are different visions and models of democracy, yet no single one can be considered optimal. It can be noted that international organizations play a significant role in elections observation as an instrument of ensuring human rights. The dynamic rhythm of global development helps to promote plurality of ideas, political ideologies and ethical values. It can be concluded that in this increasingly interconnected world democracy has the function of a mediator promoting understanding among countries, first of all, through the United Nations. Democracy as a type of political regime, i. e. type of relationship between the country leadership and the people cannot function effectively without active social groups and civil society organizations. The political context has to promote freedom of speech, independent media, rule of law, effective judiciary system and overall respect for human rights. Freedom of expression and political choices are among fundamental human rights guaranteed by democratic national and international laws. International organizations are among the most noteworthy entities on the world arena safeguarding human rights and free expression of people’s political will. International organizations are working actively in order to tackle current threats to human rights, in particular, freedom of expression and freedom of political will. To this end, the international and national organizations provide comprehensive electoral support. The United Nations, the European Union, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe and the Council of Europe are actively engaged in providing electoral support and assist in holding objective and just elections worldwide, especially in transitioning countries. They play a key role in providing electoral support in accordance with the international organizations’ mission, bolstering democracy and safeguarding human rights. The role of international organizations in the globalized world as human rights protector continues to be vital and indispensable.

THE FUTURE OF THE COMMON SECURITY DEFENCE POLICY AND A CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTION

In 2004 the European heads of state signed the treaty that established a Constitution for Europe, a document that defines the rules of political life in the new Europe of 25 states. The preamble to the new Constitution states that the European Union (EU) draws its ‘inspiration from the cultural, religious and humanist inheritance of Europe’, while article 1-2 presents the values of the EU as those of ‘respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities’ (European Communities, 2005). Even though this still needs to be ratified by the member states in order to take effect, these opening parts of the Constitution are symbolically significant both for what they include, and what they do not. One of the issues that the Constitution deliberately excludes is reference to the Christian heritage of European societies and references to God. Both points proved to be highly controversial in the earlier drafting stages of the document, and points of conflict with (particularly) the Catholic Church and the Vatican.[1] We could see this discursive omission of references to European Christian roots and to God as part of an ongoing process of secularisation of the political process, and the declining social significance of religion in Europe. This would be consistent with changing attitudes amongst the European population. Research evidence suggests a religious decline amongst Europeans over the last 15 years, although the 1999 European Values survey shows a trend for the development of ‘religiosity without belonging’ (Lambert, 2004). The persistence of religious feelings in modern societies would have been a surprise to early modernist thinkers, who saw science and rationality at the antipode of ‘faith’ and predicted a decline of religion and its eventual extinction. This process, which included a separation between state and the churches and the ‘structural differentiation’ of other social institutions that gradually gained autonomy (such as state education and social welfare), did not take into account the place that religion held in the cultural sphere (Crouch, 1999). Religion as a form of identification and the bearing of collective meaning continues to bind individuals to particular communities of faith even if attendance of religious ceremonies has declined. But, there is another important dimension of religion, and in particular of the institutions that represent them, and that is their interface with politics and nationalisms. Bruce (2003) makes the argument that religion is still a potent force over contemporary political matters (such as divorce, abortion etc.), but that it is also a powerful player in the formation of national and ethnic identities. As such, most religions in the world have been

The EU Response to COVID-19: From Reactive Policies to Strategic Decision-Making.

Social Rights in Refugee Law and Human Rights Law: The Non-discrimination Principle as a Harmonization Tool

The Quest for Information Privacy in Africa: A Review Essay

It has became common for some States, international or regional organizations to establish a link between good governance, respect of human rights and the democratization of States. This idea is now a condition for development aid. Paragraph 1 of Article 5 of the Lomé Convention between the European Community (EC) and African, Carribean and Pacific States (ACP) of 15 December 1989, revised at Maurice 4 November 1995, provides that the politics of development and cooperation are closely linked to the respect and the enjoyment of fundamental human rights, to the strengthening of the rule of law and good governance. In Paragraph 2, cooperation is established as an instrument for promoting the enjoyment of economic, social, politic and cultural rights. The democratic clause contained in Article 5 of the Lomé Convention, and for which the respect of human rights, democratic principles and rule of law are essential elements of this Convention, firstly favours the achievement of positive actions in this framework and dedicates these elements as topics of common interests and a matter of dialogue. The European Union has stressed its willingness to develop a positive approach to these essential elements, which are the bedrock of the EU-ACP relationship besides being fields of cooperation and Community support. For that purpose, the Cotonou Agreement signed on 23 June 2000 strengthens this approach in Paragraph 2 of Article 9. The EU clearly places these essential elements at the heart of its partnership and defines the shared values that underpin this kind of relationship. It is in the spirit of common commitment to the respect and promotion of universal values that this approach has been taken.

The Impact of Profiling on Fundamental Rights

This bibliography examines the influence of the formal pan-European political and economic structures on the practice and development of social work, social services, and social care in Europe, with particular reference to human rights, social welfare policy, and the practice of social work. Europe as a continent stretches from the Atlantic Ocean to the Ural Mountains, from the Arctic Ocean to the Mediterranean Sea, from Portugal to Russia (beyond the Urals), and from Finland to Greece, while also including island states such as Cyprus, Iceland, Ireland, Malta, and the United Kingdom. The continent includes not only some of the most economically and socially developed countries in the world, but also some of the poorest. It comprises the forty-seven democratic countries that are members of the Council of Europe (CE), with a total population of around 740 million. All the member states have ratified the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (also known as the European Convention on Human Rights, or ECHR), including respect for its legal institutions. Belarus, Kosovo, and the Holy See (in Rome) are also within the region but are not members of the Council. Twenty-eight of these countries are also members of the European Union (EU), a political union with common institutions and legal frameworks that have supremacy over national parliaments. Social work as a profession has been well established in Europe for over a hundred years within a variety of social welfare models; the countries in central and eastern Europe have reestablished social work since the 1990s, following the ending of the Communist political systems. The practice of social work has evolved differently in each country, but it shares common characteristics. The main political and social structures of Europe—the Council of Europe (CE) and the European Union (EU)—have a significant influence on the development of national social policies through EU Directives (laws), the human rights principles, and the conventions of the Council of Europe and convergent visions. The key instruments that impact on social work policy and practice are identified alongside analysis of their significance.

The Council of Europe (CoE) and the European Union (EU) possess significant legal instruments to affect and reverse anti-democratic changes in Poland, and some of these instruments have already been used, with varying degrees of success. The chapter opens with the CoE’s, and in particular the Venice Commission and the European Court of Human Rights’ contributions to policing Polish assaults on the rule of law. It then turns to the EU, and reflects upon the question as to whether the EU—with its assortment of different measures of ‘naming and shaming’ (Art. 7.1 Treaty on European Union (TEU)), sanctions (Arts 7.2 and 7.3 TEU), and legal infringement actions, as well as its newly crafted ‘rule of law framework’ (also known as the pre-Article 7 procedure)—has been so far, and can be in the near future, effective in cabining and reversing anti-democratic trends in one of its largest member states. The conclusion is affirmative: the EU has an important, even if limited, role to play in assisting Polish defenders of the rule of law and democracy.

Between Rhetoric and Action: The Politics, Processes and Practice of the ICC's Work in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC)

The European Union (EU) has established a highly differentiated set of external relations including trade policy, development cooperation, political dialogue and security questions. By linking the economic and political dimensions, the EU tries to be more than just an economic actor in international relations. Cooperation with third countries is based on values and criteria like human rights, democracy and the rule of law (conditionality) and a political dialogue. The problem, however, is whether the coherence of the EU's external relations is strong enough and whether the mixture of economic and political tools can be applied effectively. Looking at the empirical evidence doubts remain that they can. The imbalance between the economic and political dimension is closely linked to the divergence between the first (EC) and second (CFSP) pillar of the Treaty on European Union, between EU institutions, between the supranational and member state level, and between the member states. With regard to the EU's Asia policy the influence of these divergencies can be seen, most prominently, in the dialogue about human rights or sanctions. The paper argues that the different qualities of the economic and political dimension of EU external relations are the result of a structural coherence dilemma. It describes how the EU's relations towards Asian countries are affected. The conclusion explains why major changes towards a coherent and common Asia policy should not be expected.

Human rights condition the relations between the individual and the State, delimiting the power of the latter, and simultaneously obliging the State to take the appropriate measures that will make it possible for any person to enjoy and exercise his or her human rights freely. In the last two hundred and fifty years or so, history has witnessed the struggle and continued efforts to translate that into a tangible deed. Since the French and American Revolutions, which took place in the late eighteenth century, the human rights cause has led to several democratic revolutionary movements seeking to achieve individual liberation and establish control over the institutions of power, especially governments. Thus, governments and other power structures are duly obliged to respect, protect, guarantee and implement human rights as a sum of personal and collective rights defined in State Constitutions and other domestic and international laws comprising the reliable foundations for legal entitlements and remedies in case of non-fulfilment. Accordingly, our article focuses mainly on a detailed analysis of the relations between governments and human rights in democratic societies, stressing that guaranteeing them clears the necessary ground for the existence and functioning of the rule of law. More specifically, it aims to provide adequate answers to the following questions: (1) May governments restrict human rights, and what are the relevant clauses? (2) What does the term “derogation” mean in a state of emergency? (3) What are the reservations concerning the international or regional human rights treaties? (4) What do measures against terrorism represent within the framework of human rights? Keywords: human rights, State, power, government, restriction.

Purpose – This chapter examines how the response to the pandemic will have an impact for many years on rule of law mechanisms and human rights within Hungary.Methodology/Approach – The arguments put forward in this chapter are supported by analysis of key legislation both domestic and international concentrating on how the concept of rule of law has been redefined. This analysis is conducted by focusing on the Hungarian legislation, Fundamental Law, and key sources engaging in the analysis of the effects that the COVID-19 pandemic has had on reshaping the legal landscape.Findings – In the unprecedented times of a global pandemic it is important to reflect on how the Governments of the world responded to the immediate danger and what ramifications those changes will have as the pandemic unfolds over the coming years. This raises questions regarding the European political landscape and how the cause of the rule of law can be furthered. This chapter argues that the rule of law project of the European Union (EU) as set out in Article 2 of the Treaty of the European Union (TEU) has been circumvented by several rogue states. The European parliament now is finding new ways to engage with and curtail “rogue” Member States which, according to them, step out of line.Originality/Value – The current research contributes to the ongoing dialogue about the tension that the COVID-19 pandemic had on global legal frameworks. Of particular interest is how the EU and its institutions are uniquely placed to act as an external guarantor of the rule of law. However, this relationship has been tested by Member States, in particular Hungary, with its use of emergency measures. This chapter compliments the body of academic work by analyzing how Hungary has reached the position it is in today and what could be done to bring it back within the ethos of Article 2’s common values of the Member States.