Tema na "ordem do dia" do cenário mundial, a disciplina jurírica da liberdade religiosa, assume caracteres específicos quando aplicada à realidade brasileira. Temperada pelo sol do Brasil, instituições jurídicas de além-mar, assumem uma face autêntica e própria. Ao longo de mais de 500 anos desde a chegada dos portugueses, o panorama religioso brasileiro muda sempre mais, da hegemonia inicial do catolicismo romano, o país caminha sempre mais para um cenário de pluralismo religioso.

Against a backdrop of rapidly evolving crisis management in the European financial and sovereign debt crisis this essay aims both to explore and to re-consider the role of law in the EU integration process: What did law accomplish? Where did it fail? What is law going to endure? What kind of future can it envisage? The essay traces back the evolution of the law-politics relationship in both EU legal scholarship and practice from the foundational period of ‘integration-through-law’ to the advent of ‘new governance’ in the EU, and finally to the current deep transformations of EU law in new economic governance and the financial crisis. The centrality of law as ‘both the object and the agent’ of European integration, and the legal enshrinement of EU’s economic constitution has recently neglected the weight of ‘the social’ in the societies of post-war Europe, a failure which was to become detrimental to both domestic social stability and the legitimacy of integration. Attempts to cure Europe’s social deficit by re-conceptualising the notion of law as new governance have widened the theoretical perspective of EU legal scholarship. Yet new governance has not delivered more social democracy and justice in Europe in practical terms, and continues to suffer from the methodological problems of its ‘definition-by-contrast.’ These problems re-emerge in current new economic governance, which Europe’s crisis management is generating. This hybrid arrangement of hard and soft law instruments has, to date, been economically unsuccessful and socially disastrous, especially in the South of Europe. Equally disquieting, the notion of democratic law (either in traditional or experimentalist understandings) has been replaced by a praxis of authoritarian executive managerialism. The essay concludes by sketching out an alternative understanding of law-mediated legitimacy in the integration process, namely ‘conflicts-law constitutionalism’. This approach stresses the normative value of conflicts and pluralism in the process of European integration. Instead of ‘ever more Europe’ it aims to secure the existing democratic credentials of EU law, namely its ability to correct the democratic deficit of the Member States while respecting their constitutional integrity.

This paper explores how far experimentalist features of the EU’s internal food safety governance regime are being extended to the Union’s external governance of food safety. Hence, it analyses whether and how far the Union’s engagement with both third countries and global institutions displays features of experimentalism. Our analysis shows that while the EU constitutes a powerful global standard setter in the field of food safety, its unilateral role is to some extent mitigated by both its cooperative engagement with third countries at the bilateral level and by its embeddedness within multilateral global governance institutions, such as the WTO and the Codex Alimentarius Commission. Furthermore, our analysis of two crucial institutional mechanisms of EU’s external food safety governance, namely the EU Food and Veterinary Office (FVO) and the EU Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed (RASFF) shows that both are designed, and often function well as reflexive institutions with strong features of de-centralised implementation, reporting and peer review, as well as learning and recursive revision of rules. Both FVO and RASFF provide important opportunities for third countries to participate in the Union’s internal governance and rule-making processes. However, reviewing the performance of both institutions in previous food crisis situations, the analysis also reveals some important shortcomings in their practical functioning as experimentalist tools, which calls for the further improvement of these mechanisms.

This paper analyzes the problems of EU risk regulation of agricultural biotechnology through the lens of deliberative theories of EU law and governance, such as deliberative supranationalism and experimentalist governance. Previous research had suggested that the GMO issue is not conductive to deliberation in both Council of Ministers and comitology because of its high politicisation. This paper argues that another equally salient factor is the scientification of the EU authorization process. Scientification stands for the Commission’s overreliance on regulatory science, and therefore on epistemic legitimacy as the sole basis for risk management. Given the deadlock of comitology in this field, scientification is exacerbated by a reversion to top-down regulation by the Commission. As a result, political responsibility for GMO authorisations gets lost. Through an in-depth analysis of both legal rules and institutional practices this contribution reframes the problem of GMO regulation as one of a precarious co-production between scientification and politicisation. It shows that both processes are mutually accelerative ultimately leading to a break down of dialog at EU level. This contradicts the assumption that deliberation is fostered by technocratic ‘behind closed door’ decision-making. In the GMO case the top-down imposition of epistemic authority has only increased politicisation contributing to the de-legitimation of all EU institutions involved in GMO regulation (i.e. European Food Safety Authority, Commission, comitology committees, and Council of Ministers).

This paper argues in favor of broadening the trade and environment debate in the WTO to include a developmental perspective. It takes the US-Tuna II dispute between the United Sates and Mexico as an example to show the complex intertwinement between economic, environmental and developmental issues. WTO litigation involving environmental regulation cannot be narrowed down to a conflict between the right to regulate and free trade. It also touches upon the issue of global justice and the power asymmetries structurally embedded in the global economy. The recognition of the WTO as a legitimate global institution depends on its ability to reconcile respect for the right to regulate with the need to give due regard to the interests and concerns of foreign constituencies affected by domestic regulation, thereby ensuring external accountability. This requires imposing other-regarding obligations able to induce reflexivity in domestic regulation. The paper applies this framework by analyzing the legal reasoning of the Appellate Body in US-Tuna II (in both the original and the compliance report). Here the Appellate Body deferred to a stringent and unilateral standard of the United States while imposing only minimal accountability vis-à-vis Mexico by requiring that the US standard be applied 'even-handedly.' The paper criticizes that 'even-handedness' does not necessarily improve regard for affected foreigners. Based on a comparison with the Appellate Body's reasoning in US-Shrimp the paper argues that reflexivity-inducing other-regarding obligations require a higher burden of justification from the regulating state, especially in disputes between developed and less developed states.

The EU has most frequently resorted to harmonisation as a model to achieve its internal market. This contribution examines the dynamics of legal differentiation in EU's internal market law laid down in Article 114 TFEU and secondary laws. It concludes that there has been a modest number of invocations of the derogation possibilities under Article 114 (4) and (5) TFEU and the safeguard clauses. The low number may be due to the fact that may both the Commission and the Courts have a very rigid reading of the procedure whilst the grounds for invocation are very limited. This low number nevertheless does not automatically imply that Member States agree with the level of protection laid down in the EU's harmonisation measures or that the opt out mechanisms are not relevant. Derogation mechanisms may play an important role in the negotiations of the level of protection in the draft legislative acts. This study moreover reveals that the derogation mechanisms may be important devices of regulatory adjustment and learning in the fields of public health and environmental protection in the EU. They ultimately may rather strengthen the uniformity of regulatory requirements in the EU internal market instead of leading to regulatory diversity.

The COVID-19 pandemic is changing the face of Europe. Member States’ divergent responses to this crisis reveal a lack of unity in the face of a humanitarian catastrophe. At best, this undermines the effectiveness of health protection within the European Union (EU). At worst, it risks breaking up the Union altogether. Divergent national responses to COVID-19 reflect different national preferences and political legitimacy, and thus cannot be completely avoided. In this article, we argue that these responses should be better coordinated. Without coordination, the price for diversity is high. Firstly, there are damaging spill-overs between Member States, which undermine key pillars of European integration such as the free movement of persons and of goods. Secondly, national policy-making is easily captured by local interest groups. Our proposal is that the EU indicates – not mandates – a European exit strategy from asymmetric containment policies of COVID-19. In particular, the EU shoul...

Disclaimer/Complaints regulations If you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Ask the Library: https://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible.

Disclaimer/Complaints regulations If you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Ask the Library: http://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible.

Disclaimer/Complaints regulations If you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Ask the Library: https://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible.

Th e complexity of contemporary relations and problems, exacerbated by the intricacies of international interaction, pose an enormous challenge to law in general and international law in particular. Th is paper focuses on two of the various reactions of the legal doctrine to this complexity: on the one hand, the embracement of the novel circumstances and phenomena in their own right-the new governance approaches (NG); on the other hand, the insistence on traditional legal tools but under a renewed understanding thereof in line with changing circumstances-the global administrative law approaches (GAL). Th e fi rst part of the argument here is that within particular regulatory contexts NG and GAL fi nd their expression in sector-specifi c and public law approaches, respectively. Th e paper goes on to essentially argue for a lato sensu public law analysis to be undertaken cumulatively with-and not alternatively to-the sector-specifi c analysis. Th is serves to further support the view that NG and GAL are not antithetical; they are rather complementary, and in fact they seem to show a lot of promise in mitigating the (normative) defects of each other.

Mało komu znany jest fakt, że kojarzące nam się z rozwiniętymi państwami zachodu słowo 'robot' ma w rzeczywistości zachodniosłowiańską genezę. Jego twórcą i popularyzatorem jest piszący w XX wieku czeski prekursor fantastyki naukowej Karel Čapek. W swoim najsłynniejszym dramacie R.U.R. (Rossum's Universal Robots) opisuje on od początku do końca dzieje przedsięwzięcia polegającego na stworzeniu istot będących źródłem taniej i niezawodnej siły roboczej. Postawiony przed faktem powodowanego przez roboty bezrobocia wśród robotników Harry Domin, dyrektor naczelny firmy Rossum, odpowiada: "W ciągu dziesięciu lat Rossumowskie Uniwersalne Roboty wyprodukują tyle pszenicy, tyle materiałów, tyle wszystkiego, że powiemy: te rzeczy nie mają już wartości. Teraz każdy niech bierze, ile mu potrzeba. Koniec nędzy nie zabraknie już niczego. Tak, robotnicy będą bez pracy, ale wkrótce potem w ogóle już ludzka praca nie będzie potrzebna. Wszystko zrobią za nas żywe maszyny. Człowiek będzie zajmował się tylko tym co kocha. Będzie żył tylko po to żeby się doskonalić."