The For Long Lasting Peace After Two Major Wars

cold blast for the enemy. The winter lives to destroy the warmth of the summer

A Separate Peace, written by John Knowles in 1959, takes place at a boarding school in New England named Devon where 16-year-old Gene and Phineas live their adolescence. Their teenage years are taking place during World War 2, so their youth is spent talking about and waiting to go into war. While they are Devon, it seems the boys can not be attacked by the outside world and they can remain to be children. But soon the fun comes to an end when Phineas falls out of the tree. The tree that Gene and Phineas jumped out of every night, that Gene could even recognize when he came back 15 years later. This time between his fall and the war draft is a time for each boy to face his internal and external enemies. Their enemies are finally defeated after

"Your surroundings may change but your essence and your personality pretty much stay the same" (Dewan). The setting of the novel A Separate Peace is at an all boys school located in New Hampshire. The characters and plot are finely woven into the fabric of this institution. However, would events in this novel turn out differently if the story was set in a public high school, with a diverse environment? The characters and plot of A Separate Peace are not solely driven by their surroundings because the boys would still break the rules, Gene would have internal conflicts, and the war would affect the students.

In the 1950s, 15 years after his graduation from Devon, an all boys school in New Hampshire, Gene Forrester returns. While walking through the campus, Gene thinks of his experiences at Devon during World War II, especially during the summer of 1942, when he was a 16 year old boy.

“Agreeably to the remark already made, the national and State systems are to be regarded as ONE WHOLE. The courts of the latter will of course be natural auxiliaries to the execution of the laws of the Union, and an appeal from them will as naturally lie to that tribunal which is destined to unite and assimilate the principles of national justice and the rules of national

With regards to the claim that the European Parliament is too weak (the second of Weiler's standard version claims), Moravcsik (2002; 2003) emphasises the fact that during the last twenty years, the European Parliament is the institution which have experienced the most reforms, regarding its increase of powers, compare to the Council and the Commission. The latter argument is in fact accurate because ever since the Single European Act (1986), the European Parliament gains more and more power by reforms in every signed Treaty (Moravcsik, 2003, p. 7). Despite that, however, the Parliament is still considered to be weak compared to the other institutions, as it will be analysed later in the essay.

The principle of supremacy of European Union (EU) law has been established over the course of more than five decades. It is a principle that was established by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in 1964, and it has continued to have a rich history in the jurisprudence of the ECJ and national constitutional courts. As the ECJ and national courts attempt to define their respective realms of influence, a bright debate has sparked regarding constitutional pluralism. Moreover, the recent codification of primacy in the Constitutional Treaty has led to a new debate on the scope of the supremacy of EU law.

This hazard came after the government of Poland had reorganized the voting requirements of the Constitutional Court and altered the structure of the nation’s media outlets. The majority ruling party within Poland, the Law and Justice Party, also raised moral questions among other EU member states by establishing new government appointed leaders to the public television and broadcasting agencies. This new change in judicial processes and media control has led many members of the European Union to question both the democracy and corruption within the Polish government and to determine if the new policies have infringed on the EU’s values and morals. Therefore, these recent political fluctuations have lead me to ask what powers does the EU have to influence a member countries media and court institutions, why has the EU become worried about Poland, and in which ways will the EU attempt to sanction Poland for their alterations? This research paper will elaborate on Poland’s recent political changes. It will then analyze how Poland’s changes have raised controversy with the European Union and why the EU was concerned. Lastly, the research will demonstrate which institutions in the EU have jurisdiction over such a conflict, and how the European Union will attempt to nullify Poland’s voting rights within the EU.

Enforcing the European Union legal system is diverse and done on multiple platforms; through not only actions taken against member states for breach of their obligations, but also, for example, through the use of direct effect1. Article 267 TFEU; an organism devised to practice private enforcement of EU law before national courts, has been critical to ensure uniform interpretation and application of EU law in member states. References for preliminary rulings occur when the national courts are presented with a question of EU law due to uncertainty of the provision. The national court will therefore ‘make a reference to the Court of Justice (COJ) to obtain a preliminary ruling on any point of EU law relevant to the proceedings’2. In

The CJEU case-law on horizontal direct effect of directives arguably lacks consistency in regards to the application of the general principle. The principle of direct effect was established in Van Gend en Loos v. Nederlandse Administratie der Belastingen. Although there is no set definition of direct effect, a broader definition was provided in Van Gend en Loos that it “can be expressed as the capacity of a provision of EU law to be invoked before a national court.” However, Van Dyun v. Home Office established that directives are capable of direct effect. Furthermore, Marshall v. Southampton established that there could only be vertical direct effect of directives. This stringent principle has arguable ignited the highly contested debate of whether or not horizontal direct effect is applicable to directives or if directives could only have vertical direct effect. However, this essay shall explore the lack of consistency in case-law regarding horizontal direct effect of directives. Firstly, this paper will delve into the case-law of the topic of horizontal direct effect of directives in efforts to try to highlight its consistency in its approach. Secondly, the paper will use case law and the opinion of academics (enter the name of the academics later) to highlight its inconsistencies using the legal mechanisms that have been introduced by the Courts to try to compensate for the lack of horizontal direct effect of directives. Namely, indirect effect, incidental horizontal

However again this higher status can be seen as limited as is only assumed from a written obligation. Therefore to asses if supremacy is not the challenge to member state sovereignty that is appears to be, a close analysis of how the CJEU has dealt with the issue of supremacy of EU law in case law is needed, firstly looking at Van Gend en Loos which stated that the ‘EU was a new legal order permanently limiting the sovereign rights of the Member State’. This customs case helped establish the ‘relationships between the European Union and international law…to grantee that the rules of one system are complied with in another legal order ’ showing in practise that if on a national level EU law is breached CJEU will take supremacy and comply with ‘the integrity of the EU legal order’ . Further evaluation of the limits of the supremacy can be seen in the case of Costa V ENEL where ‘Italy had claimed that the EU treaties…had been transposed into the Italian legal order by national legislation, which could therefore be derogated by subsequent national legislation. The court rejected this presumption of the supremacy of national law by insisting on the supremacy of EU law’ . This case holds significance as it ‘is well-known since Costa V ENEL the court has affirmed the supremacy of Community law over national law’ strongly suggesting the continued existence of EU supremacy is not frequently

World Peace is something that will never happen. Too many countries have too much military power and don't want to give in to any other country. War is something that the world is going to have to deal with because there has been very few years over the history of the world that have been war free. Like one quote by an unknown author says, "Peace is rare: less than 8% of the time since the beginning of recorded time has the world been entirely at peace. In a total of 3530 years, 286 have been warless. Eight thousand treaties have been broken in this time."

The European Union (EU) is not a typical international organization. The mix of intergovernmental and supranational institutions makes the EU a unique, distinctive political, and economic system. As Europe has spiraled from one crisis to the next, difficult discussions haves arisen about how much more power should be delegated to Brussels. Even though the EU advocates for “ever closer union”, through increased integration, states are becoming hesitant to relinquish power to the EU. This is due to the fact that state sovereignty has become threatened; it is being compromised by a combination of the lack of effective democratic institutions and the loss of states have lost control of law-making to legislation power to EU institutions. Euroenthuthiasts argue that state sovereignty is enhanced, not threatened, by reallocating power to EU institutions. However, Eurosceptics dispute that too much control has seceded to the EU making is a threat to state sovereignty. My position aligns with Eurosceptics, for the EU has weakened state sovereignty do to increased centralization of power in EU institutions that lack legitimacy. The European Project has obtained a copious amount of jurisdiction from states and eroded a basic fundamental freedom of the modern state- sovereignty. Since the EU has with goals to deepen and widen integration it’s clear that forfeiting state sovereignty will only intensify. My essay will start with a brief history of the European Union and a short

We speak of legal precedent when a decision of a court is an obligatory authority required for the same court and others of equal or lower rank. LaMorte (2002) noted that doctrine of precedent arose in the common law legal system. It is currently outstanding in all legal systems given the importance of court decisions, not only in its own field (the application of law) but to the extent that it has relevance as a formal source of law. Analysis of legal precedent has special complexity since the following dimensions are involved: the objective dimension related to what is effective of precedent, and that leads us to distinguish between ratio decidendi and obiter dicta. They are concerning the structural dimension to constitute precedents decisions with regard to a further decision. The institutional dimension related to the organization of courts and the relations of authority between them.

International commercial arbitration is one of the most important legal institutions in international private law. This conclusion follows from the fact that the nature of arbitration depends largely on autonomy of the parties, who choose arbitration procedure as the procedure in which the dispute will be settled; place where the arbitration is to be held; arbitral tribunal etc. Probably the most important and considerable expression of the autonomy is the right to choose the law, which is to be applied to merits of the dispute. The chosen applicable law guarantees in large measure predictability of the outcome of the case and allows parties to control the scope of interpretation and application of the international commercial