Right Of Self-determination Research Articles

Is citizenship like feudalism? An egalitarian defense of bounded citizenship

ABSTRACT This article examines the provocative analogy between feudalism and modern citizenship in Joseph Carens’s case for open borders. The analogy raises a distributive objection against bounded citizenship: modern citizenship is an inherited status assigned by birth and is attached to great advantages or disadvantages, and states reinforce these objectionable inequalities by restricting people’s mobility across borders. I argue the analogy is misleading. The case for bounded citizenship does not stand or fall with feudalism. One can be committed to the value of equality and defend bounded citizenship while rejecting feudalism. A key aspiration of the modern liberal ideal of citizenship is to recognize and promote the equality of citizens. One way to promote the equal standing of citizens is to respect their right of collective self-determination, including the right to make decisions about matters of immigration and membership in their political community. A commitment to equality is compatible with bounded citizenship if we adopt certain qualifications on the right of collective self-determination, including the duty to remedy historical injustice, the duty to extend membership to resident noncitizens, the duty to take in refugees and other necessitous migrants, and the duty to alleviate global poverty through development assistance.

The Emergence of the Penitentiary System in Greenland (late 1950s − 1960s)

The article states that with the development of the state and society of Greenland, the acquisition of self-government in 1978 and the expansion of the rights of self-government in 2009, the evolution of criminal and penal law, aimed at regulating the relevant relations in Greenland, in this region since the late 1950s began to form a regional probation service and prison system. In this system, the chief of police was the inspector of the remand center. Tasks related to long-term prisons, juvenile prisons, labor homes and regime institutions were assigned to the inspectors of the individual institutions. The execution of the above measures of deprivation of liberty was carried out under the centralised supervision of the Ministry of Justice (Prison Department). The supervision of probationers and the fulfilment of other conditions of probation was almost without exception entrusted to the private institution Dansk Forsorgsselskab. In the 1960s, several detention centers were opened, including for young people, but the number of places in these centers was not sufficient to meet the challenges facing the prison service. In the 1960s, several detention centers were opened, but the number of places in them did not allow the prison service to meet the challenges. Private detention centers were also established, sites were planned for the opening of forced labor centers (Juliannehob, Godthob, Egedesminde and K’or Kut) and in 1967 a prison for dangerous criminals in Gotthob, and construction of youth boarding houses, including for girls and especially for the mentally ill, began. The penitentiary system established in Greenland in the 1960s was developed in accordance with local political, legal, cultural and social conditions, in close cooperation with Greenlandic society and its representatives (National Council), the judiciary, the public and the Danish Prison and Probation Service.

The Use of Force and Self-determination: Parsing Indeterminacy

Hersch Lauterpacht observed in 1952 that “if international law is, in some ways, at the vanishing point of law, the law of war is, perhaps even more conspicuously, at the vanishing point of international law.”[1] More than 70 years later, Lauterpatch’s observation overstates the indefiniteness of modern international humanitarian law – the jus in bello or law of armed conflict governing the means and methods of armed conflict. However, it remains a fair critique of the jus ad bellum – the law that addresses the “rightness” of a recourse to force. Even more pointed would be a codicil, addressing the relationship between this jus ad bellum and the right of self-determination: The vanishing point at the vanishing point of international law is the relationship between the regulation of force and the right to self-determination. At this convergence point, two challenging questions of high politics intertwine to compound the indeterminacy of the law. The result is an area fertilized with opinions but hobbled with uncertainty. This fact is not accidental. States have little incentive to lay a roadmap for their lawful forcible dismemberment. Still, it may be possible to tease from the accrual of state practice answers to some questions in this area if factual scenarios are carefully parsed.

Legal Form of Self-Determination in International Law

The paper aims to address the right of peoples to self-determination through one of the perspectives of critical legal thinking, namely the concept of the legal form. The theory of the legal form remains one of the most productive paradigms within Marxist approaches to the law. A hundred years since it was proposed in 2024 by Evgeny Pashukanis, it can be creatively developed to grasp paradoxes of self-determination. China Miéville’s influential proposal opens some avenues, but they require further deepening. As the paper demonstrates, three dimensions encompassed within the tradition of the legal form can be applied to self-determination. First, the understanding of the legal subject as imposed through procedures of interpellation. The right to self-determination contains, as its foreground, a set of ideologemes aimed at offering a people’s identity. Communities which ‘recognise’ their ‘selves’ in this interpellation can become legal subjects of self-determination. At the same time, national identity is welded with imagery of sovereignty and statal expression. Second, the concept of the legal form allows of grasping the process of exchange of recognition which develops through the right of self-determination. This process is based on internal inequality, as peoples are structurally divided between statal and non-statal ones. The right to self-determination, although posited as mediating between these two, effectively freezes its non-statal subjects before the gate to the community of states. Third, the right to self-determination demonstrates a high level of singularity in international law. Singularity is expounded as what perturbs the relations between the universal and the particular, the rule and its cases. Especially after the era of decolonisation instances in which self-determination is invoked do not form a graspable chain of cases. Instead, singularity of this right appears in its suspended applicability and practical non-enforceability.

SOLVING THE PARADOX: THE SOCIAL SEMANTICS OF CHILDREN’S RIGHT OF SELF-DETERMINATION

Centred on a critical examination of the United Nations Conventions on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC, 1989), this article proposes an approach to children’s right of self-determination as social semantics, to illuminate the dynamic and paradoxical coupling within discourses on childhood between a fundamental social process, the reproduction of generational order and a fundamental social institution, human rights as codified in European modernity. The article presents the result of a three-stages study, articulated in: a systematic review of literature around the theme of children’s right of self-determination; a discussion of children’s right of self-determination as social semantics; the use of Early Childhood Education as a significant case-study to observe the development of children’s self-determination as a tenet of the mainstream semantics of childhood in society. It is argued that the semantics of children’s right of self-determination: 1) describes a paradoxical coexistence between intergenerational order and human rights; 2) is capable of maintain its viability as a cultural form because it is coupled with another semantic distinction, between human rights and personal rights. It is hoped that the scholarly debate will benefit from the contribution of an article exploring the intersection between social ontology of childhood and children’s right of self-determination.

Issues and Challenges of Ethnicity in Nepal: Arguments Against Primordial Conception

This article seeks to invalidate the primordial conception, manifested in academia and activism in Nepal arguing that ethnic identities are not fixed and given rather they are contingent and fluid. The fluidity takes the shape during the interaction and communication of different ethnic groups and communities. The continual intergroup interaction contributes to construction of mix-identities. The process of making mixed identities reject the scholarly view that ethnicity is biological. Biological traits of ethnicity further lose its shape in the process of migration that forms the identity in different way. Notwithstanding the reality of loss of territorial inhabitation of specific ethnic groups as it were in the past, ethnic scholars and activists voiced the idea of ethnic federalization which was already invalidated by the constitution of 2015 AD. Stating that, our argument is not against the inclusion, representation and dignity of the marginalized groups in Nepal. The issue of language and proper representation of the ethnic groups are to be addressed and include diversity of the groups in mainstream. In contrast, the issue of right of ethnic self-determination in the back of ethnic federalization is not feasible because of the existence of diverse ethnic and non-ethnic groups and also their cohabitation throughout Nepal. This article also seeks to discuss the challenges ethnic movement experiences. The party affiliate and indoctrinated movement has lost its independent character on one side and the failure of ethnic based political parties demanding on ethnic federalization explicitly and implicitly on the other proves that right of self-determination in invalidated. This study is purely qualitative. To argue against the spirit of primordial conception, Content analysis has been chosen as the method.

Sergiusz Bober (ed.), Post-World War One plebiscites and their legacies. Exploring the right of self-determination

Sergiusz Bober (ed.), Post-World War One plebiscites and their legacies. Exploring the right of self-determination

THE PROBLEMS OF PRESERVING THE CULTURAL HERITAGE OF THE GUNA INDIANS

Indigenous cultures around the world face unprecedented challenges and are often in danger of extinction. The preservation of the cultural heritage of these peoples is an important task not only for themselves, but also for all mankind. These cultures possess valuable knowledge and traditions that have developed over the millennia and open unique prospects for the development of the world. The loss of indigenous knowledge and practices is an irreparable loss for all of us, as we are losing part of the cultural heritage of all mankind. The indigenous peoples of Panama have a rich cultural heritage deeply rooted in their traditions and beliefs. The Guna people living in Panama and Colombia represent one of the most sovereign indigenous communities in the world, with extensive land holdings and self-government rights. They are known for their colorful traditional clothes, intricate manners, beliefs, and strong sense of community. The relevance of the topic is since in a world that is becoming increasingly homogenized, the preservation of indigenous cultures ensures that this cultural diversity will not be lost due to the impact of globalization. This article is devoted to the problems of preserving the material and spiritual heritage of the Guna people living in Panama and Colombia. The lifestyle of the Guna Indians, their traditions, worldview and definition of the role of man in the world are unique and of great interest for research. The authors of the article analyze the distinctive features of the Guna cultural heritage and highlight current phenomena and processes that pose a threat to the preservation of the traditional way of life of this people. Understanding the history and traditions of the indigenous Guna people is essential to preserve their culture.

From Belgrade to Madrid Conferences

Between the Belgrade and Madrid conferences, the main political organisations of the movement for the liberation of Lithuania acting in the West – the Supreme Committee for the Liberation of Lithuania (VLIK), Lithuanian American Council (ALT) and World Lithuanian Community (PLB) – acting both separately and jointly to seek a new quality of liberation activity, kept the case of Lithuanian liberation relevant in the West. The Supreme Committee for the Liberation of Lithuania, in the wake of a positive US Congress resolution concerning the Baltic States, changed its leadership and carried on fulfilling its promise to speak on behalf of the Lithuanian nation about its inalienable and unconditional right to restore sovereignty. Thus, with the Madrid conference approaching, the Supreme Committee for the Liberation of Lithuania deemed it important to use the final Helsinki Act to show the rest of the world that the rights of national self-determination of the Baltic nations were being trampled on, and that human rights were being infringed; they also wished to raise specific requirements with the Soviets: withdrawal of the oppressive administrative apparatus of the Soviet Union from Lithuania, the freeing of political prisoners and exiles, and respect for human rights and freedoms. The main target of the programme for the liberation of Lithuania by the American Lithuanian Council became the implementation of the principles of the final Helsinki Act. With the Madrid conference approaching, the American Lithuanian Council, having conceived those principles as “a new international legislative foundation” was determined to seek full rather than partial restoration of the freedom of Lithuania. Recognising its auxiliary role in the liberation process of Lithuania, the World Lithuanian Community foresaw that the deciding events would take place in Lithuania itself. As confirmation of this, the programme considering the issues of the order of the state of a liberated Lithuania, its borders and relations with its neighbours, was created. With the concept of liberation activities shifting, they focused on political actions, spreading information, and writing studies on events in Lithuania. Due to persistent disagreements between the Lithuanian American Council and the US Lithuanian Community, the Supreme Committee for the Liberation of Lithuania and the World Lithuanian Community, no general liberating conference to include all relevant parties was organised in the period between the Belgrade and Madrid conferences. But the free Lithuanian community, with assistance from the Lithuanian diplomatic service, agreed on a joint Lithuanian delegation to the conference held in the Spanish capital, Madrid. The unions of emigrant political organisations from the Baltic countries, reinvigorated by US Congress resolution No 200 adopted in 1979, which reiterated that the case for the liberation of their countries remained relevant, adopted a united position and deemed it necessary to continue political lobbyism and to act in a unified manner in both the West and during the conference of the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe in Madrid.

Chagos in the South Pacific? The principle of self-determination and the France-Vanuatu dispute over the Matthew and Hunter Islands

AbstractThe dispute over the Matthew and Hunter Islands (MHIs) has long been a constant strain on Vanuatu-French relations. The article examines this dispute in light of the Chagos Advisory Opinion and a few other cases concerning territorial disputes. It first submits that sovereignty over the MHIs had never been raised until 1962, when, at the occasion of a private claim, France and Britain, the two administering powers of the New Hebrides at that time, considered the issue. The two states reached an agreement in 1965, asserting that the MHIs were part of the French colony of New Caledonia and not the British-French Condominium of the New Hebrides. This article then considers the legal implications and lawfulness of the agreement, which did not take into account the local populations’ will. Although there are some important differences between the Chagos and MHIs disputes, mainly due to the fact that the MHIs are uninhabited, the applicability of the right of self-determination to both cases is nevertheless beyond doubt. The article contends therefore that the 1965 Agreement between France and Britain may constitute a violation of the right to self-determination of the people of the New Hebrides (Vanuatu), who were not consulted on the decision to attach the MHIs to the French territory of New Caledonia, and suggests that there may be, however, some other legal principles under international law that can come into play. Finally, the article contends that negotiated solutions could be a potential way forward for the parties involved.

Evaluation of Theory of Remedial Secession in International Law and Its Corresponds to the Demand for Independence of the Kurdistan Region

The main subject of this study is “Remedial secession,” which emerged associated with the global development and promotion of human rights in a non-colonial context as a new theory of the principle of external self-determination right. In this respect, this study aims to analyze the direction and history of the Remedial secession paradigm and explain how the doctrine of this theory has formed and turned into conventional practice. Besides, in addition to a description of the foundation of remedial succession theory, several successful practical patterns of implementation of this theory all around the world have been introduced. Finally, the conventional position and legislation process of the theory of remedial succession in international law were evaluated and based on the current theory, the separation of the Kurdistan Region from Iraq was studied.

Legal basis for the use of covert means

Aim: The use of covert means is any information gathering intelligence operation (secret police activity) in which the authorised authorities of the State seek to obtain new knowledge in the course of administrative and criminal proceedings without the knowledge of the holder of the information, by limiting the right of self-determination. In dictatorships, this form of exercise of state power is also dominated by arbitrariness. Constitutional states place the use of secret means on a public law basis. This study aims to demonstrate that it is possible to regulate acts of public authority that are at the heart of secrecy by means of legal instruments whose core is publicity. Methodology: The objective outlined above can only be achieved if the dogmatic and moral characteristics of the legislation are harmonised with the specific characteristics of the secret police. The task is not easy. Legislation is always about the future and is always based on abstract prognosis; covert intelligence aims to discover the past, the present and the future, and the knowledge to be acquired is always unique and concrete. Finidings: The abstract nature of the regulation and the uniqueness of the intelligence operation resolve the contradiction between publicity and secrecy. What is public is the rule, what is secret is the application of the rule to a specific situation. However, legislation can become fully formalised when it no longer imposes limits on the operation of state power, but merely authorises it, opening the way to free discretion. In such a case, the guise of legality conceals an untrammelled power. Value: Law that serves humanity is an effective means of preserving social order. Secret data-collection requires a limitation of rights, yet it is indispensable to combat violations (principle of necessity), provided that it does not cause more serious harm than the threat against which it is used (principle of proportionality).

The War on Tigray: Geopolitics and the Struggle for Self-Determination

Tigray continues to be a unique case among ancient kingdoms, Westphalia nation-states, post-colonial Africa, and post-Cold War national liberation struggles. It is one of the oldest civilizations (Aksumite Kingdom) and the historical, cultural, and political soul of ancient and modern Ethiopia. But it was made to be an ‘oppressed nation struggling for regional autonomy and survival from genocidal aggression’ by the empire state of Ethiopia and the ‘garrison state’ of Eritrea. It also survived Egyptian and Mahdist expansionists, and Italian colonialism, though it lost ‘Bahre-Negash’ (Eritrea) to Italy due to the Wuchale Agreement (or Treaty of Wichale) in 1889. Eritrea was handed over to Italian colonialists by Menelik II of Shewa-Amhara in order to weaken Tigray’s geopolitical power base. Tigray was also the hotbed of the first Woyane rebellion in 1943 which sparked the idea of ‘land to the Tiller, fair taxation, and self-rule,’ and the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) led the second Woyane rebellion (1975–91) that restructured the empire state of Ethiopia into a federation with the 1995 constitution. Since 2018, after 27 years of the Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF)- led federal experiment, Tigray again became a victim of a ‘genocidal war’ led by the Ethiopian federal army, Amhara forces, Ethiopian regional forces, and Eritrean army, supported by UAE and Turkey drones, and the Somalian army. The international community and the African Union supported Abiy Ahmed and Issaias Afewerki’s genocidal war in the name of “maintaining the territorial integrity of Ethiopia” by neglecting the principles of Responsibility to Protect (R2P), people’s self-determination rights, and the prevention of genocide. Tigray, therefore, is a rare case in the vicious cycle of violence. The Tigrayan ‘two-year’ survival war (from November 2020 to November 2022) against those who practice genocide was destined to break Tigray’s historically vicious cycle of violence perpetrated by Ethiopia and Eritrea. The paper aims to investigate the historical, geopolitical, and security reasons that have trapped Tigray into facing the post-2020 genocidal war.

Resistance and Change in Form and Content of International Law: A Third World Perspective on Commodity Form Theory of International Law

Can Marxists, especially in the Third World, use international law for progressive social change? Responding to the Soviet Union's context and its jurisprudential challenges in constructing socialism, Pashukanis's seminal work on commodity form theory is nihilistic, assuming the very nature of form of international law as bourgeois with limited possibilities of radical change as its new content. European Marxism, on the other hand, in its context of revolutionary defeat and consequent postmodernist pessimism of cultural Marxism, either relies on Pashukanis's nihilistic position or a pragmatist and realist posture, insisting on staying within the law's bourgeois form and being content with social democracy. As opposed to this, Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL) scholars, while exploring the imperialist nature of international law and representing one variant of Third World Marxism, have been more optimistic, wanting to use international law to restrain and shield against powerful Western states, i.e., they believe that the content of Third World resistance can change the form of international law. This article deconstructs this class “content” of international law in the understanding of TWAIL and shows the postcolonial Third World states, and even in the yet to be independent states, were dominated by their dependent local elite, which had compromised by the ex-colonizers and had started blocking radical structural changes in Third World. Soon, the target of imperialism and the Third World elite became radical movements in the Third World, and this struggle of the marginalized shaped international law. Therefore, relying on the radical tradition of Third World Marxism and taking the right of self-determination as an example, this article argues that both the content and form of international law were simultaneously used, subverted, and changed in a dialectical and dynamic way by the resistance of the people of the Third World.

THE SOVEREIGNTY OF STATES OVER NATURAL RESOURCES AND THE RIGHT OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TO SELF-DETERMINATION FROM THE INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW

This paper focuses on the analysis of the principle of State sovereignty over natural resources (PSNR) from the perspective of International Human Rights Law. The United Nations Declaration and the American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which recognize their right to self-determination and the right to collective property, raise the hypothesis about the extension of the PSNR towards the recognition of the rights of indigenous peoples to exercise jurisdiction over their ancestral lands and territories. A documentary study of the origin and development of the PSNR has been carried out in relation to the right of self-determination of peoples and it is concluded that in a non-colonial context, indigenous peoples are holders of that right and that the right to their territories, to Land and natural resources are elements of the PSNR, which is the basis of its political and economic autonomy. The failure of States to respect and guarantee these rights promotes the risk of secession.

Judicial Autonomy of Vilnius and 16 January 1566 Privilege of Sigismund Augustus – Guaranteeing the Rights of Self-Government in the Context of Judicial Reform

In 1387, Jogaila’s privilege granted Vilnius the Magdeburg law and guaranteed the judicial autonomy of its citizens. Vilnius citizens had the right and the obligation to conduct their legal affairs in the courts of the Vaitas, the Bench judges and the Council, which started to function from the moment the privilege of self-governance was granted or shortly afterwards, and to be governed by Magdeburg law. The preservation of judicial autonomy had to be constantly taken care of, and the Vilnius city authorities did this by securing confirmatory privileges of self-governance and, if necessary, the ruler’s injunctions against their violation by the Vilnius Palatine and Bishop, whose courts some times violated the judicial autonomy of Vilnius. In this respect, one of the critical moments was the reform of the courts of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the renewal of the Statute of Lithuania in the pre-union period (the 1560s). During the reign of Sigismund Augustus, King of Poland and Grand Duke of Lithuania, the City of Vilnius was granted as many as three Confirmation privileges, which renewed the rights of self-governance and ensured the inviolability of the city’s legal autonomy during the period of judicial reform and the adoption of the Second Lithuanian Statute. The last one, on 16 January 1566, crowned the intense struggle of Vilnius citizens during the years of great changes in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania.

The Rationale of Turkish Cypriot Position on Two-State Solution in Cyprus

This article examines the rationale behind the Turkish Cypriot position on the Two-State solution in Cyprus. The analysis consists of three interrelated parts. Initially, the question of whether Turkish Cypriots are entitled to ‘peoplehood’ that can exercise the right of self-determination according to international law is discussed. This is followed by evaluating the reasons driving the Turkish Cypriot side to exercise the right of self-determination and whether Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) fulfills the criteria for statehood. In accordance with arguments carried out in the previous sections, the final part delves into the reasons for the Turkish Cypriot position on the Two-State solution in Cyprus in detail. It is argued that Turkish Cypriot people possess all of the attributes of statehood and are entitled to the same rights and status as the Greek Cypriot side currently exercises. Therefore, reinstating Turkish Cypriot people’s rights by reaffirming their sovereign equality and equal international status is necessary for a just and sustainable settlement in Cyprus.

Should obstetric mortality be an inalienable right?

Obstetricians often times find themselves in a conflict of right and duty with their patients, when these patients refuse recommended treatment. On the one hand, the obstetrician, aiming to fulfil the duty of care, recommends a treatment in the best interest of the woman. The woman, on the other hand, exercising her right of self-determination and autonomy, declines the recommended treatment. A search was conducted for literature, articles and case reports on the subject on PubMed/MEDLINE and Google Scholar using the keywords: medical ethics, medical law, obstetric mortality, maternal medicine, foetal medicine, patient autonomy, informed consent, right to life and right to liberty. Opinions have historically differed on whether maternal or foetal rights should be deferred to in situations where pregnant women refuse obstetric interventions. So also have legal decisions on the issue. The general consensus is, however, to respect a woman's refusal of recommended medical treatment, in deference to her right of self-determination and autonomy. The obstetric outcomes in such instances are however, often times, unfavourable. The ethics of patient care in the face of conflicting rights deserves renewed examination and discourse.

Differences in sexual development-S2k guideline update

Human beings with adifference in sexual development (DSD) often underwent gender reassignment surgery during early childhood. However, the medical decision was often not congruent with the gender identity that affected persons developed later on. To represent the interests of affected persons, an interdisciplinary guideline in cooperation with support groups was written. The revision of the first version of the guideline, published in 2016, was edited by 18professional societies and working groups as well as 3support groups. Aliterature search was performed for each of the 12chapters. Recommendations and statements created by the working groups were voted on during four consensus conferences. The guideline highlights the right of self-determination of affected persons. In this context, new legal requirements are reported. Other than necessary primary diagnostics, medical procedures should be postponed. Most important is the psychological support of parents and patients. Tumor risk of the gonads and protection of fertility are analyzed and discussed in detail. The content of the guideline represents aparadigm shift in dealing with human beings with adifference of sexual development. Projects as DSD Care and Empower-DSD help to promote the practical implementation of the guideline's recommendations.

The Council of Europe and the Catalan Secessionist Process: The Authoritarian Drift of the Radical Democratic Principle

This study shines a light on the problem of Catalan secessionist leaders’ abuse of the term “democracy”, an issue rarely discussed in the academic debate. The Catalan secessionist case has mainly been studied as a problem concerning the principle of territorial integrity and how it relates to the existence (or otherwise) of a right of self-determination for a substate entity. However, it is also a problem of democracy. For the entire secessionist process was based on a democratic principle outside and against the Spanish Constitution: one that defends the supremacy and inviolability of the (regional, in this case) parliamentary majority over the rule of law and respect for minority rights. It thus pitted a radical or identity-based democracy against the democracy protected and promoted by the Council of Europe (in which the rule of law, human rights and democracy are inseparable principles forming a single whole). The Venice Commission, the European Court of Human Rights and a divided Parliamentary Assembly have all witnessed this defence of authoritarianism through the radical democratic principle advocated by the leaders of the Catalan process. In response, the first two have defended constitutional democracy, the common heritage on which European public order is based. In 2021, the PACE took a short-lived position (it has adopted no further resolutions in this sense), buoyed by a weak majority, in favour of the Catalan radical democratic principle. Two years later, however, it, too, would defend constitutional democracy as the “genuine democracy” to which the 1949 Treaty of London refers, albeit again by a slim majority. The study concludes that there is no place for the radical democratic principle in Council of Europe law.