Three Generations of Participation Rights in European Administrative Proceedings

This paper develops a conceptual framework for analyzing the development of participation rights in Community administration from the early 1970\u27s to the present day. Procedural rights can be divided into three categories, each of which is associated with a distinct phase in Community history and a particular set of institutional actors. The first set of rights, the right to a fair hearing when the Commission inflicts sanctions or other forms of hardship on individuals, first emerged in the 1970\u27s in the context of competition proceedings and later in areas such as anti-dumping and structural funds. This phase was driven by the Court of Justice and an English, and to a lesser extent, German conception of the value of a fair hearing. The rise of transparency in the 1990\u27s-- the requirement of openness in all Community institutions, including administration--marks the second stage. The drive for transparency was led by certain member countries with longstanding traditions of open government--the Netherlands, Denmark, and Sweden--as well as the European Parliament. The most recent phase in the development of process rights is the debate on whether and under what conditions, individuals, firms, and their associations, billed civil society, should take part in Community legislative and rulemaking proceedings. The Commission and now the Convention on the Future of Europe have been the keenest proponents of giving citizens and their associations a right to participate in rulemaking and legislative proceedings. Civil society participation is then critically examined. Representation--not expertise or good management practices--is the only justification for allocating power, within the Community policymaking process, to individual citizens and their organizations. Yet there is no consensus in Europe, where republican, corporatist, and liberal traditions continue to flourish, on the legitimacy of representation outside of political parties and the electoral process. Without wider consensus, I conclude that associational participation in Community policymaking should not be entrenched and that the Commission should, in mediating the informal influence of civil society actors, act in awareness of its innate institutional bias toward liberal interest group pluralism

Creating European Rights: National Values and Supranational Interests

This Article develops an explanation for the emergence of individual rights before the European Commission, one of the oldest and most powerful international organizations in existence today. I argue that, in the early days of the European Community, rights before the Commission were patterned on the laws and legal traditions of the dominant Member States. Changing political circumstances largely outside the control of the Commission and other European institutions gave rise to a number of discrete, historical challenges to their authority. Most of these challenges came from citizens with allegiances to minority, national constitutional symbols and practices who were determined to retain them in the face of European integration. To preserve and extend their authority, European institutions adopted these constitutional ideals and hence altered the nature of European rights. In developing this explanation, I draw upon a number of theories in political science. One of the longest-running debates over European integration is the balance between sovereign states and supranational institutions in setting the pace of European integration. While some scholars argue that traditional state interests and the balance of power among states are critical, others take supranational institutions--and their interest in expanding their powers and pushing forward integration--as the decisive force behind integration. My review of the origins of rights before the Commission shows that both sets of actors, at different points in time, were agents of rights. More importantly, the empirical analysis brings to light two important constraints on the ability of states and supranational institutions to design European rights to their advantage, often overlooked in the political science literature. The first is history writ large: understandings of fair and democratic government developed within the nation-state and representing the accumulation of experiences, beliefs, and norms over generations. The second is history writ small: episodic, external challenges to the authority of European institutions that serve as the context in which such institutions further their interests. These factors should be taken into account in explaining the rights that define what it is to be a European citizen today

Civil Society and International Organizations: A Liberal Framework for Global Governance

An earlier draft of this Article was presented at a faculty workshop at the University of Illinois College of Law. (Author\u27s Manuscript, March 2005) This analysis of how civil society can contribute to a better system of global governance draws on the political philosophy of civil society and the comparative law of democracy. Its first part describes the civil society phenomenon in three different international organizations: the World Bank, the World Trade Organization, and the European Union. Part Two puts forward the moral principle upon which my argument rests: liberal democracy. The next part sets the stage for the discussion of contemporary liberal theories of civil society by reviewing the history of the concept. Part Four critically examines the four dominant theories of citizen associations and their contribution to the good life in democratic societies. These theories serve as the basis for evaluating the pro-civil society reforms that have been made to date in international organizations and for suggesting additional areas of improvement. Yet the review of the literature also demonstrates, somewhat surprisingly, that the political philosophers and the civil society activists are talking past one another: the theory does not address head-on the question whether associations should be represented in public decisionmaking. For civil society theory, the democratizing potential of civil society lies in collective life outside the state. Thus, Part Five explores the comparative law of contemporary democracies and shows that interest and identity groups can participate in public life in at least three different ways: pluralism, corporatism, and republicanism. The concluding section returns to the institutional reform of international organizations. In view of the premises and ideals that inform different cultures of democracy and the realities of politics in the international realm, I argue that the public law of corporatism is the most appropriate for today\u27s international organizations

Comparative Law Approaches to Media Access to Court Proceedings

A particularly interesting panel, this one examines media access, pretrial publicity, and the presumption of innocence, comparing the laws and practices in the United States to those in several European countries and Canada. The panelists speak to the national laws of continental Europe and case law of the European Court of Human Rights, law and practices in the United Kingdom, Canada, and the United States. Apparent differences emerge in both trial procedures and media actions and expectations in these various countries. Questions/themes/discussion topics Comparing U.S. law to the law of other countries concerning media access to trials, pretrial information that might prejudice a juror, and the presumption of innocence What restrictions on the press do other countries employ to ensure that defendants get a fair trial? What restrictions do other countries employ to ensure that the reputation of innocent defendants are not irreparably damaged in the course of legal proceedings? Should freedom of the press be reexamined under a modern media lens? What are the differences between English law concerning journalist liability and U.S. law as defined by New York Times v. Sullivan? The effect of Naomi Campbell\u27s court case on UK law Difference between jury selection in the U.S. and Canad

A Specific Mutational Signature Associated with DNA 8-Oxoguanine Persistence in MUTYH-defective Colorectal Cancer.

8-Oxoguanine, a common mutagenic DNA lesion, generates G:C>T:A transversions via mispairing with adenine during DNA replication. When operating normally, the MUTYH DNA glycosylase prevents 8-oxoguanine-related mutagenesis by excising the incorporated adenine. Biallelic MUTYH mutations impair this enzymatic function and are associated with colorectal cancer (CRC) in MUTYH-Associated Polyposis (MAP) syndrome. Here, we perform whole-exome sequencing that reveals a modest mutator phenotype in MAP CRCs compared to sporadic CRC stem cell lines or bulk tumours. The excess G:C>T:A transversion mutations in MAP CRCs exhibits a novel mutational signature, termed Signature 36, with a strong sequence dependence. The MUTYH mutational signature reflecting persistent 8-oxoG:A mismatches occurs frequently in the APC, KRAS, PIK3CA, FAT4, TP53, FAT1, AMER1, KDM6A, SMAD4 and SMAD2 genes that are associated with CRC. The occurrence of Signature 36 in other types of human cancer indicates that DNA 8-oxoguanine-related mutations might contribute to the development of cancer in other organs

The Democratic Deficit in European Community Rulemaking: A Call for Notice and Comment in Comitology

Parliamentary democracy is the dominant paradigm in the European Community\u27s democratic deficit debate