Unia Europejska wobec kosmopolityzmu prawnego

• Autorzy: Waldemar Hoff

Warianty tytułu

The European Union's Relationship to Legal Cosmopolitanism

• Języki publikacji: PL

Abstrakty

Prawo Unii Europejskiej jako część globalnego porządku prawnego jest najczęściej badane z punktu widzenia recepcji prawa międzynarodowego, rzadziej przez pryzmat trudnych do zaklasyfi kowania norm stanowionych przez podmioty prywatne działające na płaszczyźnie międzynarodowej. Prawo międzynarodowe jest rozumiane jako prawo tworzone przez państwa oraz, w mniejszym stopniu, przez organizacje międzyrządowe. Jednocześnie istnieją kosmopolityczne systemy normatywne o zasięgu globalnym niewywodzące swojej mocy wiążącej ani z woli państw, ani organizacji międzynarodowych, takich jak Unia Europejska. Określenie istoty kosmopolityzmu prawnego, stosunku do niego Unii Europejskiej oraz jego skutków jest celem tego artykułu.(fragment tekstu)

EN

This article seeks to identify the characteristic features of legal cosmopolitanism, the EU's attitude towards it, and its consequences. Cosmopolitanism manifests itself in creating normative systems outside and above traditional international law. While the latter draws its binding power from the will of states, cosmopolitan rules are created by private actors and their binding power results predominantly from the practical necessity to obey. Such is the status of lex sportiva, of the power of rating agencies, or private accreditation bodies. Rating agencies create soft, although powerful rules concerning the standing of commercial papers, goods, services and entire national economies. Institutional examples of cosmopolitan rule are also global judicial and administrative networks. Judges and regulators exchange opinions and information, thus informally shaping the axiological foundations of decision-making. The relation of the EU towards cosmopolitan law is multifaceted. The EU has been an inspiration to the cosmopolitan legal theory and activism. In some areas the EU clearly asserts the superiority of its law, particularly where the rules of the internal market are being violated. In some instances the EU allows cosmopolitan rules to take over as is the case of the rules of the game in sports law, while in other areas the rules of both systems overlap or disjoint. Usually, the spread of cosmopolitan normative systems is the product of a power vacuum created by insuffi cient activity of the EU or national legislative bodies. The downside of legal cosmopolitanism is the danger of judicial overstepping their powers by making laws instead of applying it. Cosmopolitan organizations, including rating agencies, avoid responsibility hiding behind their status as private organizations while at the same time exercising exorbitant influence on public life. The most important reservation is this: by enhancing the cosmopolitan multicentricity of law and its desystemization we deprive law of its defining attribute - predictability. Fortunately the EU has taken some legislative actions to counterbalance the negative impact of cosmopolitanism. The recent UE regulations aimed at subjecting rating agencies to more control are a step in the right direction, and a model approach to cosmopolitan normative systems.(original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

PL

Prawo; Prawodawstwo; Prawo międzynarodowe; Prawo WE

EN

Law; Legislation; International law; European Community law

• Czasopismo: Studia Europejskie / Centrum Europejskie Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego
• Rocznik: 2014
• Numer: nr 3
• Strony: 73--91

Twórcy

autor

Waldemar Hoff

• Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego w Warszawie

Bibliografia

• B. Bowring, The Degradation of the International Legal Order? The Rehabilitation of Law and the Possibility of Politics, New York 2008, s. 179.
• M. Happold, International Law in a Multipolar World, London-New York 2012, s. 275-276.
• Y. Al-Qardawi, Islamic law in the Modern World, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia 2000, s. 22.
• M.A. Bonca, Islamskie instrumenty finansowe, Warszawa 2010, s. 83-122.
• P. Hoekstra, Islam and Free Speech, "The Wall Street Journal", 26.03.
• S. Žižek, First as Tragedy, Then as Farce, London-New York 2009, s. 134.
• R. Janda, Towards Cosmopolitan Law, "McGill Law Journal" 2005, No. 50, s. 981-982.
• M. Sornarajah, Power and justice. Third World Resistance in International Law, "Singapore Yearbook of International Law" 2006, nr 10, s. 41.
• M.A. Jayatilake, The Global Judicial Network: Towards New Hope for Development, Democracy and Equality in the Global Era, "Sri Lanka Journal of International Law" 2009, No. 21(2), s. 140.
• L. Zhaoije, Legacy of Modern Chinese History: Its relevance to the Chinese Perspective of the Contemporary Legal Order, "Singapore Journal of International & Comparative Law" 2001, No. 5, s. 314.
• A.-M. Slaughter, Global Government Networks, Global Information Agencies, and Disaggregated Democracy, "Michigan Journal of International Law" 2002-2003, No. 24, s. 1047-1048.
• K.G. Young, The World, through the Judge's Eye, "Australian Yearbook of International Law" 2009, No. 28, s. 40-41.
• G.Majone, The New European Agencies: Regulation by Information, "Journal of European Public Policy" 1997, No. 2, passim.
• W. Weis, Agencies Versus Networks: From Divide to Convergence in the Administrative Governance of the EU, "Administrative Law Review" 2009, No. 61, s. 48-62.
• A. von Bogdandy, I. Vetzke, Beyonddispute: Interna Trytional Judicial Institutions as Lawmakers, "German Law Journal" 2011, No. 12, s. 982- 983.
• G. Majone, A. Surdej, Regulatory Agencies in Economic Governance. The Polish Case in a Comparative Perspective, "KICES Working Papers" 2006, No. 5, s. 23.
• K. Fostera, Is there a global sports law? "Entertainment Law" 2003, No. 1, s. 8.
• M. James, Sports Law, London 2010, s. 7.
• A.R. Pinto, Control and Responsibility of Credit Rating Agencies in the United States, "The American Journal of Comparative Law" 2006, No. 54, s. 341.
• A. Maracci, IOSCO: the World Standard Setter for Globalized Financial Markets, "Richmond Journal of Global Law & Business" 2012, No. 12, s. 25.
• S. Benhabib, On the Philosophical Foundations of Cosmopolitan Norms, w: Law and Legal Cultures in the 21st Century. Diversity and Unity, Warszawa 2009, s. 71-75.
• S. George, Globalizing Rights? w: Globalizing Rights, red. M.J. Gibney, Oxford 2003, s. 18.
• M. Czepelak, "Klauzule parasolowe" w dwustronnych umowach o ochronie inwestycji zagranicznych, "Kwartalnik ADR" 2009, nr 1(5), s. 44-45.
• W. Hoff, Benchmarking of legal systems for global competition, "International Journal of Private Law" 2013, No. 2, s. 214-216.
• T.A. Bunjevac, Credit Rating Agencies, The Regulatory Challenge for Australia, "Melbourne University Law Review" 2006, No. 33, s. 46.
• Ch. Maetcalf, Corporate Social Responsibility as Global Public Law: Third Party Rankings as Regulation by Information, "Pace Environmental Law Review" 2010-2011, No. 28, s. 199.
• T.J. Fitzpatrick IV, Ch. Sagers, Faith-based fi nancial regulation: A Primer on Oversight of Credit Rating Organizations, "Administrative Law Review" 2009, No. 61, s. 558, 564, 567, 592.
• P.L. Bonewitz, Implications of Reputation Economics on Regulatory Reform of the Credit Rating Industry, "William & Mary Business Law Review" 2010, No. 1, s. 397-398.
• E. Łętowska, Multicentryczność współczesnego systemu prawa i jej konsekwencje, "Państwo i Prawo" 2005, nr 4, passim.
• B. Markesinis, J. Fedtke, The Judge as Comparatist, "Tulane Law Review" 2005-2006, No. 80, s. 128-131.