Les instruments juridiques de la protection des intérêts diffus et des biens collectifs :. Le rôle des pouvoirs privés et la rentrée des pouvoirs publics
LEGAL INSTRUMENTS FOR THE PROTECTION OF DIFFUSE INTERESTS AND COLLECTIVE GOODS�: THE ROLE OF PRIVATE ACTORS AND THE RETURN OF PUBLIC POWER This paper starts with the presentation of a few venues for a research programme. Contemporary and comparative legal history could try and find out more about the correlation between globalisation, regionalisation (especially European integration) and the loss of impact of notions such as the general interest as a standard for legislators and judges, and their substitution by more sophisticated techniques. The most promising fields to be covered appear to be the regulation of public utilities, environmental law, and the rules on liability relating to the exercise of public authority. The paper then tries to examine to what extent the traditional mechanisms of diplomatic protection remain central in the adjudication of global transnational and international issues. National governments, and especially Foreign Ministries or Trade Representatives continue to play a major role in representing interests, thus limiting access to global adjudication to those interests who are able to directly obtain it on the domestic level. A comparison between Section 301 of the 1974 US Trade Act and the 1994 EU Trade Barriers Regulation draws attention to the specific advantages of mechanisms that are being built and implemented at regional rather than domestic level. The paper then tries to deepen the analyses of the issues concerning access to justice in the context of globalisation�: to what extent can remedies be made available to individuals and for the protection of diffuse interests�? The experiences of the EU judicial system on the one hand, and,on the other, with the recently adopted �rhus Convention on access to information, public participation in decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters show how domestic judiciaries can be involved in becoming the judges of globalisation issues. Rather than focusing on establishing global institutions for the solution of legal issues, thinking about how to relate the institutions of different legal systems to one another appears to be a promising way forward.
Volume (Year): t. XVII (2003)
Issue (Month): 3 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.cairn.info/revue-internationale-de-droit-economique.htm|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cai:riddbu:ride_173_0495. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Jean-Baptiste de Vathaire)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.