Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Public lecture (36)
- Article (28)
- Part of a Book (26)
- Review (13)
- Conference Proceeding (7)
- Part of a commentary (6)
- Contribution to online periodical (5)
- Book (2)
- Contribution to a Periodical (2)
- Habilitation (1)
Language
- German (57)
- Other Language (51)
- English (16)
- French (3)
Has Fulltext
- no (127) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (127)
Keywords
- Germania (11)
- Italien (5)
- Germany (4)
- Covid-19 (3)
- Pandemic (2)
- Verfassung Verwaltung Italien (2)
- Verwaltungsgerichtsbarkeit (2)
- assicurazione sociale (2)
- federalismo (2)
- sanità (2)
This chapter focuses on the German reaction to the Covid-19 pandemic, in relation to the employment of both the funds from the NGEU and the internal funds. The Deutscher Auf-bau- und Resilienzplan (DARP) is a national recovery and resilience plan that is undoubtedly small, as it uses few resources when compared to the rest of Europe. Nevertheless, Germany has undergone a Copernican revolution both in its domestic economic policies, in which an investment package has been approved that violates the balanced budget, and in its relation-ship with European policies, which have seen resources injected to achieve ambitious reform goals.
Open Government Data
(2022)
Il saggio analizza le procedure di selezione utilizzate nell’ordinamento italiano e in quello tedesco, sia nell’ambito dell’accesso al pubblico impiego sia rispetto alle progressioni di carriera. L’analisi comparativa si propone di verificare se le procedure impiegate in Germania per garantire l’affermazione del «principio della selezione dei migliori», le promozioni attuate prevalentemente attingendo al personale interno e il sistema di «federalismo competitivo» rappresentino un modello da imitare, suscettibile di essere traslato nella realtà italiana. Proprio le apparenti distanze fra i due ordinamenti suggeriscono l’opportunità di descriverne e compararne le caratteristiche attraverso la scelta di «coppie dicotomiche», volte a stabilire se i contrasti immanenti alle procedure di selezione siano reali o apparenti oppure se si tratti piuttosto di percorsi diversi, orientati nella stessa direzione.
This contribution investigates the German response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The analysis highlights the measures taken by the German government in cooperation with subnational units to mitigate the spread of infections, as well as the efforts made to stem the economic consequences of the containment measures. The emergency situation turned out to be a real stress test for the German legal system, and a serious challenge for democratic institutions
The contribution investigates the impact of COVID-19 on long overdue reforms of German healthcare. The pandemic revealed some major shortcomings in patient care and elicited calls for new legislative solutions, more effective use of resources and a reduction of hospital expenditure.
The proposals discussed here clash with the “stability” which is a major feature of the German legal system.
La crisi legata alla diffusione globale del virus SARS-Covid 19, dopo aver imposto agli Stati europei di impiegare strumenti emergenziali per rispondere alla prima fase della pandemia, sta ora richiedendo l’adozione di riforme amministrative strutturali che possano permettere l’effettiva realizzazione dei progetti contenuti nei Piani Nazionali di Ripresa e Resilienza e finanziati attraverso il Recovery fund europeo.
I sistemi amministrativi nazionali si trovano, quindi, di fronte ad una nuova fase di profondo mutamento nella cornice delineata dalle istituzioni europee e dovranno affrontare nei prossimi anni trasformazioni necessarie per permettere la ripresa del sistema economico.
L’analisi dei diversi Piani di ripresa mostra come i diversi Paesi abbiano previsto interventi e azioni solo in parte simili. In alcuni casi, le riforme previste rappresentano la realizzazione di progetti già in corso, avviati durante il 2020 oppure già in fase di realizzazione. In altri casi, invece, si tratta di riforme del tutto nuove che sono state previste per la prima volta.
The essay examines changes in German law on administrative procedure recently introduced to address the challenge of digitization. This reform was undertaken in the framework of the very complex German legal system, which has federal structure, as well as the so-called “three pillars” of general administrative, financial and social security procedures, and a tradition of homogeneous development. The article also investigates the links between administrative procedural law and the legislation on e-government, as well as the problem of the poor interoperability of the IT systems of the various levels of government (Federation, Länder and Municipalities), that the (federal) law on online access to public services proposes to solve. Finally, the potential and limits of digitization of administrative procedure are examined, distinguishing binding and routine measures (easily automated) from the new frontiers of artificial intelligence.
Universities in Germany and other countries have recently undergone comprehensive reforms: they are expected to contribute to social development through exchange with external actors. These exchanges are commonly termed “third mission”. In this context knowledge and technology transfer can prove to be particularly critical to academic freedom, because market logic and economically rational behaviour may lead to goals in conflict with the institutional logic of scientific communities.
Academic freedom is currently under pressure. The most obvious cases in Europe are those of Hungary and Poland, where the state interferes directly in core academic issues by chan-ging the laws. More generally, research and teaching are at risk in European democracies. Except in Hungary and Poland, this is not only due to political constraints: society itself seems to have lost its trust in science. Scientific results are declared “fake news” and students and lecturers are not allowed to discuss social, gender or integration issues (keyword: “trigger warning”). Such threats to research and teaching curb scientific autonomy directly and indirectly.
It has long been a commonplace that the European Union forms a community of law and that the principle of “integration through law” is one of its central characteristics. In view of the growing scope and complexity of Union law, which requires ever new adaptations from the Member States, research on the implementation of Union law, which also works empiri-cally, is gaining considerable importance. An international research project conducted at the German Research Institute for Public Administration was dedicated to the implementation and adaptation strategies of selected EU Member States. It investigated the transposition of organisational and procedural requirements for national administrations as laid down in EU directives related to environmental and energy policy. The investigation focused on various modalities of transposition: minimum transposition (“copy out”), the enactment of provisions that create obligations going beyond the requirements of the Directive (“gold-plating”) and the extension of the rules or principles of the Directive to other fields of law (“spill-over”), either by including a subject area not provided for in the Directive in the scope of application of the transposition provisions (spill-over in the narrow sense) or by fundamentally reforming a legal area on the occasion of the Directive (spill-over in the broad sense). The comparative analysis revealed a low degree of strategic use of transposition modalities. However, there is a growing awareness among Member States that they belong not only to a law community, but also to an implementation community. This is not least due to the mechanisms and procedures of intertwining Union and national action.
Seit seiner Einführung im Jahre 1970 erweist sich in Italien das abrogative Referendum als starker Reformmotor. Insbesondere nach der Schmiergeldaffäre (Tangentopoli) in den 1990er Jahren wurde in großem Ausmaß auf dieses direktdemokratische Instrument u.a. hinsichtlich des Parlamentswahlrechts zurückgegriffen. Anschließend sank nach einer Phase der intensiven Nutzung mit zunehmender Häufigkeit und Zahl von Abstimmungsvorlagen die Beteiligung, was die meisten Volksabstimmungen zum Scheitern verurteilte.
Parallel zu dieser Entwicklung hat der Verfassungsgerichtshof in ständiger Rechtsprechung eine proaktive Rolle eingenommen und ungeschriebene Regeln für die Zulässigkeit von Referenden festgelegt. Insbesondere beim abrogativen Referendum über Wahlgesetze hat sich der italienische Verfassungsgerichtshof (Corte Costituzionale) – zuletzt Anfang 2020 – entschieden gegen die Nutzung dieses direktdemokratischen Instruments zur Manipulierung von Wahlgesetzen ausgesprochen.
Covid-19 Response in Germany
(2021)
La Resilienza ai Cambiamenti Climatici Nella Gestione Del Territorio: Uno Sguardo al Sistema Tedesco
(2021)
Il saggio pone in risalto le misure adottate in Germania nell’ambito della strategia di prevenzione di eventi calamitosi legati ai fattori climatici. L’analisi illustra le modifiche introdotte nella legislazione urbanistica allo scopo di contrastare i cambiamenti climaticie, viceversa, migliorare la resilienza a tale fenomeno.
La gestione dell’emergenza pandemica in Germania è una sfida che mette alla prova il sistema democratico e federale, rivelandone i punti di forza e di debolezza.
Nel complesso, la risposta tedesca all’emergenza è stata gestita secondo i principi dello Stato di diritto e nel rispetto delle dinamiche del federalismo, con una pari attenzione sia alla prevenzione della diffusione del virus, sia ai danni al sistema economico dovuti alle misure anticontagio, accompagnando da subito le restrizioni a misure di sostegno. Il governo federale ha svolto un ruolo di coordinamento politico, rispettando il riparto delle costituzionale delle competenze legislative e amministrative, che vede i Länder protagonisti della gestione in concreto dell’emergenza sanitaria.
Le pesanti limitazioni dei diritti fondamentali dovute alle misure di contrasto hanno sollevato un acceso dibattito e sono state oggetto di un attento controllo giurisdizionale.
This contribution focuses on the analysis of the strategies adopted in Germany against the COVID-19 pandemic. The analysis is divided into two main issues represented by the virological containment of the pandemic on the one hand, and by the effort to stem the economic consequences of the containment measures on the other. This emergency has shown to be a real stress test for Germany, putting a strain on the federal division of competences, the democratic institutions as well as the protection of fundamental rights as a qualifying element of the rule of law.
The article analyses the fully digitalized administrative procedures introduced by the reform of the General Administrative Procedures Act (Verwaltungsverfahrensgesetz – VwVfG) of 2017. This act is not an all-encompassing codification since the presence of several administrative procedures in the German legal system is dependent upon two factors: Germany’s federal structure, and its so-called "three columns system" comprising the General Administrative Procedures Act, tax procedure law and social law.
However, the legislator is committed to ensuring the uniformity of administrative procedure rules in every code in order to make their interpretation and use easier for administrations and judges. Following changes in tax law, a generalized introduction of robotic measures generated by algorithms was inaugurated in 2017, as it had become clear that mass procedures in tax law administration were particularly suitable for digitization.
The paper deals with the Föderalismusreform III, focusing in particular on the amendments of the financial constitution (‘Finanzverfassung’) and on the changes in the Finanzausgleich that will be effective from 2020 onwards. Insofar the system of revenue distribution across and within the different layers of government (Finanzausgleich) has been one of the most controversial issue with reference to Bund-Länder financial relations and it is not by chance that the reform approved in July 2017 has substantially revised this system. Not only the horizontal equalization scheme (Länderfinanzausgleich) will expire by the end of 2019, but the VAT distribution among the Länder will be done according to new criteria, showing a strong redistributive impact. In discussing the main features of the new system to come, the paper investigates the pros and cons of the reform, evaluating the impact on federal dynamics.
Verfassung und Verwaltung
(2019)