No abstract

Human rights is a core issue of continuing political, legal and economic relevance. The current article discusses the historical perceptions of the very essence of human rights standards and poses the question whether the Realpolitik of the changed world and Europe can justify the deviation from the "purist" approach to human rights. The EU Charter, as the most eminent and contemporary "bill of rights", is chosen as an example of the divergence from "traditional values". The article does not offer solutions but rather focuses on the expansive development in the doctrinal approach of interpreting human rights that has not been conceptually agreed upon by historians, philosophers and legal scholars.

The aim of this paper is to evaluate and differentiate between the phenomena of cyberwarfare and information warfare, as manifestations of what we perceive as postmodern warfare. We describe and analyse the current examples of the use the postmodern warfare and the reactions of states and international bodies to these phenomena. The subject matter of this paper is the relationship between new types of postmodern conflicts and the law of armed conflicts (law of war). Based on ICJ case law, it is clear that under current legal rules of international law of war, cyber attacks as well as information attacks (often performed in the cyberspace as well) can only be perceived as "war" if executed in addition to classical kinetic warfare, which is often not the case. In most cases perceived "only" as a non-linear warfare (postmodern conflict), this practice nevertheless must be condemned as conduct contrary to the principles of international law and (possibly) a crime under national laws, unless this type of conduct will be recognized by the international community as a " war"proper, in its new, postmodern sense. KEYWORDSInternational law, law of war, cyber attacks, information attacks, postmodern warfare

This paper analyses the question of how to perceive the traditional theoretical concept of state sovereignty vis-á-vis European integration. Within the European project we face the paradox of having two authorities claiming autonomy and dominance. It is undisputable that the European Union is behaving like an autonomous public power - the new sovereign of its kind. But at the same time the Member States also maintain their sovereign statehood. This duality cannot be comprehended together with the old characteristics of sovereignty, which accepts only one holder of this feature. To reconcile the phenomena of European integration and the concept of sovereignty, we must shift into new definitions of the latter. This paper argues in favour of the acceptation of a shared sovereignty concept.

of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made.