Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (30731)
- Part of Periodical (11922)
- Book (8312)
- Doctoral Thesis (5734)
- Part of a Book (3721)
- Working Paper (3388)
- Review (2878)
- Contribution to a Periodical (2369)
- Preprint (2200)
- Report (1544)
Language
- German (42597)
- English (29553)
- French (1067)
- Portuguese (723)
- Multiple languages (314)
- Croatian (302)
- Spanish (301)
- Italian (195)
- mis (174)
- Turkish (148)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (75699) (remove)
Keywords
- Deutsch (1038)
- Literatur (809)
- taxonomy (766)
- Deutschland (543)
- Rezension (491)
- new species (453)
- Frankfurt <Main> / Universität (341)
- Rezeption (325)
- Geschichte (292)
- Übersetzung (271)
Institute
- Medizin (7767)
- Präsidium (5228)
- Physik (4543)
- Wirtschaftswissenschaften (2710)
- Extern (2661)
- Gesellschaftswissenschaften (2378)
- Biowissenschaften (2195)
- Biochemie und Chemie (1978)
- Frankfurt Institute for Advanced Studies (FIAS) (1775)
- Center for Financial Studies (CFS) (1632)
The Åland Islands archipelago enjoys a special international status sui generis, which essentially encompasses demilitarisation, neutralisation, and autonomy. This status is guaranteed under international law by the agreements of 1921, 1940, and 1947, which are still in force. Furthermore, there are convincing reasons to assume that the Åland Islands regime has grown into European customary law. By virtue of her international (treaty) obligations, Finland cannot unilaterally change this status under the present conditions, irrespective of domestic (constitutional) decisions. While integration into NATO’s collective defence system and the EU’s Common Security and Defence Policy structures is compatible with the special status of the Åland Islands, care must be taken by Finland and her partners to ensure that the obligations arising from these developments are fulfilled in accordance with the demilitarised and neutralised status of the archipelago. This includes that the use by Finnish troops for preventive defence, beyond the exceptions laid down in the 1921 Åland Agreement, is only permitted in the case (of threat) of an immediate and clearly identifiable attack.
The autonomous character of the Åland Islands was established under a League of Nations dispute settlement and implemented, inter alia, in Finnish legislation. Its essence even grew into customary law. The arrangements of 1921, however, do not constitute a bilateral treaty between Finland and Sweden. The UN assumes that the international mechanism to protect Åland’s autonomy did not become obsolete with the demise of the League of Nations, but was only “suspended until such time as an express decision has been taken by the United Nations to put it back into force”. A corresponding proposal could be submitted, in any case, both by Finland and/or Sweden or possibly even by any other UN member state, for discussion in the Sixth Committee. However, the final decision to re-activate this special mechanism would have to be adopted by the UN General Assembly.
EU Law applies to the Åland Islands in principle; however, Finland’s Accession Treaty to the EU to which Protocol No. 2 on the Åland Islands was annexed, established a number of specific rules which are still in force today. This, most notably, results in the limited application of value added tax and excise duties in the Åland Islands. Therefore, the rules on customs procedures apply with respect to the movement of goods to and from the Åland Islands. In addition, other provisions of Union law, in particular those relating to fundamental freedoms and European state aid law, may be relevant in view of the special fiscal status of the Åland Islands. However, assessing individual cases would require further information and in-depth studies. Irrespective of the requirements set out in the said Protocol, the EU is obliged to respect the national identity of Member States pursuant to Article 4 para. 2 TEU; this obligation includes respect for the special status of the Åland Islands under both international and Finnish constitutional law.
Previous phylogenetic analyses of the grass-specialist leafhopper tribe Chiasmini have resolved relationships among genera but have included few representatives of individual genera. Here the phylogeny of 20 Chinese species belonging to 8 chiasmine genera was investigated by combining DNA sequence data from two mitochondrial genes (COI, 16S) and two nuclear genes (H3, 28S). In both maximum likelihood (ML) and Bayesian inference (BI) analyses, relationships among genera were largely consistent with prior analyses, with most members of the tribe placed into two sister clades: (Exitianus + Nephotettix) and the remaining five sampled genera. To examine morphology-based species definitions in the taxonomically difficult genus Exitianus Ball, 1929, one mitochondrial gene (COI) and one nuclear gene (ITS2) were used to infer the phylogenetic relationships and status of two common and widespread species and compare the performance of different molecular species-delimitation methods. These analyses divide the included populations into two well-supported clades corresponding to current morphological species concepts but some inconsistencies occurred under the jMOTU, ABGD and bPTP methods depending on the which gene and analytical parameter values were selected. Considering the variable results yielded by methods employing single loci, the BPP method, which combines data from multiple loci, may be more reliable in Exitianus.
The Cladonematidae are a family of hydrozoans with a worldwide distribution and morphological adaptations for a benthic mode of life. Species of this family are characterized by high morphological variability, which has caused many taxonomical debates, mainly for the species of the genera Eleutheria Quatrefages, 1842 and Staurocladia Hartlaub, 1917. Herein, we describe Staurocladia dzilamensis sp. nov., a new species of crawling hydromedusa from the southern Gulf of Mexico. This finding also constitutes the first record of the genus Staurocladia for the Gulf of Mexico. The presence of additional nematocyst clusters, supplementing the apical one on the upper branch of the tentacles, places it within Staurocladia. The presence of exumbrellar buds, a conspicuous marginal ring of nematocysts, 6–11 bifid tentacles with lower branches longer than their upper counterpart, the cnidome with stenoteles of two size classes, and two nematocyst clusters on the upper branch supplementing the apical one, opposite placed alternately on its aboral and oral sides permits to differentiate S. dzilamensis from its congeners. A taxonomic key for the species of Staurocladia is provided.
Eine finalisierte Fassung des Beitrags wird 2024 in einem von Burchard/Schmitt-Leonardy/Singelnstein/Zabel herausgegebenen Sammelband („Alternativen zum Strafrecht“) erscheinen.
Im Zentrum des Beitrags steht jedoch nicht der Versuch, positiv Alternativen zum oder im Strafrecht zu formulieren. Vielmehr ist der Begriff der Alternativlosigkeit erkenntnisleitend, konkret die Identifizierung gesellschaftlich-politischer Wirkmächte und innerstrafrechtlicher Deutungsmuster, die eine (auch) strafrechtliche Bewältigung der durch den menschengemachten Klimawandel aufgeworfenen Konflikte alternativlos erscheinen lassen können.
Dazu wird die jüngst aufgekommene Debatte um ein Klimaschutzstrafrecht aus einer zukunftssoziologischen und strafrechtswissenschaftlichen Perspektive analysiert. Im Zentrum des Beitrags steht die These, dass sich gerade die Verbindung von katastrophischen Zukunftsvorstellungen – hier erschlossen über den zukunftssoziologischen Schlüsselbegriff der Imagination und deskriptiv-analytisch als „Klimakatastrophismus“ bezeichnet – und Exzeptionalisierungen des Strafrechts als Treiber in die imaginative Sackgasse der Alternativlosigkeit erweist.
Die verdichtete Imagination, das die Zukunfts eine Katastrophe sei („Klimakatastrophismus“), befördert als ein an Boden gewinnendes kollektives Deutungsmuster eine intensivierte Sozialkontrolle und Punitivität.
Der kriminalpolitisch expansive Kurs einer mit radikalisierten Selbsterhaltungsfragen konfrontierten Gesellschaft scheint in gesellschaftlich wie dogmatisch tief verankerten Exzeptionalisierungen des Strafrechts – wie der Zuschreibung, (nur) strafwürdige Sozialschädlichkeit adressieren zu dürfen, dies aufgrund einer regulativen und expressiven Ausnahmestellung aber auch in besonderer Weise zu können (oder zu müssen) – durchaus Widerhall zu finden. Dadurch entsteht ein strafrechtsexpansives (weil rechtfertigendes) Momentum, das der ohnehin in der Herausbildung begriffenen Legalisierung eines Klimaschutzstrafrechts Vorschub leistet.
Es entspricht den vornehmen Aufgaben der Strafrechtswissenschaft, diesen Entwicklungen prospektiv vorauszugreifen, sie aufzuklären und kritisch zu wenden – gerade im Hinblick auf die Gegenläufigkeit und Brüchigkeit gesellschaftlicher Entwicklungen oder die Kontingenz eines als politisch gelesenen Strafrechts. Eine kritische Strafrechtswissenschaft darf sich dabei nicht allein, allemal nicht unreflektiert auf tradierte Formen der Strafrechtsbegrenzung zurückziehen.