Laws | October 2025 - Browse Articles

22 pages, 339 KB

Open AccessArticle

Socially Distancing the ‘Irregular’ Migrant: An Arendtian Political Analysis of Contemporary UK Asylum Law

by Joel Platt

Laws 2025, 14(5), 62; https://doi.org/10.3390/laws14050062 - 27 Aug 2025

Viewed by 216

Utilising Arendt’s ‘right to have rights’ thesis not only as an observation on citizenship but as an intrinsic eligibility and political opportunity for the stateless, this paper outlines how the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 and Illegal Migration Act 2023 do not merely continue the general trend of criminalising migrants but take the further step of socially distancing the securitised migrant object. The recent legislation provides that those who arrive in the UK via ‘irregular means’ (i.e., small boats) will likely have their asylum claims deemed ‘inadmissible’. The lack of a ‘negotiated settlement’ in the asylum complex has been well noted; however, the systematic prejudgement and consequent bureaucratic social distancing inherent in the new legislation now threatens to remove even the prospect of negotiation. The means of arrival instantly proving decisive precludes the possibility for asylum seekers to present evidence that they are genuine refugees, and, with it, the politico-legal space and opportunity for the ‘irregular’ person to generally make themselves seen and heard is maliciously obstructed. The result is not just the denial of humanity and concomitant human dues (rights), but a distinct move towards denial of even the possibility of humanity (the right to have rights). Such works to distance system administrators from issues of vulnerability, assuredly direful consequences, and humanness itself, as is essential for the expansion of a system where basic human rights are so lacking. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue The Shifting Sands of Refugee Protection: Normativity, Crisis, and Contemporary UK Asylum)

27 pages, 666 KB

Open AccessArticle

The Regulation of Market Manipulation in the EU Energy Sector: Doctrinal Analysis of REMIT II’s Sanctioning Framework

by Ionuț Bogdan Berceanu, Mihaela Victorița Cărăușan and Alina Zorzoană

Laws 2025, 14(5), 61; https://doi.org/10.3390/laws14050061 - 25 Aug 2025

Viewed by 337

Abstract

This study examines the evolution of the European Union’s regulatory framework addressing energy market manipulation, focusing on recent amendments introduced by Regulation (EU) 2024/1106 (REMIT II) to the original REMIT—Regulation on Market Integrity and Transparency (EU) No. 1227/2011. Employing logical interpretation and comparative legal analysis, the paper explores the rationale and challenges of developing a proportionate yet dissuasive sanctioning regime for acts of market manipulation. The study commences with a comprehensive overview of manipulative practices within energy markets and the legal thresholds they must meet to fall under REMIT. A critical evaluation of the role of the European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER) is conducted, with particular attention to its updated guidelines following the revision of the REMIT regulation. A particular emphasis is placed on the evidentiary standard that is required to establish manipulation, a matter of particular significance in the context of enforcement. The comparative section analyses REMIT and REMIT II, identifying significant legal innovations and the regulatory intent behind them. The study highlights the need for enhanced legislative harmonization among Member States and strengthened coordination among national regulators under ACER. It is noteworthy that Romania has proactively aligned its policies with those of REMIT II, a development that is presented as a case study and a call for more widespread implementation. This analysis contributes to the existing body of knowledge in academic discourse since this topic has not been widely covered in the literature, despite the heightened relevance of energy market regulation in the current European context. Full article

23 pages, 909 KB

Open AccessArticle

Enhancing Marine Environmental Protection Enforcement in Taiwan: Legal and Policy Reforms in the Context of International Conventions

by Shu-Hong Lin and Yu-Cheng Wang

Laws 2025, 14(5), 60; https://doi.org/10.3390/laws14050060 - 22 Aug 2025

Viewed by 409

Abstract

The Marine Pollution Control Act (MPCA) in Taiwan aims to align with international conventions such as the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL), the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage (CLC), the International Oil Pollution Compensation Funds (FUNDs), and the International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships’ Ballast Water and Sediments (BWM). However, Taiwan’s particular international status prevents formal participation in these treaties. This study evaluates Taiwan’s legal and institutional frameworks on ship emission control, pollution liability and compensation, and interagency coordination, identifying key gaps compared with global standards. By analyzing Japan’s and South Korea’s best practices in port management, cross-border pollution prevention, and vessel monitoring, this study proposes legal and policy reforms that are tailored to Taiwan. Recommendations include strengthening liability mechanisms, enhancing interagency collaboration, monitoring vessels, and fostering regional cooperation. Our findings suggest that these reforms will improve Taiwan’s marine environmental governance and contribute to regional and global ocean sustainability. Full article

(This article belongs to the Section Environmental Law Issues)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

Journal Menu

Journal Browser

Laws, Volume 14, Issue 5 (October 2025) – 3 articles

Further Information

Guidelines

MDPI Initiatives

Follow MDPI