Thematic Report (Energy): The Swiss Federal Administrative Tribunal ruled on July 8th, 2010, that ElCom, the Swiss energy regulator, had overridden its powers in its decision of March 6th 2009. In a decision of July 8th 2010, the Bundesverwaltungsgericht (the Swiss Federal Administrative Tribunal) partially amended a decision of the Eidgenössiche Elektrizitätskommission (ElCom, the Swiss Federal Electricity Commission), stating that it is unconstitutional and illegal for power-plant operators to bear the price of “system-services”.
FRENCH
Fiche thématique (énergie) : Le tribunal fédéral administratif suisse a rendu un arrêt le 8 juillet 2010 contre une décision du 6 mars 2009 de l'ElCom, le régulateur suisse de l'énergie, pour excès de pouvoir
Dans un arrêt du 8 juillet 2010, le Bundesverwaltungsgericht (le Tribunal Fédéral Administratif suisse) a partiellement annulé une décision de l'Eidgenössiche Elektrizitätskommission (ElCom, la Commission fédérale suisse de l'électricité), déclarant qu'il est anticonstitutionnel et illégal que les opérateurs des centrales électriques supportent le coût des "services systémiques"
GERMAN
Thematischer Bericht (Energie): das schweizerische Bundesverwaltungsgericht hat am 8. Juli 2010 die Verfügung der ElCom, die Eidgenössische Elektrizitätskommission, die Schweizer Regulierungsbehörde für Elektrizität, vom 6. März 2009 für ungültig erklärt.
In einer Entscheidung vom 8. Juli 2010 hat das Schweizer Bundesverwaltungsgericht eine ElCom-Verfügung vom 6. März 2010 zum Teil für ungültig erklärt, da die in der Verordnung vorgesehene Anlastung der Systemdienstleistungskosten an die Kraftwerke gesetzeswidrig ist.
SPANISH
Informe Temático (Energía): El Swiss Federal Administrative Tribunal (El Tribunal administrativo federal de Suiza) dictó el 8 de julio 2010 que ElCom, el Regulador suizo de energía, había sobrepasado sus poderes en su decisión del 6 de marzo 2009.
En una decisión del 8 de julio 2010, el Bundesverwaltungsgericht (El Tribunal administrativo federal de Suiza) anuló parcialmente la decisión de Eidgenössiche Elektrizitätskommission (ElCom, la Comisión suiza de electricidad federal) constatando que es inconstitucional e ilegal que las operadoras de centrales eléctricas soporten el precio de “servicios sistemáticos.”
The cost issue of regulation is a recurring issue.
One can complain specifically, when companies are protesting about the "cost of regulation" or when the topic is taken as an object of study, through the cost / benefit calculation.
A practical question of importance is whether there is a "legal question" or not.
The "juridicity" of a question is defined by the fact that discussing about this question has an effect on the outcome of a case before a judge. This concrete definition, leaving the judge's power, binding nature of the rule (here the balance between cost and benefit) the effectiveness of its decision before the judge, its consideration by him in the decision he makes, has been proposed in France by Carbonnier. It is opposed to a definition of Law by the source, the author of the rule, which identifies law for example through Parliament Acts, because the text is adopted by the legislator, listed source of law.
The first definition, more sociological, more flexible, giving the spotlight on judge better corresponds to a legal system which gives more room for ex post and for the judge. It is logical that we find more demonstrations of this conception in the common law systems.
However, the issue of cost / benefit is being debated before the Supreme Court of the United States, about the latest environmental regulations, adopted by the Environment Protection Agency (EPA). It is a question of law. It is under the empire of the judge.
For it is in this light that President Barack Obama in November 2014 asked a very costly regulation, and it was under his leadership that the Environmental Protection Agency has developed texts. Indeed, pollution of certain plants are the cause of asthma and laid in public health imperative to fight a regulation that results in a direct cost on firms. Indeed, some plants pollution is the cause of asthma and President Obama has asked public health imperative to combat by a regulation that results in a direct cost on the industry. The regulations adopted in 2012 they cost a $ 9 million, some claiming that future ones could result in billions of costs directly related to business The President emphasized by stating that the health of children was priceless.
By challenging those of 2012 before the Supreme Court, in the case Michigan v. EPA, this is the other texts that conservative states and companies have in mind because it is the principle that is posed: : does A regulator have the right to take regulations very "expensive" when the advantage, however legitimate it is, is small-scale in terms of costs? The Supreme Court, having chosen to handle the case, listened to March 25, 2015, the arguments of each other and discussed the case.
The question is the integration or not into the constitutional notion of "necessity of the law" of the "cost / benefit" calculation. This is a crucial point because the concept of "necessity of the law" is a common notion to the constitutions of many countries.
However, not only the so-called judges "conservatives" as Justice Antonio Scalia, took position felt it was crazy not "consider" the cost of new regulations from the expected health benefits, but also Justice Stephen Breyer called "progressive," said "irrational" the environmental regulator has not taken in consideration such an imbalance between cost and benefit.
It is true that Justice Breyer was formerly professor of competition law at Harvard.
The media sector is organized on an equilibrium between the principle of competition and other concerns like information pluralism. Generally, competition Law by making market accessible to many competitors ensures information pluralism. But, this is not the case if an operator get an excessive market power, running risk not only for competition but also for information pluralism. It is the reason why the Italian legal system forbids the constitution of an operator gathering more than 40% of the total income generated by the media sector or more than 10% of the total income generated by the Italian communication sector.
In 2016, Vivendi, a French media group, got more than 28% of the Mediaset Group's actions and around 30% of its voting right. The Italian communication regulation authority sized by Mediaset demands in 2017 to Vivendi to ends its participations in the group Mediaset. Vivendi contested this decision before the regional administrative court which referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union in order to know if freedom of establishment can legitimately be discarded in favor of information pluralism in this concrete case. The Court of Justice answered, in a decision of 3rd of September 2020, that the restriction of the freedom of establishment can in principle be justified by a general interest objective such as information pluralism protection but that in this concrete case, this is not justified because the fact that a firm is committed in the transmission of contents does not necessarily give it the power to control the production of such contents.
We can learn three lessons form this case:
The Court precises that even if the principle is the freedom of establishment, it is possible to discard it to protect information pluralism protection under the condition that the concerned member State do not use this legitimate power to create a political monopoly, the burden of proof falling on the person attacking national legislation and not on the Member State.
The Court distinguishes transmission of contents and production of contents and explains that if the State rejects this decision, the burden falling to it to prove the concrete links between these two activities.
This case shows that the power to share the respective places of the "principle" and of the "exception" always comes back to the judges.
It is often argued that energy because it is a matter of sovereignty and because it is rooted in the territory, returns to the State. But it is resolutely towards Europe that Michel Derdevet pulls the whole system.
Probably by conviction, by will of a strong Europe and because there has economic power only when propped on energy. However, an energy system that is up by networks as in energy, we never doubted the convergence between the container and the content, meaning that the energy source is irrelevant whitout being carried, whitout being 'provided to users.
This construction of the networks is political and it is in terms of "mesh" that the report Michel Derdevet just submitted to the President of the Republic, François Hollande, presents a European project. In a way, it is not "revolutionary", as it is to finally fulfill the will of those who conceived Europe in 1945 through the coal, steel and energy, to a common Europe from which built the industry, not only for the reconstruction of Europe but for its economic dynamism and its common security policy.
In this, the European network of the transportation of electricity is essential. Yet it is to be done because the legislation of the European Union rather liberalized energy markets whitout building Europe of energy, leaving remaining national specificities. The result is what Michel Derdevet rightly called "inertia".
He therefore proposes the establishment of an "European industrial project." In this context, Michel Derdevet requires better definition of "model of norms and regulation", aiming in particular the structure of tariffs that include or not the R & D according to the Member States, claiming the alignment of the tasks of network operators and a price guarantee for users, which would facilitate investment. He stressed that national regulatory differences hinder the development of smart grids (and therefore the European market). Without a convergence of regulations, interoperability is not optimal, as it would allow Europe to be a major global player in energy.
Michel Derdevet therefore advocates regulation that goes to both a stronger European articulation, but at the same time which must be more "decentralized", for users to make better use of new uses of energy through the action of regulators they are close.
It is true that we are very far off ...
This is why the author asks what one favors "regulatory convergence". This is not only to harmonize rules but also to redirect them to detach the competitive prism to direct them to the long-term financing.
It is true that Europe's energy, without which a single industrial space can hardly be, can not actually do if the regulation does not resolutely takes over the principle of competition, competition remaining in the moment of exchange, while the Regulation is in the long term and what to take to designate as "industrial policy" which is nothing but a form of expression of the Political.
So what Michel Derdevet request, what ever that finally the arrival of a political Europe, the need for it finds its place in the global competition.
The real economy is entirely financiarized, it is the same for the oil economy. This is why the G20 has asked to the "Organisation internationale des commissions de valeurs" - OICV (International Organization of Securities Commissions) to reflect back on how oil markets could be regulated, what they are currently not, because the market remains an over-the-counter market. Financial regulators, in a report published on June 12, 2012, suggest that at least the information be controlled, fluctuations in the price of a barrel are reviewed and the functions of "the information agencies," should be inspected, but also the role of traders that communicate them information. Regulation, so shy it is, starts with information. On the matter of oil, transparency is not expected and geopolitics often excludes it.
The Gambia has 1.7 million inhabitants and 4 mobile operators. It was common that people use prepaid cards purchased on the street, without revealing their identity. In January 2012, the telecommunications regulatory authority, the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority (PURA) enacted the obligation to identify the holder of a mobile phone; this declaration must be made before June 15, 2015. It is not possible since January to buy prepaid SIM cards and from June, if the identification is not made, the line will be suspended. Associations are protesting, seeing in this device a mechanism for monitoring of the population.
In the Unites States, the Federal Act, the Interstate Wire Act, is now performed by the Department of Justice as that only prohibiting sports betting and not poker online. In addition, States have to make arrangements if they want to liberalize the game of poker online. In February 2012, there is that many States have explicitly maintained the ban, only having liberalized and permits issued for Nevada.
Two and a half years after having been established by the LME, the French Competition Authority has uncontestably acquired its “place in the sun” amongst the competition authorities of other countries, as demonstrated by multiple indicators.
ITALIAN
Articolo: L’Autorità garante della concorrenza tra “regolazione” e politica in materia di concorrenza
Due anni e mezzo dopo l’instaurazione da parte del LME, l’Autorità francese garante della libera concorrenza ha trovato il suo posto tra le diverse autorità degli altri paesi, così come è stato dimostrato da diversi indicatori.
SPANISH
Artículo: La Autoridad de la competencia, entre “regulación” y política competitiva.
Después de dos años y medio de haber sido establecido por el LME, la Autoridad francesa de la competencia ha incontestablemente adquirido su “lugar bajo el sol” entre las autoridades de la competencia de otros países, como demostrado por varios indicadores.
Usually the companies in charge of a public service established with the State of the "plan contract". In application of the "Code de l'aviation civile (Civil Aviation Code), the private company "Aéroports De Paris - ADP" (Paris Airports) establishes a "contract of regulation". This one develops "contracts of economic regulation". They must generate visibility for the company and for the customers, set ceilings for the royalty, set quality objectives, respect the just remuneration of invested capital. The new "regulation agreement" concluded between the French State and "Aéroports De Paris - ADP" (Paris Airports) covers the 2011-2015 period, presented as a period of transition towards the profitability of capital. This contract was signed in July 2010. The contract was presented to investors June 27, 2012 in its implementation, "Aéroports De Paris - ADP (Paris Airports) progressing in its profitability.
On 7th of August 2020, the Conseil Constitutionnel (French Constitutional Court) made a decision concerning the constitutionality of a French law implementing safety measures against authors of terrorist offenses after their sentence. The law permitting to impose, through an act from the administration, various controls or interdiction to communicate with some people for authors of terrorist offenses after the end of their sanction.
Although the Conseil Constitutionnel estimated that such dispositions was disproportionate with regards to the objective, which prompted it to censor the text, it recognized that, since terrorism seriously disturbs public order through intimidation and terror, the fight against terrorism contributes to the objective of constitutional value consisting of preventing attacks on the public order. Thus it is not the nature but the intensity of the proposed measures which pushed the Conseil Constitutionnel to state this text not constitutional. By the way, the Conseil affirms that if the legislator submits it a law whose the measures are more proportionate to the goal, these, although Ex Ante and justified only by the existence of a risk, will be declared in conformity with the Constitution.
The Conseil Constitutionnel confirms here that the fight against terrorism financing is a "monumental goal" of Compliance Law.
