European Parliament

The entry into force of the World Trade Organization (WTO) TRIPS Agreement in 1995 transformed the international intellectual property system. The harmonization of basic intellectual property standards has operated to protect investment in innovation, limiting risks from unjustified ‘free riding’. Yet these same harmonized IP standards sharply curtailed the traditional capacity of suppliers of public goods, such as health care and nutrition, to address priority needs of less affluent members of society, particularly in (but not limited to) developing countries. In the Doha Declaration, the Waiver Decision of 30 August 2003 and the Article 31bis Protocol of Amendment, stakeholders concerned with re-opening policy space for the supply of newer pharmaceutical products pushed back against restrictive elements of the TRIPS Agreement.Governments around the world are in the process of deciding whether to ratify and accept the Article 31bis Amendment. Based on their Study for the Internatio...

This chapter explores the territorial dimension and its recent evolutions during the current European Parliament’s mandate. This territorial dimension is generally considered to be central to the process of representation at the national level but has been relatively neglected in the EP to date. Rather than assuming an electoral disconnection between MEPs and EU territories, authors take an inductive approach to empirically examine the extent to which territorial representation is reflected in members’ practices. To do so, they rely on an analysis of MEP’s written questions, which constitutes another understudied topic. The content of these questions is used as an indicator of members’ priorities, centres of interest, and conception of their mandate, as well as of their evolution in the recent period of time.

European voters can be classified into different groups according to the Political Group of the European Parliament the MEP they have voted for is attached to. In the first part of the paper we build clusters of EU countries according to the distribution of the country MEPs to the Political Groups. We find two large clusters of memberstates. One of the two large clusters includes countries from the central and northern Europe and the other cluster includes countries from southern Europe. In the second part of the paper we study the social characteristics of the voters in each political group. Using a series of socio-structural variables, (i.e. subjective social class, education level, standard of living, and religiosity), from the PIREDEU voter survey data, we try to describe the social profile of the voters in each group. Then we study the social profiles of the voters in each group in these two large clusters of EU countries. There are political groups that display strong associat...

The short brief analyses the new dynamics in the new EU legislature on EU enlargement to the Western Balkans, its impact on the EU’s perspective to North Macedonia, and the role of the Assembly of North Macedonia in pushing for the country’s European perspective.

On 31 August, China's legislature, the People's National Congress1 (NPC), adopted recommendations for the first-ever direct election of the Hong Kong's Chief Executive, to be held in 20172. The ruling was long awaited, both in Hong Kong and the EU. The European Parliament has previously reminded the government of Hong Kong that its Basic Law provides for its Chief Executive to be elected by universal suffrage, and that the European Parliament expects 'the electoral system to be based on the principles of multi-party democracy, accountability of the government to the legislature and genuinely effective governance'3.

This article explores the differences in radical right parties' voting behaviour on economic matters at the European Parliament. As the literature highlights the heterogen-eity of these parties in relation to their economic programmes, we test whether divergences survive the elections and translate into dissimilar voting patterns. Using voting records from the seventh term of the European Parliament, we show that radical right parties do not act as a consolidated party family. We then analyse the differences between radical right parties by the means of different statistical methods (NOMINATE, Ward's clustering criterion, and additive trees) and find that these are described along two dimensions: the degree of opposition to the European Union and the classical left– right economic cleavage. We provide a classification of these parties compromising four groups: pro-welfare conditional, pro-market conditional, and rejecting. Our results indicate that radical right parties do not act as a party family at the European Parliament. This remains true regardless of the salience of the policy issues in their agendas. The article also derives streams for future research on the heterogeneity of radical right parties.

Quando fu creato, il Parlamento europeo era solo una tra le molte assemblee sovranazionali del secondo dopoguerra. Come le altre, non aveva ampi poteri né era eletto direttamente dai cittadini. Tuttavia, si svilupparono presto campagne per la sua elezione. Il libro ripercorre le diverse battaglie per l’introduzione del voto europeo e i diversi significati politici che a questo sono stati attribuiti. Prende in considerazione
la prospettiva degli attivisti europeisti, che ambivano a costruire una federazione europea incentrata sul Parlamento, e lo scontro
con chi difendeva una visione confederale dell’integrazione europea. Esamina l’emergere di un chiaro deficit democratico nella Cee e il tentativo di risolverlo anche attraverso l’introduzione del voto. Sottolinea, infine, come la prima elezione del Parlamento europeo (1979) sia stata immaginata come uno strumento per consolidare la natura intergovernativa della Cee e contenere il Parlamento europeo.

Abstract:  Last year the European Commission published its Action Plan on European contract law. That plan forms an important step towards a European Civil Code. In its Plan, the Commission tries to depoliticise the codification process by asking a group of academic experts to prepare what it calls a ‘common frame of reference’. This paper argues that drafting a European Civil Code involves making many choices that are essentially political. It further argues that the technocratic approach which the Commission has adopted in the Action Plan effectively excludes most stakeholders from having their say during the stage when the real choices are made. Therefore, before the drafting of the CFR/ECC starts, the Commission should submit a list of policy questions regarding the main issues of European private law to the European Parliament and the other stakeholders. Such an alternative procedure would repoliticise the process. It would increase the democratic basis for a European Civil Code and thus its legitimacy.

The EU plays an increasingly important role in issues such as the fight against organised crime and the management of migration flows, transforming the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ) into a priority of the EU’s political and legislative agenda.
This book investigates whether institutional change - the gradual communitarisation of the AFSJ - has triggered policy change, and in doing so, explores the nature and direction of this policy change. By analysing the role of the EU’s institutions in a systematic, theory-informed and comparative way, it provides rich insights into the dynamics of EU decision-making in areas involving high stakes for human rights and civil liberties. Each chapter contains three sections examining:
 the degree of policy change in the different AFSJ fields, ranging from immigration and counter-terrorism to data protection
 the role of EU institutions in this process of change
 a case study determining the mechanisms of change.
The book will be of interest to practitioners, students and scholars of European politics and law, EU policy-making, security and migration studies, as well as institutional change.

In standard textbook accounts, the history of European Community (EC) environmental policy conventionally begins in 1973, when the First Environmental Action Programme was officially accepted. Some texts also mention the Paris summit of October 1972 and the subsequent ministerial meeting of the member states in Bonn on 31 October 1972, where the governments agreed in principle and in detail on the start of environmental policy measures at EC level. 1 Even though these were important steps, putting the new policy on track, the origins of EC environmental policy actually go back to the summer of 1969. The new policy was not simply the result of the enlightened environmental spirit of national governments still under the impression of the Stockholm United Nations (UN) Conference on the Human Environment in June 1972. In fact, EC environmental action can be traced back to an initiative by what is usually believed to be the least powerful of European institutions, the unelected European Parliament (EP). The EP first put the issue of water pollution on the agenda of the European institutions via an own initiative report, one of the few instruments available to it. 2 Members of the EP (MEPs) responded to a massive fish kill in the river Rhine, Western Europe's main watershed, in June 1969, caused by a pesticide released in Germany. The Dutch were particularly cross with their German neighbours upstream, not only because they had not been notified, but also because they crucially relied on Rhine for their water resources. Activist MEPs from the Committee of Public Health and Social Affairs skilfully widened the issue from the Rhine to river and water pollution more generally, to other issues, such as noise and air pollution, that contemporary scientists and policy makers increasingly conceptualised as part of the problem called the "environment". MEPs argued for the introduction of European level policy action on such environmental issues.

Recent publications argue that the traditional gender gap in voting has decreased or reversed in many democracies. However, this decrease in the gender gap may apply only to some types of elections. Building on the existing literature, we hypothesise that although women participate at the same or higher rates than men in national elections, they participate less in supranational elections. We investigate this possibility empirically by analyzing the evolution of the gender gap in voter turnout in elections to the European Parliament (EP). We make three important contributions. First, we show the presence and stability of the traditional gender gap in EP elections. Second, we find that gender differences in political interest are the main source of this gender gap. Third, these gender differences in political interest are, in turn, context-dependent. They are strongly associated with cultural gender differences, which we capture through differences in boys' and girls' maths scores.

ABSTRACT

Why do international institutions promote emotional norms? In order to answer this question, the article, first, maps the legitimizing arguments put forward by the Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) in promoting an emotionally loaded norm vis-à-vis Turkey, i.e., the recognition of the Armenian genocide. Second, the paper explores the reasons behind the promotion of this emotional norm by the European Parliament (EP) as justified by the MEPs. The article theoretically draws on the IR literature on emotions, and empirically, it relies on the data generated from the interventions by the MEPs at the plenary on the centenary of the Armenian genocide on 15 April 2015. Through claims analysis, it is demonstrated that the condemnation of genocide is a shared norm within the EP, which transcends national and ideological differences. Consequently, the MEPs aspire to render it an essential constitutive element of the emotional community at the EU level.

Il volume offre un'analisi del ruolo del Parlamento europeo rispetto alle riforme istituzionali e alla politica estera dell'Unione europea, e del suo contributo alla costruzione di una sfera pubblica europea. Partendo dall'analisi delle posizioni assunte dai gruppi parlamentari e da singoli deputati rispetto alle tematiche di natura istituzionale, dal Progetto Spinelli del 1984 fino al Trattato di Lisbona, vengono ricostruiti e valutati il dibattito parlamentare, la coesione dei gruppi e le dinamiche delle relazioni tra il Pe, da un lato, e le altre istituzioni dell'Ue e i governi nazionali, dall'altro. Viene poi analizzato il contributo del Parlamento rispetto alla costruzione dell'azione esterna dell'Ue e del suo ruolo nel mondo, con particolare riferimento alla politica estera, di sicurezza e difesa, alla politica per lo sviluppo e alla politica ambientale internazionale. Infine, nella terza parte, l'attenzione è focalizzata sulle elezioni europee del maggio 2019, con particolare rilievo dato ai temi del populismo e del sovranismo, anche con l'obiettivo di verificare l'esistenza di un adeguato collegamento tra il dibattito dei gruppi politici e la comunicazione ufficiale del Pe, nel suo rapporto con l'opinione pubblica e la società civile organizzata.

El Tratado de Lisboa abre la puerta a que las elecciones al Parlamento Europeo, más allá del correspondiente reparto de escaños, desempeñen un papel protagonista en la elección del presidente de la Comisión Europea. En este sentido, su art. 17 estipula que el Consejo Europeo proponga un candidato a presidir la Comisión "tomando en consideración los resultados de las elecciones a la Eurocámara", que habrá de ser elegido por esta. En la práctica, esta formulación ha dado lugar a que cada partido político europeo elija su denominado Spitzenkandidat o "candidato principal", con el objetivo primordial de combatir el déficit democrático de la UE. Las elecciones al Parlamento Europeo de 2014, aunque con dificultades, se adecuaron a la nueva fórmula. No fue el caso de los comicios de 2019 en los que, refrendado por la Eurocámara, la elección de presidente de la Comisión Europea no correspondió a ninguno de los Spitzenkandidaten. El artículo analiza la génesis y desarrollo de esta figura, su papel en la profundización democrática de la UE y sus perspectivas en el contexto del debate sobre el futuro de Europa.

D'usage courant en allemand, le terme de Spitzenkandidat est utilisé depuis 2014 pour désigner la personne «tête de liste», lors de la campagne des élections européennes, susceptible de présider la Commission européenne. La présidence de cette institution exige en effet, depuis le Traité de Lisbonne, l'aval du Parlement européen. Mais les chefs d'État et de gouvernement de l'Union européenne gardent un rôle décisif dans cette désignation. La pratique a varié d'une élection à l'autre. Comment stabiliser la désignation du Président de la Commission ? Avec quels rôles respectifs pour le Conseil européen et pour le Parlement européen ? Le choix des personnalités têtes de liste revient-il aux seuls partis politiques européens ? Place dévolue nécessairement au parti arrivé en tête ou constitution d'une coalition parlementaire autour d'une personnalité qui entraînera l'élection ? Le recours au Spitzenkandidat soulève nombre de questions toujours débattues et à éclaircir avant les européennes de 2024. Il en va de la légitimité de la prochaine Commission et, plus largement, de la démocratie au niveau européen. Nous avons demandé au Professeur Olivier Costa (Directeur de recherche au CNRS, CEVI-POF-Sciences Po et Directeur des études politiques au Collège d'Europe de Bruges) et à Pauline Thinus (Assistante académique au Collège d'Europe de Bruges) de revenir sur l'historique de cette problématique et sur ses enjeux, d'analyser les positions des différents acteurs et de présenter les scénarios susceptibles d'advenir d'ici au prochain scrutin européen. En complément de l'étude, nous présentons les contributions de quatre éminents membres de notre Observatoire politique du Parlement européen, tous anciens députés européens : Pervenche Berès, Jean-Louis Bourlanges, Monica Frassoni, Alain Lamassoure. Cette étude est la première d'une série consacrée aux grands enjeux institutionnels européens. Elle sera suivie d'un policy paper sur la question des listes transnationales et d'autres études à venir.

Parlamento Europeo: CENSURA DE LOS MEDIOS IMPUESTA A LOS ESTADOS MIEMBROS POR UN REGLAMENTO DE LA UE • 20 MARZO DE 2022 - Pregunta formulada por SANDRA PEREIRA – [E-001139/2022]

Respuesta de la Vicepresidenta Jourová en nombre de la Comisión Europea (13 de mayo de 2022):

Reprinted in: S. Hummelbrunner/L. Kirchmair/B. Pirker/A.-C. Prickartz/I. Staudinger (eds), Shaping the Future of Europe, Vienna: Jan Sramek Verlag 2022, 15-51

Citizens’ perception that lawmaking is dominated by special interests undermines their trust in democratic institutions and lawmaking processes. This also applies to the EU, where lobby regulation remains weak despite past lobbying scandals. While the European Commission and the European Parliament established a Joint Transparency Register in 2011, registration remains voluntary for lobbyists. Only in 2019 did the Parliament make a further step towards transparency by encouraging or even requiring political representatives to disclose their meetings with lobbyists. Given that domestic lobbies have increasingly been oriented towards the European supranational realm, adopting effective lobby regulation at EU level has become more essential than ever to protect the democratic legitimacy of EU lawmaking. This especially applies to the European Parliament, which has important decision-making powers in the context of the ordinary legislative procedure, and which represents the citizens of the EU, thereby constituting a key lobbying target. My goal, in this paper, is to show why and how lobbying should be further regulated in the European Parliament. I first examine the specificities of lobbying in the EU and in its Parliament, before looking at the EU’s constitutional framework, as well as EU parliamentary law and the Joint Transparency Register. I then evaluate the Parliament’s current regulation of lobbying from the perspective of EU primary law. I argue that its narrow focus on transparency is misguided and neglects other fundamental democratic values, such as equality. Moreover, the existing framework does not sufficiently focus on MEPs’ duties of integrity.

During its first decade as a directly elected political institution, from 1979 to 1989, the European Parliament exercised significant influence in shaping the debate and agenda around the concept of completing the ‘single’ or ‘internal’ market of the (then) European Economic Community. Through both its early campaigning for action in this field and its definition and analysis of issues such as the ‘cost of non-Europe’, the Parliament contributed to the political and intellectual climate which led to the launch in 1985 by the European Commission, under its new President, Jacques Delors, of an ambitious programme to complete the single market by 1992. This process was reinforced and facilitated by adoption of the Single European Act (SEA) the following year. The extension of qualified majority voting (QMV) in the Council and the introduction of a more significant legislative role for the European Parliament under the SEA enhanced the position of the Parliament in the Community’s ‘institutional triangle’, enabling it to influence the content of law more directly. From 1987 onwards, the Parliament used its new legislative power actively when considering the detailed proposals for completing the single market brought forward by the Delors Commission, with significant debates taking place on the priorities that should attach to various aspects of liberalisation and regulation. The growing success of the single market process led in turn to the Parliament strongly supporting efforts to complement the single market with the creation of a single currency, building momentum for the launch of Economic and Monetary Union (EMU).

The increased authority delegated to independent agencies raises questions about the conditions of politically accountable governance, and specifically parliament's role as a representative institution. Focusing on committee hearings as an accountability mechanism , we ask: How can a parliament employ hearings to ensure that the ends pursued by agencies have a democratic foundation? We propose a model of "mutual attunement" where accountability relations presuppose a process of working-out shared understandings of the ends, means and circumstances of policy needs. We test our argument through a case study assessing the interaction between the European Parliament's Committee on Economic & Monetary Affairs and the European Securities and Markets Authority. Theoretically, we contribute to discussions on agency accountability and European governance, while providing a novel conceptual model and the first analysis of its kind.

This chapter analyses the European Parliament (EP)’s role in the promotion of human rights in the world, in particular after the coming into force of the Lisbon Treaty (LT). For this purpose, the chapter is structured in four sections. The first describes the creation and development of a human rights policy within the
European Union (EU) context. The second highlights the issue of the EP acting as a civilian power and its profile in the field of values, which affects human rights policies and their implementation with respect to non-EU countries. We
pay special attention to the attitudes of different political groups and sensitivities, as well as the definitions of human rights from the perspective of several European institutions, including those of primary importance to this study. We analyse the instruments created by the EP to promote and uphold such policies.
We describe and study the role of the normative, legislative and institutional framework created and used by the EP for that purpose. The third section examines the human rights approaches that the different EP political groups have
taken over the years. The fourth section then addresses the question of how useful this institutional framework is for the effective promotion of human rights worldwide. Here we wonder whether the Parliament and other EU institutions have evolved towards a greater interest in those issues alongside the growing
importance and power they have gained over the past two decades; and whether the tools they have gained in the different treaties have been useful and sufficient to develop such policies. The concluding section of our study highlights these very issues as we try to find out the real aim of the EU institutions, in particular
the Parliament, in upholding a human rights policy, the constraints on this desire inside the Parliament itself and the various trends in these activities in accordance with the different legislation periods and ideological sensitivities within the EP.

One of Parliament’s main tools of political control vis-à-vis the
EU executive is its capacity to establish Committees of inquiry.
This possibility, now formally recognised in Article 226 TFEU, has
existed since 1981 but it has been scarcely used by Parliament.
This study prepared for the EP AFCO Committee provides an analysis of Parliament’s right of inquiry as
it stands after the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, and
examines how it has evolved since it was first introduced. It also
compares Parliament’s right of inquiry with the investigatory
powers of other European Union institutions and bodies, and
with the rules governing the right of inquiry of Member State
parliaments. The study concludes with some proposals for
reform.

Since the Esperanto speech community cannot rely on intergenerational transmission to guarantee its long-term continuity, the Esperanto movement has emerged as an attempted solution to stabilise the community by promoting the language and encouraging continuous engagement with it. In this sense, one of the most interesting wings of the current neutral Esperanto movement in Europe is the political party Europe-Democracy-Esperanto (EDE), which puts forward candidates for the European Parliamentary elections and uses their election campaigns as a platform to promote the language. Through a socio-anthropological approach, based on long-term fieldwork carried out among Esperanto speakers and supporters in France, this work explores some aspects of EDE’s actions, focusing on a controversy: how can a political party be neutral? From this initial interrogation, the diverse definitions of neutrality held by Esperantists will be explored as a means to approach the question of how a concept of neutral politics can be strategically mobilised as a tool in the discussion among this party’s members. Also examined is how the outcomes of this party’s actions are seen by its members in terms of success and failure, and how the issue of neutrality and political engagement reappears in this discussion.

Ĉar la Esperanta lingvokomunumo ne povas kalkuli je laŭgeneracia transdono garantianta ĝian daŭron, la Esperanto-movado aperas kiel provo stabiligi tiun komunumon varbante por la lingvo kaj instigante okupiĝadi pri ĝi. Tiusence unu el la plej interesaj frakcioj de la neŭtrala Esperanto-movado estas la politika partio Eŭropo-Demokratio-Esperanto (EDE), kiu startigas kandidatojn por la balotoj al la Eŭropunia Parlamento kaj utiligas la balotajn kampanjojn por reklami la lingvon. Per soci-antropologia aliro kaj bazita sur longdaŭra kampolaboro inter parolantoj kaj subtenantoj de Esperanto en Francujo, mi esploros kelkajn aspektojn de la agado de EDE, kun speciala atento al la disputo, kiel politika partio povas resti neŭtrala? De tiu unua demando mi esploros la diversajn difinojn de neŭtraleco troveblajn ĉe la Esperantistoj, kiel maniero aliri la demandon, kiel koncepto de neŭtrala politiko estas strategie utiligata kiel helpilo en la diskutoj inter la partianaro. Mi krome esploros, kiel la rezultoj de la partia agado estas perceptataj de la membroj rilate sukceson kaj malsukceson, kaj kiel la problemo de neŭtraleco kaj politika engaĝiĝo reaperas en tiu diskuto.

For the last 20 years, Euroscepticism has become a stable component of European politics and has attracted much attention. European elections have provided Eurosceptic parties with an opportunity to get parliamentary representation. While there is a burgeoning literature on the Eurosceptic stances of these parties, there remains relatively little research on their strategies once inside the European Parliament. This article analyzes how Eurosceptic MEPs from the ‘untidy right’ conceive and carry out their representative mandate in an institution they despise. First, it takes an historical perspective to show that despite the persistence of Euroscepticism in the European Union's elected chamber, the body of research remains comparatively limited. Second, it examines the institutional constraints faced by Eurosceptic representatives resulting from the institutional environment and the ideological heterogeneity of these actors. The final part proposes a typology of parliamentary roles to account for their attitudes and behaviours inside the chamber.

What makes up a capital city? In this first comprehensive look at the architectural and urban visions for a European capital, Hein examines how these visions compare to the reality of the three headquarter cities for the European Union: Strasbourg, Luxembourg, and Brussels. Tracing the history of the EU and its creation of the new political entity of the polycentric capital, Hein explores the impact that European unification has on visionary projects and the transformation of EU member cities. Widely researched, the book also brings in architectural projects that have remained largely unknown until now. Using architectural and urban history as a lens, Hein examines the past five decades of European unification. Also analyzed for the first time are the debates, plans, projects, and constructions-both realized and failed-that accompanied this process. Looking to the future, Hein asserts that the task of these three capital cities is to balance the needs of a collective Europe with national, local, and-increasingly-regional demands.

The focus of this article is an analysis of possibilities of effectuating language regimes in the EU with a review of the implementation of multilingual policy through the language regime Pure full multilingualism. EU institutions call for that regime in a whole variety of documents but in practice they tend to implement other regimes (Monolingualism, Reduced multilingualism, Asymmetric systems, Controlled multilingualism and Full multilingualism with management correctives) justifying that on the grounds of applying the principles of practicality and efficiency. Though, Pure full multilingualism seems to be the best solution because of a variety of its advantages. By carrying out this regime, a full development of linguistic diversity in the European society would be allowed and, also, freedom of mobility and migrations within Europe would be encouraged. Its impact on the promotion of multilingual economy and economic positioning of EU on global economy scene would be consequential. No less important would be that its impact on providing all the citizens with complete access to EU legislation, procedures and information in their own language.

Media often portrays European Union (EU) decision-making as a battleground for national governments that defend the interests of their member states. Yet even the most powerful individuals, such as the German chancellor, the French president, or the Commission president, are party politicians. At the same time the consistent empowerment of the European Parliament (EP) means that the party groups of European-level "Europarties"-political parties at European level-are in a key position to shape EU legislation. The Parliament has also become more directly involved in the appointment of the Commission, with the results of EP elections thus influencing the composition of the Commission. Examining the "partyness" of European integration, this article argues that scholarly understanding of the role of parties in the EU political system has taken great strides forward since the turn of the millennium. This applies especially to the EP party groups, with research focusing particularly on voting patterns in the plenary. This body of work has become considerably more sophisticated and detailed over the years; it shows that the main EP groups do achieve even surprisingly high levels of cohesion and that the left-right dimension is the primary axis of contestation in the chamber. It nonetheless also emphasizes the continuing relevance of national parties that control candidate selection in EP elections. Considering that most votes in the Parliament are based on cooperation between the two largest groups, the center-right European People's Party (EPP) and the center-left Party of the European Socialists (PES), future research should analyze in more detail how these groups build compromises. Actual Europarties, however, remain relatively unexplored. Case studies of treaty reforms or particular policy sectors reveal how individual Europarties have often wielded decisive influence on key integration decisions or key appointments to EU institutions. The Europarty meetings held in conjunction with European Council summits are particularly important in this respect. The regular, day-today activities of Europarties deserve more attention, both regarding decision-making and vertical links between national parties and their Europarties. Overall, it is probably more accurate to characterize Europarties as networks of like-minded national parties or as loose federations of member parties, especially when compared with the often centralized and strongly disciplined parties found in the member states.

RINASCIMENTO-RENAISSANCE Millennium III
Together for Europe's Future ... Together with Europe for the World

It’s time for a HUMANISTIC Europe to rise up again to guide the world for peace and prosperity ...
Europe must carry the flame of a new Renaissance to restore the immortal values of her XIV-XVI c. Renaissance, placing humanity back into its Central Position over and above all biases, ideologies, interests, and aspirations.
We are proud of our working staff of Literature/Thought Luminaries, Peace Ambassadors, and Human Rights Activists from around the world:
RINASCIMENTO-RENAISSANCE Millennium III
• Founder-President: George Onsy - EGYPT (thinker, writer, poet, artist, peace science researcher).
• Associate President: Goffredo Palmerini - ITALY (writer, journalist, festival organizer).
• Vice President & SD Coordinator: Nikki De Pina - UK (founder-president of Global Peace Let Talk-GPLT).
• Cultures Dialogue Coordinator: Michela Zanarella – ITALY (president of Euro-Mediterranean Dialogue Network, editor-in-chief, poet).
• Academic Coordinator: Franca Colozzo - ITALY (writer, architect, professor, researcher, Human Rights activist).