Search results

This article analyzes the history, development, & continuity of the sociology of law within the context of Czech social & legal science since 1989. The sociology of law is depicted as a branch of both social & legal science that has suffered greatly from different political discontinuities & ideological repression during the communist era. After the 1989 political changes, the weak tradition of the Czech sociology of law had to be reconstituted. This development is mainly typical of the law faculties of different Czech universities, while academics trained in general sociology & social theory rather continue to ignore the importance & social functions of the legal system in the process of the postcommunist transformation of Czech society.

The post discusses some issues with proving intelectuall and mental maturity of juveniles. In the introduction author briefl y deals with reasons of the adoption of The Juvenile Justice Act and corresponding relative adoption of criminal responsibility of juveniles. Distinctive theoretical attitudes are not omitted with this conception of criminal responsibility. Also the adolescence process is analysed in the brief including factors directly infl uencing this process. Another chapter is dedicated to the examination of the mental state of the juveniles and determination of the degree of their mental maturity by expert's investigation. In this context some factual problems and drawbacks common to the criminal proceeding are pointed out. These issues are demonstrated in the examples from practice. The next part is about proving bio-psycho-social level of the juvenile. The standard procedure of the law enforcement authorities for proving intelectuall and mental maturity of juveniles is described, including possible drawbacks and the opinion of the courts regarding this topic. At the end author summarizes outputs of the individual chapters, including consideration of possible change de lege ferenda.

Being a part of the social world, international law is not closed nor isolated system -- on the contrary, it is in an intimate interaction with international relations & politics. Richard Falk, Professor of International Law, taught for example at the Princeton University & presently at the University of California, Santa Barbara. He is interested in the connections between IL & IR & is a prolific writer on this topic. Two of his last books, The costs of War -- International Law, the UN & World Order After Iraq (2008) & Achieving Human Rights (2009) are reviewed in this essay in highly critical manner. In the essay, Falk's normative inquiry into the legal & political developments is contrasted with the latest discussions in both the International Law & International Relations. In the review essay, Falk is criticized for his unconvincing criticism of the US foreign policy, for his intellectual shortcuts & excessive idealism. However, very interesting & significant parts of both books are emphasized & Falk's books are considered to be worth reading. His insight into the international legal problems & into the developments of human rights is outstanding. Adapted from the source document.

The aim of the contribution is to examine and analyse prosecutor's notice by which prosecutor performs supervision of compliance with the law and generally binding legal regulations by public administration. The contribution's aim is not just a description of current legal state but in addition of that the authors try to make reference to problem issues of the legislation de lege lata as well as several unclear theoretical and application questions whose analysis and answering is part of the content of this contribution. In connection with processed issues the authors off er certain recommendations and propositions which could pro futuro fi nd its application not only in the legal regulation of the prosecutor's notice, but also in the case of supervision of compliance with the legitimacy in public administration.

This article presents a review of the currently debated options for regulations of activities of private military companies (PMCs). This topic is a matter of pondering in the foreign literature. It primarily reflects on the massive use of PMCs in Iraq and Afghanistan, which, however, merely illustrates the broader shortcomings resulting from the prolonged absence of clearly defined and enforceable mechanisms for the monitoring and control of the accountability, transparency and effectiveness of PMCs' activities. The goal of this article is therefore not only to present the practical, legal, economic, and political pros and cons of the possible regulation frameworks, but also to illustrate why it is still so difficult to reach a consensus on a regulation framework that would be acceptable to all the relevant actors. Adapted from the source document.

On 2 January 2020, the Government of the Czech Republic submitted a bill to the Chamber of Deputies amending the Labor Code. The bill was sent to deputies as press 689/0 on 2 January 2020. The proposed amendment to the Labor Code was compiled by the Ministry of Labor and Social Aff airs of the Czech Republic, among other objectives, with the aim of achieving compliance with national legislation with EU regulations and case law. The proposed amendment to the Labor Code should explicitly regulate the conditions for the transfer of the employer's activities, and further specify the conditions for giving notice by an employee pursuant to Section 51a of the Labor Code when transferring rights and obligations from employment relationships. It is precisely in the issue of conditions for the transfer of the employer's activities that the current legal regulation has been repeatedly criticized due to insuffi cient use of EU legislation for the national legal regulation of the transfer of rights and obligations from labor relations.

In the recent past, we discussed the legal regulation of public procurement in the Czech Republic. As an amendment to the Act on Procurement the European Commission. By submitting a draft amandment to the Act, Czech republic will fulfill the task of the European Commision. Minor adjustments may be made to the legislative process. However, today ́s treatise can contribute to the preparation of the addresses of the regulation (including the preparation of their internal regulations and procedures).

This paper seeks to find out to what extent the process of EU accession has influenced legal regulations concerning the creation & functioning of social & political actors. Through the analysis of various statutes & changes made to them, the paper tries to determine the role the EU plays in amending assembly legislation. The actors under scrutiny include political parties, professional organizations, labor unions, & civil society organizations. The paper concludes that the most influenced field of actors was the area of chambers of professionals which was obliged to conform to requirements for the free movement of people & services in the European Union in order to comply with European law. The Czech Republic was quite leisurely in their harmonization of statutes, with the majority of them passed just before accession to the EU. An interesting part of the problem concerns the question of political party membership, which is still reserved only for Czech citizens. However, European citizenship, with its voting rights to the European Parliament & local magistrates, is arguably going to push slowly for change even in this domain. Adapted from the source document.

Due to the different and mutually incompatible interpretations of Article X of the Treaty of Utrecht of 1713, there is still an ongoing dispute between the United Kingdom and the Kingdom of Spain on the question of the sovereignty of Gibraltar. In the United Kingdom's view, which is largely shared by legal scholars, Article X of the Treaty of Utrecht grants full and entire sovereignty over Gibraltar to the UK. Meanwhile, the Kingdom of Spain argues that Article X yielded to the crown of Great Britain only the property of Gibraltar's castle, town and port. Sovereignty over Gibraltar, however, continued to be retained by the Spanish state. In spite of their disagreement, both states started negotiating a form of condominium at the beginning of the 21st century. In the end, they failed to achieve this goal, which seems to be incompatible with the UN General Assembly resolutions on the decolonization of Gibraltar. The people of Gibraltar, who are the third actor in the Spanish-British dispute, claim their own sovereignty and their right to self-determination. However, according to the UN General Assembly, the decolonization of Gibraltar requires as a precondition that the Kingdom of Spain and the UK solve their dispute on the question of sovereignty. Otherwise the decolonization of Gibraltar cannot occur. Both the United Kingdom and the Kingdom of Spain are European Union members but their inter-state dispute under international law cannot be solved within the EU context. Thus, three hundred years after the signature of the Treaty of Utrecht, the future of Gibraltar remains completely unclear. Adapted from the source document.