U tekstu se rastvara pojam "dekonstrukcije" administrativne države u SAD-u kao njen reprezentativni primjer. Polazeći od dominacije moderne administrativne države, puna slika suvremenog konstitucionalizma u SAD-u mora uključivati administrativni konstitucionalizam kao svekoliko razumijevanje i interpretaciju suvremene administrativne države i njene strukture od strane agencija i drugih aktivnih aktera upravnoga prava. Administrativni konstitucionalizam danas je jedan od najintenzivnije izučavanih predmeta istraživanja komparativnog ustavnog i upravnog prava. Razlog egzegeze ovoga pitanja nisu samo njegove različite dimenzije već i činjenica da on predstavlja glavni mehanizam kojim se danas elaborira i implementira ustavno značenje. ; This paper opens up the concept of "deconstruction "of administrative states in the USA as its representative example. Starting from the domination of a modern administrative state, the full picture of modern constitutionalism in the USA must include administrative constitutionalism as overall understanding and interpretation of a modern administrative state and its structure by agencies and other active participants in administrative law. Administrative constitutionalism is today one of the most intensively studied subjects of investigation of comparative constitutional and administrative law. The reason for exegesis of this issue is not only its various dimensions but also the fact that it represents the main mechanism which today elaborates and implements constitutional meaning.
Carl Schmitt je jedan od najposvećenijih protivnika liberalnog univerzalizma sa svojim pojmom pluralističke, racionalne i uključive konsenzualne politike kao progresivnog demokratskog projekta i svojeg razumijevanja političke arene kao pročišćene, od sukoba slobodne, i na taj način progresivne kretnje demokratske logike. U ovom radu nastojat ću pokazati Schmittove pesimističke i negativne stavove, zasnovane na ontološkim i teološkim temeljima, o deliberativnom modelu politike koja tvrdi da partikularna volja može doći do koncepta zajedničkog javnog interesa ili zajedničkog dobra kroz raspravu i dijalog. Nadalje, pokušat ću pokazati da unutar Schmittovog projekta koncept diktature suverena postoji kao nužni kontrapunkt pojmu politič- kog. Schmitt odbija razumijevati politički život kao medij dijalog koji vodi razumskom konsenzusu. U ovom kontekstu, suveren iz Schmittove teorije mora se razumijevati upravo kao sila napravljena da proizvodi homogenost kroz hegemoniju. Hegemonija, u Gramscijevom smislu, nije gola opresivna sila. Namjesto toga, odnosi se na vladajuću silu sposobnu upisati vlastitu ideologiju i pogled na svijet u javnost kroz uvjeravanje. U tom okviru, ljevičarski mislitelji poput Mouffea, koji preporuča da moramo misliti »sa Schmittom protiv Schmitta« kako bismo razvili novo demokratsko političko razumijevanje, svraćaju pozornost na Schmittovu tezu da je svaki politički identitet u funkciju »mi–oni« antinomije, ali im promiče činjenica da je nemoguće deducirati koncept zbiljski demokratske javne sfere iz Schmittove teorije. Kao što će biti naglašenu u radu, demokracija u Schmittovom smislu može biti savršena forma suverenosti, takva kakva usuprot liberalnoj demokraciji rezultira homogenizacijom i isključenjem heterogenosti, te na taj način mora biti začeta kao fundamentalno hegemonijski sistem. Schmittov ideal demokracije zahtijeva da politički identiteti, javno mišljenje, javna sfera i formiranje volje vudu rezultati suverenove volje i bez prostora za raspravu. ; Carl Schmitt is one of the most dedicated opponents of liberal universalism, with its notion of pluralist, rational and non-exclusivist consensus politics as a progressive democratic project and its understanding of the political arena – "purified", being free from struggles and conflict – as the progressive move of democratic logic. In this paper I will first try to show Schmitt's pessimistic and negative stance based on ontological and theological grounds on the deliberative model of politics with its claim about the possibility of making particular wills reach the conception of common public interest or the common good through discussion and dialogue. Secondly, I'll try to show that, within Schmitt's project, the concept of the sovereign dictatorship exists as the necessary counterpoint to the concept of the political. Schmitt refuses to understand political life as a medium of dialogue leading to a rational consensus. In this context, the sovereign in Schmitt's theory should be precisely understood as a force constructed to reproduce homogeneity in a hegemonic manner. Hegemonia, in a Gramscian sense, is not a bare oppressive force. Rather, it refers to a ruling force which is able to inject its own ideology and world view into the public through persuasion. In this framework, leftist thinkers like mouffe, who recommended that we should think "with Schmitt against Schmitt" in order to develop a new democratic political understanding, draw attention to Schmitt's thesis that every political identity functions as "we-they" antinomy, yet they miss the fact that it is impossible to deduce a conception of a truly democratic public sphere from Schmitt's theory. As it will be emphasized in this paper, democracy in the Schmittian sense can be the perfect form of sovereignty, one which in contrast to liberal democracy results in homogenization and the exclusion of the heterogeneous and thus must be conceived as a fundamentally hegemonic system. The Schmittian ideal of democracy requires that political identities, public opinion, public sphere and will formation are the products of a sovereign will and not of open and free discussion. ; Carl Schmitt est l'un des opposants les plus puissants de l'universalisme libérale de par sa notion de consensus politique pluraliste, rationnel et non exclusiviste en tant que projet démocratique progressiste, mais aussi de par sa compréhension de l'arène politique - « purifiée », libre de toutes luttes et de tout conflit – en tant que mouvement progressiste de la logique dé- mocratique. Dans cet article, je vais en premier lieu tenter de montrer l'opinion pessimiste et négative de Schmitt – basée sur des fondements ontologiques et théologiques – concernant le modèle délibératif de la politique et sa prétention à penser que la formation de volontés particulières pourrait toucher l'intérêt public commun ou le bien commun à travers la discussion et le dialogue. En second lieu, je vais tenter de montrer qu'à l'intérieur du projet de Schmitt le concept de dictature souveraine existe comme contrepartie nécessaire au concept du politique. Schmitt refuse de penser la vie politique comme instrument de dialogue menant au consensus rationnel. Ainsi, le souverain dans la théorie de Schmitt doit précisément être compris comme une force construite pour reproduire une telle homogénéité de manière hégémonique. Hegemonia, au sens gramscien, n'est pas une simple force oppressive ; il s'agit plutôt d'un terme qui se réfère à une force dirigeante capable d'injecter sa propre idéologie et vision du monde dans le domaine public à travers la persuasion. Dans ce contexte, certains penseurs de gauche telle que mouffe qui nous recommande de penser « avec, et contre, Schmitt » dans le but de développer une nouvelle compréhension de la politique démocratique, attirent notre attention sur la thèse de Schmitt où chaque identité politique fonctionne par l'antinomie « nous/eux ». Toutefois, ces penseurs passent à côté du fait qu'il est impossible de déduire une conception de réelle sphère publique démocratique sur la base de la théorie de Schmitt. Comme cet article le souligne bien, la démocratie au sens schmittien peut être la forme parfaite de souveraineté, une forme qui – en contraste avec la démocratie libérale – aboutit à une homogénéisation en excluant l'hétérogé- néité, et ainsi doit être conçue comme un système fondamentalement hégémonique. Selon l'idéal schmittien de démocratie, les identités politiques, l'opinion publique, la sphère publique et la formation de volontés doivent être les produits, non pas d'une discussion ouverte et libre, mais d'une volonté souveraine. ; Carl Schmitt ist einer der mächtigsten Gegner des liberalen Universalismus mit dessen Vorstellung von pluralistischer, rationaler und nicht exklusivistischer Konsenspolitik als einem progressiven demokratischen Projekt und dessen Verständnis der politischen Arena – "gereinigt", frei von Kämpfen und Konflikten – als eines progressiven Schritts der demokratischen Logik. In diesem Beitrag werde ich zunächst versuchen, Schmitts pessimistische, negative und auf ontologischer und theologischer Grundlage ruhende Haltung zum Beratungsmodell der Politik darzulegen, mit dessen Behauptung über die möglichkeit, partikulare Willen zu veranlassen, durch Diskussion und Dialog die Konzeption des gemeinschaftlichen öffentlichen Interesses oder Gemeinwohls zu erreichen. Zweitens werde ich versuchen zu zeigen, dass im Rahmen des schmittschen Projekts der Begriff der souveränen Diktatur als notwendiger Kontrapunkt zum Begriff des Politischen existiert. Schmitt weigert sich, das politische Leben als ein medium des Dialogs zu begreifen, das zu einem rationalen Konsens führt. In diesem Zusammenhang soll das Souveräne in der schmittschen Theorie eben als eine Gewalt aufgefasst werden, die konstruiert ist, um eine solche Homogenität in einer hegemonialen Art zu reproduzieren. Die hegemonia im gramscischen Sinne ist nicht eine bloß repressive Kraft; vielmehr bezieht sie sich auf eine herrschende Kraft, die imstande ist, durch Überzeugungsvermögen ihre eigene Ideologie und Weltanschauung in die Öffentlichkeit zu injizieren. Linksorientierte Denker wie mouffe, die empfohlen haben, wir sollten "mit Schmitt gegen Schmitt" denken, um ein neues demokratisches politisches Verständnis zu entwickeln, lenken in diesem Kontext das Augenmerk auf Schmitts These, jede politische Identität funktioniere durch die "wir – sie"-Antinomie, doch sie übersehen die Tatsache, dass es unmöglich ist, aus der schmittschen Theorie die Vorstellung von einer wahrhaft demokratischen öffentlichen Sphäre abzuleiten. Wie es in dieser Arbeit betont wird, kann die Demokratie im schmittschen Sinne die perfekte Form der Souveränität sein, die – im Gegensatz zur liberalen Demokratie – in der Homogenisierung und Ausgrenzung des Heterogenen resultiert und daher als ein grundlegend hegemoniales System erachtet werden muss. Das schmittsche Ideal der Demokratie erheischt, dass politische Identitäten, öffentliche meinung, öffentliche Sphäre und Willensbildung keine Produkte einer offenen und freien Diskussion, sondern eines souveränen Willens sind.
There are prima facie reasons why political parties should be recognized as public law persons of the Croatian legal system: Political parties play a leading role in the creation & implementation of the state's will. Continental European legal systems distinguish between public & private law: the Croatian Constitution prescribes that political parties are associations with the features typical of public law persons. What requires analysis is the nature & consequences of the public law personality of political parties. Aristotle's theory of justice is still a useful starting point for distinguishing between public & private law, & between public & private law persons. The theory demonstrates that both the political community & the economic market presuppose standards of conduct that regulate interaction of their members. The standards include two essential types of legal acts, namely, statutes, which are fundamental acts of public law, & contracts, which are fundamental acts of private law. The dichotomy of legal acts implies virtually all the criteria that Roman & Continental lawyers have found important for distinguishing public & private law (source, bindingness, hierarchy, interest, subjects, etc). The division of a legal system into private & public law can be positivized in several ways. However, a liberal, democratic, & social legal system ought to meet the following principles, which guarantee the public law status of political parties: explicit recognition of the public law personality; justiciability; constitutionality; transparency; democracy; solidarity. The principles are followed by the Draft Bill on Political Parties, which was prepared by the Croatian Law Center in May 2002 & was adopted, with some changes, by the Committee on Constitution, Rules of Order, & Political System of the Croatian Parliament in July 2002. 90 References. Adapted from the source document.
In this text the author deals with the analysis of the fundamental legal texts regulating local self-government & administration in the Republic of Croatia & to what extent they are 'the fall guys' to be blamed for the state the systems of local self-government & administration are in. He concludes that these laws are a major generator (though not the only one) of the crisis of local self-government & administration in the Republic of Croatia. 16 References. Adapted from the source document.
There are two key tasks of public television in a liberal democracy: to support the democratic government & the rule of law, which is at the same time a guarantee of its independence & freedom, & provide for the public accurate & comprehensive information & an egalitarian & free public forum for debating major social issues. In this work, the author looks into how the composition of the HRT Program Council, in line with the tasks stipulated by law, directly influences programming of the HRT, the biggest & the most prestigious Croatian TV house. According to the Law on HRT of 2003, eleven members of the HRT Program Council, whose task is to promote & protect public interest by monitoring & improving the programs, is appointed & relieved by the Croatian parliament (Sabor). This has once again evoked the specter of the direct control of the state over the Croatian television. One of the Council's priorities is the creation of the framework of an independent, pluralist & balanced TV program, which requires the establishment of a complex, transparent structure of dynamic relations between the professionals -- journalists & editors, the organizations of the civil society, the relevant social groups & the interests of the entire public. 14 References. Adapted from the source document.
The paper provides a detailed overview of the existing relationship between the just war theory & international law. It stresses the fact that the two concepts were historically incompatible. The just War theory falls within ethics & appeals to superior principles that were not in accordance with the positivist law theory & the concept of sovereignty upon which public international law was founded. That incompatibility may at first seem as a paradox since the two concepts should be derived from a common base: the idea of justice. Further development of international law has clearly proved that law cannot be separated from the idea of justice & that is, to some extent, closely linked to some elements of natural law. The author concludes that in the domain of the use of force contemporary international law provides a legal frame, which is in accordance with the precepts of the just war theory. References. Adapted from the source document.
Opisuje se oblikovanje sustava informacijskog zakonodavstva u kojem je novi Zakon o tajnosti podataka četvrti dio, pored Zakona o pravu na pristup informacijama, Zakona o zaštiti osobnih podataka i Zakon o medijima. Naglašavaju se temeljne novine, kao i pitanje prevođenja stupnjeva tajnosti prema prethodnim propisima u one prema novom Zakonu. Razmatraju se određene dileme u provedbi novog Zakona, od kojih su neke povezane s kaznenim pravom, a neke s pravom na pristup informacijama javnog sektora. Zanimljivi su postupovni problemi u vezi s testom razmjernosti. Autor upozorava na neusklađenost propisa, nedostatne nadzorne kapacitete, mogućnosti zloporabe propisa o tajnosti podataka, te na potrebu terminološkog i drugog preciziranja pravnih propisa. ; Design of the system of information legislation is described. The new Law on Data Confidentiality is the fourth part of this system, along with the Law on the Access to Public Sector Information, Law on Personal Data Protection, and Media Act. Basic novelties in the Law are stressed, such as the issue of transitional regulation about levels of confidentiality. There are a few dilemmas with regard to implementation of the new Law. Some of them are connected with criminal law, and some with the issue of access to public sector information. An interesting procedural problem is connected with the test of proportionality. The author warns about the gaps in legal regulation, lack of control capacity, possibilities of misusing legal regulation on data confidentiality, and the necessity of terminological and other clarifications in legal regulation.
The author deals with the background & the types of human rights in the era of globalization & looks into the proposals of their global institutionalization. His assumption is that the increased legal normatization of global legal regimes on the basis of human rights is in the rational interest of the actors of global law. There are five main ideas: the democratization of all states, the global institutionalization of the direct global civil law, the global federal republic, the international legal solutions &, the global law. The global institutionalization of human rights has been beset by various problems & it requires different approaches which should be seen as mutually corrective. The globally oriented weak publics are a kind of a forum in which individual solutions' relevance must be argued. They affect the globally operating strong publics. The author concludes that the demand for global justice remains a normative measure towards which public education & the public will must be oriented for the sake of the legal formulation of human rights. 45 References. Adapted from the source document.
Different parts of state territory on land, sea, & in the airspace are explained first. The concept of territorial sovereignty is envisaged through principles of its all-inclusiveness & its exclusivity, subject to many exceptions & restrictions imposed either by rules of general international law or by specific treaty obligations that can be assumed by a state. The concept of state servitudes was not assimilated in the practice of international courts & tribunals. Besides, it can be the cause of some misconceptions & confusion in public international law. Within the explanation of territorial boundaries are discussed the so-called natural boundaries -- such as rivers, lakes, & mountain boundaries -- as well as the artificial boundaries. An explanation of the principle of uti possidetis, of procedures of fixing boundaries, & of special legal scope of boundary treaties in international law is offered in conclusion. Adapted from the source document.
Pojam "centralizacije" počeo se koristiti u Francuskoj krajem 18. stoljeća kada je nakon revolucije stvorena nova struktura vlade. Pojam "decentralizacije" u upotrebu je ušao početkom 19. stoljeća. Ideje slobode i decentralizacije provodili su tijekom 19. i 20. stoljeća protudrţavni politički aktivisti koji su sebe nazivali "anarhistima", "libertarijancima", pa čak i decentralistima. Tocqueville, jedan od zagovornika decentralizacije je istaknuo da decentralizacija ima ne samo administrativnu vrijednost već i graĎansku dimenziju, jer povećava mogućnosti za graĎane da se zainteresiraju za javne poslove. I od akumulacije tih lokalnih, aktivnih, pronicljivih sloboda, raĎa se najučinkovitija protuteţa središnjoj vladi, čak i ako bi bila podrţavana od neosobne, kolektivne volje. Veliki broj zemalja u razvoju i tranzicijskih zemalja započeo je neki oblik programa decentralizacije. Taj je trend povezan sa sve većim zanimanjem za ulogu civilnog društva i privatnog sektora kao partnera vladama u traţenju novih načina pruţanja usluga. Decentralizacija upravljanja i jačanje kapaciteta lokalne uprave dijelom je i funkcija širih društvenih trendova, što uključuje, na primjer, općenito rastuće nepovjerenje u vladu, propast nekih od najcentraliziranijih reţima na svijetu (npr. Sovjetskog Saveza) i novonastale separatističke zahtjeve koji se rutinski pojavljuju u pojedinim dijelovima svijeta. Pokret prema lokalnoj odgovornosti i većoj kontroli nad nečijom sudbinom nije, meĎutim, rezultat samo negativnog stava prema središnjoj vladi. Umjesto toga, ovaj razvoj dogaĎaja uglavnom je potaknut snaţnom ţeljom za većim sudjelovanjem graĎana i organizacije privatnog sektora u funkciji upravljanja. ; The term "centralization" began to be used in France in the late 18th century when, after the revolution, a new government structure was created. The term "decentralization" came into use in the early 19th century. The ideas of freedom and decentralization were implemented during the 19th and 20th centuries by anti-state political activists who called themselves "anarchists," "libertarians," and even decentralizers. Tocqueville, one of the proponents of decentralization, pointed out that decentralization has not only an administrative value but also a civic dimension, as it increases opportunities for citizens to take interest in public affairs. And from the accumulation of these local, active, insightful freedoms, the most effective counterbalance to central government is born, even if it were supported by an impersonal, collective will. A large number of developing and transition countries have embarked on some form of decentralization program. This trend is linked to the growing interest in the role of civil society and the private sector as partners to governments in seeking new ways of providing services. Decentralization of governance and strengthening the capacity of local government is partly a function of broader social trends, which include, for example, growing distrust of government, the collapse of some of the world's most centralized regimes (eg the Soviet Union) and emerging separatist demands that routinely emerge in some parts of the world. The movement towards local responsibility and greater control over one's destiny is not, however, the result of only a negative attitude towards the central government. Instead, this development is largely driven by a strong desire for greater citizen participation and private sector organization in the governance function.
Pojam "centralizacije" počeo se koristiti u Francuskoj krajem 18. stoljeća kada je nakon revolucije stvorena nova struktura vlade. Pojam "decentralizacije" u upotrebu je ušao početkom 19. stoljeća. Ideje slobode i decentralizacije provodili su tijekom 19. i 20. stoljeća protudrţavni politički aktivisti koji su sebe nazivali "anarhistima", "libertarijancima", pa čak i decentralistima. Tocqueville, jedan od zagovornika decentralizacije je istaknuo da decentralizacija ima ne samo administrativnu vrijednost već i graĎansku dimenziju, jer povećava mogućnosti za graĎane da se zainteresiraju za javne poslove. I od akumulacije tih lokalnih, aktivnih, pronicljivih sloboda, raĎa se najučinkovitija protuteţa središnjoj vladi, čak i ako bi bila podrţavana od neosobne, kolektivne volje. Veliki broj zemalja u razvoju i tranzicijskih zemalja započeo je neki oblik programa decentralizacije. Taj je trend povezan sa sve većim zanimanjem za ulogu civilnog društva i privatnog sektora kao partnera vladama u traţenju novih načina pruţanja usluga. Decentralizacija upravljanja i jačanje kapaciteta lokalne uprave dijelom je i funkcija širih društvenih trendova, što uključuje, na primjer, općenito rastuće nepovjerenje u vladu, propast nekih od najcentraliziranijih reţima na svijetu (npr. Sovjetskog Saveza) i novonastale separatističke zahtjeve koji se rutinski pojavljuju u pojedinim dijelovima svijeta. Pokret prema lokalnoj odgovornosti i većoj kontroli nad nečijom sudbinom nije, meĎutim, rezultat samo negativnog stava prema središnjoj vladi. Umjesto toga, ovaj razvoj dogaĎaja uglavnom je potaknut snaţnom ţeljom za većim sudjelovanjem graĎana i organizacije privatnog sektora u funkciji upravljanja. ; The term "centralization" began to be used in France in the late 18th century when, after the revolution, a new government structure was created. The term "decentralization" came into use in the early 19th century. The ideas of freedom and decentralization were implemented during the 19th and 20th centuries by anti-state political activists ...
Electronic media in many countries have from their inception been linked & defined with commercial content. However, together with the development of the system of commercial radio, democratic countries very soon began to build &/or revamp the alternative systems of public &/or noncommercial radio. The 1994 Croatian Law on telecommunications again allowed private ownership of electronic media & consequently the number of radio-stations doubled. There are 114 of them today (excluding Croatian Radio stations). However, the expected democratization of the media resulted only in an increase of commercial & entertaining broadcasts. The true role of the radio as a public media whose purpose is public dissemination of information has been replaced by a new (& profitable) role of public entertainer. Should radio be left there? 2 Tables, 28 References. Adapted from the source document.
In Croatia, the issue of the legal status of the sources of journalists' information as well as the status of journalists who publish sensitive information is increasingly gaining prominence. This is a subject that includes elements of constitutional, media, labor, civil, & penal law. The essay is limited to people as information sources. The sources can be divided into internal & external. The rationale for the sources' confidentiality privilege lies in the fact that journalists serve public goals & their sources can find themselves imperiled. According to the author's classification, the risks of this privilege are faced either by the sources (direct or indirect manipulation, smear campaigns, misapprehensions) or by the journalists ("protecting" a fictional source, subsequent blackmail of the source, misapprehensions). In Croatia, the protection of the information sources is defined in Article 12 of the Law on Public Information. The author outlines the major comparative systems of regulation of this field, the examples of antinomies among different Croatian regulations (the principles for their resolution are also offered) & analyzes the position of certain types of sources in relation to the Croatian law. And finally, the author compares the regulations of the Croatian law with the comparative systems, analyzes the representation of certain forms of responsibility of certain types of subjects & lists the principles he deems most important regarding journalists' work (the necessity of protecting the sources, the responsibility of journalists toward their sources, the different legal status of journalists & their sources, the protection of privacy, the verification of confidentiality, the more dominant interest, the importance of administrative ethics, the familiarity with the regulations, the adequate legal definition of a secret). 30 References. Adapted from the source document.
The central question in addressing the subject of confidential information is to define the borderline between citizens' "right to know" & the general interest of keeping certain information confidential -- in a word, between justifiable & unjustifiable secrets. This area includes parts of administrative & public media law & the theory of public law. The paper is limited to the analysis of the issue of classified information in state possession (state, military, & official secrets) on three levels: theoretical, comparative, & that of legislation in Croatia. The essential elements of the theoretical concept of confidentiality are the possession of the information kept secret from others; deliberate concealment; & social context. A secret can have different forms: strategic, private, pressing, sequential, collective, petty, deep, simple, exploited, & conspiratorial, as in a plot. The theoretical analysis of confidentiality deals with the questions of contemporary forms of the manipulation of information (defining agendas & priorities, "quantitative overload," lobbying) & with the generic issue of the process of decision making, lies, & half-truths. In closing, the author offers certain elements for legislation regarding classified information. 13 References. Adapted from the source document.