The special legal nature of the concession contract (as one of the legal transactions) which represents a legal framework where the public & private interests meet (two parties cooperate for mutual benefit) is characterized by intertwining of general rules of obligation law & special legal institutes that originate from the sphere of public law. The legal nature of the contractual relationships that arise between administrative & private entities requires special regulation of individual institutes that should reflect the public interest as an important guiding principle for concluding these contracts, & a special legal position of a public law entity as a holder of this public interest. Despite adoption of the new Public-Private Partnership Act in the legislative regulation of the concession contract that still remains variously regulated in previously adopted special provisions of sectoral laws, there are still some deficiencies & dilemmas that are more or less effectively dealt with in the contractual practice. For the legal positions that are classically civil at first sight, the legislator or court practice have laid down special modified rules of civil law in most developed countries. In the course of time, these rules became part of public law/administrative law. Thus, the French legal order has best developed the rules of the public contractual law & the legal institute of the administrative contract that the Slovenian administrative theoreticians try more & more to introduce also into our legal order. References. Adapted from the source document.
Magistrsko diplomsko delo z naslovom Glavna obravnava v upravnem sporu kot človekova pravica celovito obravnava vprašanje (ne)izvedbe glavne obravnave v upravnem sporu. Mednarodni in slovenski predpisi predvidevajo javne sodne postopke z neposrednim ustnim obravnavanjem zadev. Prvi odstavek 6. člena Evropske konvencije o varstvu človekovih pravic in temeljnih svoboščin določa, da je javna obravnava sestavni del pravice do poštenega sojenja. Ustava Republike Slovenije posredno ureja glavno obravnavo v upravnem sporu, in sicer zlasti v 22. členu (enako varstvo pravic), 23. členu (pravica do sodnega varstva) in 24. členu (javnost sojenja). Glavno obravnavo kot zakonsko materijo podrobneje urejajo določbe Zakona o upravnem sporu in Zakona o pravdnem postopku. Izhajajoč iz ugotovitev Evropskega sodišča za človekove pravice, Ustavnega sodišča Republike Slovenije in Vrhovnega sodišča Republike Slovenije v magistrskem diplomskem delu zagovarjam dosledno izvedbo glavne obravnave, predvsem v primeru spornega dejanskega stanja in ko stranka njeno izvedbo izrecno zahteva. Vrhovno sodišče Republike Slovenije in Ustavno sodišče Republike Slovenije sta v novejši sodni praksi zavzela enotno stališče, da ima glavna obravnava v upravnem sporu enako naravo in smisel kot glavna obravnava v katerem koli drugem sodnem postopku. Ustavno sodišče Republike Slovenije je pravico do glavne obravnave v upravnem sporu opredelilo kot samostojno človekovo pravico, ki jo zagotavlja 22. člen Ustave Republike Slovenije. Pravica ni absolutna, zato morajo biti posegi vanjo zakonsko določeni ter prestati ustavna testa legitimnosti (tretji odstavek 15. člena Ustave Republike Slovenije) in sorazmernosti (2. člen Ustave Republike Slovenije). ; The master's thesis titled The main hearing in an administrative dispute as a human right comprehensively deals with issues regarding decision-making in an administrative dispute. International and Slovenian legal acts envisage public legal procedures with direct oral proceedings. The right to an oral hearing is an integral part of the right to a fair trial, as guaranteed by Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia indirectly regulates the right to a main hearing in an administrative dispute, especially in Article 22 (Equal Protection of Rights), Article 23 (Right to Judicial Protection) and Article 24 (Public Nature of Court Proceedings). The right to a main hearing is specified in the Administrative Dispute Act and the Contentious Civil Procedure Act. Building on the findings of the European Court of Human Rights, the Constitutional and the Supreme Court of the Republic of Slovenia, the master's thesis advocates for the consistent execution of the main hearing, particularly in cases where facts are being disputed and when a party explicitly demands it. The Constitutional and the Supreme Court of the Republic of Slovenia agreed that the main hearing possesses the same nature and meaning in an administrative dispute as it does in any other judicial proceeding. The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Slovenia has declared the right to a main hearing in an administrative dispute as an independent human right, which is guaranteed by Article 22 of the Constitution. As the right is not absolute, the absence of the main hearing is only permissible in duly justified cases prescribed by law and when the Constitutional tests of legitimacy (paragraph 3 of Article 15 of the Constitution) and proportionality (Article 2 of the Constitution) are passed.
Avtorica v magistrskem delu obravnava vpliv Listine Evropske unije o temeljnih pravicah na upravni postopek v državah članicah. V začetku prikaže razvoj varstva temeljnih pravic v okviru Skupnosti, zatem podrobneje predstavi temeljne značilnosti Listine ter povzame ugotovitve o uporabi Listine v državah članicah, ki izhajajo iz poročil o temeljnih pravicah Agencije Evropske unije za temeljne pravice. Že v začetnih poglavjih na relevantnih mestih opozori na prednosti in slabosti Listine, ki bi utegnile vplivati na upravni postopek. V nadaljevanju se posveti kritični obravnavi vpliva, ki ga imata na nacionalni upravni postopek dve najbolj procesno naravnani pravici iz Listine, in sicer pravica do dobrega upravljanja (41. člen Listine) in pravica do učinkovitega pravnega sredstva in nepristranskega sodišča (47. člen Listine). Nato na primerih iz sodne prakse Sodišča Evropske unije in nacionalnih sodišč prikaže, kako Listina vpliva na ugotovitveni postopek, obveznosti upravnih organov pred izdajo odločbe, možnost sodne kontrole nad upravnimi akti ter na pravnomočno zaključene zadeve. ; The thesis examines the impact of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union on the administrative procedure in Member States. In the introductory chapters, the developments in the protection of fundamental rights within the European Communities are outlined and the main features of the Charter are presented in greater detail. The key findings on the application of the Charter in the Member States are drawn from the annual fundamental rights reports that are prepared by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. Throughout the entire thesis, strengths and weaknesses of the Charter that would have a significant impact on the administrative procedure are referenced where relevant. Further on, the Author critically examines the impact of the right to good administration (article 41 EU Charter) and the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (article 47 EU Charter), both of procedural character, on the national administrative procedure. Finally, referring to examples acquired from the recent case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union and national case law, the Author demonstrates how the Charter impacts the fact assessment procedure, the obligations of administrative bodies throughout the proceeding, the possibility of judicial review of administrative action and the impact on final administrative decisions.
The Law Amending the General Administrative Procedure Act refers to a variety of provisions. New solutions should contribute to a more rapid, more efficient and more cost-effective procedure. Primarily due to elimination of the inconsistent use of individual provisions in practice, the amending law regulates more definitely the issues of authorizing the persons to manage and make decisions at different decision-making levels in administrative procedures in municipalities. The law also develops electronic operations and it especially amends the electronic service provisions. There is a fairly large number of amendments in the Service Chapter. And an important novelty needs to be emphasized. This is the institute of the waiver of the right to appeal which the General Administrative Procedure Act did not know. However, it is well-known in foreign legal regulations and in the Construction Act adopted in our country. Adapted from the source document.
After explaining the difference between the notions of self-government & local autonomy, the applicability of both to the description of the political-administrative status of the Slovene city of Ljubljana in the 19th-century Austrian Empire is examined. The Austrian March Constitution of 1849, its abolishment by the emperor Franz Joseph in 1851, the municipalities law of 1849 & 1862, & December Constitution of 1867 are some of the legal acts examined in the outline of the chronology of the self-government & autonomy of Ljubljana as a provincial capital in the Austrian Empire. The powers & prerogatives contained in the city's municipal statues are discussed, considering the relationship & power sharing between the state & municipalities in the Austrian Empire & the Austria-Hungary dual monarchy. The study of the Ljubljana archive sources concludes that prior to 1895, the city's municipal council powers to issue normative legislation were limited, & an increased norm-giving activity resulted only from the need to rebuild the city after the 1895 earthquake. The council's municipal autonomy was largely responsible for regulating all reconstruction activities, including the organization & modernization of transport, electrification, & other infrastructure. Adapted from the source document.
POVZETEK MEDNARODNI KAZENSKI PREGON IN ČLOVEKOVE PRAVICE TUJIH TERORISTIČNIH BORCEV Avtor: Rok Petročnik Mentorica: izr. prof. dr. Vasilka Sancin V magistrski nalogi sem raziskoval nastanek fenomena tujega terorističnega borca, njihov mednarodni kazenski pregon in kršitve njihovih temeljnih človekovih pravic v domačih kazenskih pregonih. Varnostni svet OZN je leta 2014 na podlagi VII. poglavja Ustanovne listine OZN sprejel Resolucijo 2178, ki podaja opis tujega terorističnega borca, vendar ne loči med oboroženimi spopadi in terorizmom. Resolucija 2178 opisuje tujega terorističnega borca kot posameznika, ki potuje v tujino z namenom izvedbe ali sodelovanja v terorističnem napadu, medtem ko je tuji borec posameznik, ki odpotuje v tujino z namenom pridružitve oboroženim spopadom. V raziskavi sem prišel do sklepa, da trenutno ne obstaja mednarodni kazenski pregon tujih terorističnih borcev, saj pregon izvajajo države same pred nacionalnimi sodišči. Varnostni svet OZN je pregon tujih terorističnih borcev preložil na države članice OZN, in sicer z vzpostavitvijo različnih odborov za nadzor izvajanja sankcij Varnostnega Sveta, kot so Sankcijski odbor 1267 in Skupina za analitično podporo in nadzor sankcij. V primerih Nada, Ahmed in Abdelrazik so nacionalna sodišča zaradi kršitev temeljnih človekovih pravic s sodbami razveljavila državne upravne akte, ki so vpeljevali sprejete protiteroristične resolucije Varnostnega sveta. Podobno je naredilo sodišče EU v primeru Kadi, kjer je bila razveljavljena uredba, ki je vpeljala sankcije Varnostnega sveta. Sodbe nacionalnih in sodišč v EU so bile glavni dejavnik za spremembo mednarodnopravnega okvirja terorizma OZN in za posledično večji poudarek na spoštovanju temeljnih pravic, ki jih zagotavlja Evropska konvencija o človekovih pravicah. ; ABSTRACT INTERNATIONAL PROSECUTION AND HUMAN RIGHTS OF FOREIGN TERRORIST FIGHTERS Author: Rok Petročnik Mentor: Vasilka Sancin, PhD, Professor In master's thesis i explored the emergence of the foreign terrorist fighter phenomenona, international prosecution of foreign terrorist fighters, and the violation of the fundamental rights of foreign terrorist fighters in domestic prosecutions. UN Security Council in 2014 adopted Resolution 2178 under Chapter VII of the UN Charter. However, while the Resolution outlines the description of a foreign terrorist fighter, it fails to distinguish between armed conflicts and terrorism. Resolution 2178 defines foreign terrorist fighters as individuals who travel to a state other than their states of residence or nationality for the purpose of the perpetration, planning, or preparation of, or participation in, terrorist acts or the providing or receiving of terrorist training, including in connection with armed conflict, while foreign fighter is an individual who travels abroad with intention to join armed conflict. The research led to the conclusion that there is currently no international prosecution of foreign terrorist fighters because states carry it out before national courts. UN Security Council has placed the burden of prosecuting foreign terrorist fighters on UN Member States by establishing different committees monitoring the implementation of the Security Council sanctions, such as the 1267 Committee and the Analytical Support and Sanctions Monitoring Team. In the cases of Nada, Ahmed and Abdelrazik, national courts due to violations of fundamental rights, repealed national administrative acts that introduced the adopted UN Security Council counter terrorism resolutions. The Court of Justice of the EU made a similar decision in the case of Kadi by repealing the regulation introducing the UN Security Council sanctions. Judgements of national and EU courts were the main factor in changing the UN terrorism framework in terms of international law, thus shifting the focus on the respect of fundamental rights as guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights.