Suchergebnisse

Na osnovu analize izvornih arhivskih dokumenata i propisa objavljenih u službenim listovima, opisuje se djelokrug, ustroj i sastav Prezidijuma Sabora NRH. Njegovi temelji postavljeni su u radu Zemaljskog antifašističkog vijeća narodnog oslobođenja Hrvatske (ZAVNOH), odnosno njegova Predsjedništva, koje je kao uže tijelo plenuma osnovano 9. svibnja 1944. godine. Na Četvrtom zasjedanju održanom 24. i 25. srpnja 1945. u Zagrebu, ZAVNOH je promijenio naziv u Narodni sabor Hrvatske, a njegovo Predsjedništvo od tada djeluje kao Predsjedništvo Narodnog sabora Hrvatske. U razdoblju 1945.–1953. njegovo djelovanje može se podijeliti u četiri mandatna razdoblja: Predsjedništvo Narodnog sabora Hrvatske/Prezidijum Sabora NRH (25. srpnja 1945.–30. studenoga 1946.), Prezidijum Ustavotvornog sabora NRH (30. studenoga 1946.–20. siječnja 1947.), Prezidijum Sabora NRH prvoga saziva (20. siječnja 1947.–4. prosinca 1950.) i Prezidijum Sabora NRH drugoga saziva (4. prosinca 1950.–6. veljače 1953.). U prvom dijelu rada opisuje se osnivanje i prestanak rada Prezidijuma Sabora, u drugom njegov djelokrug, a u trećem ustroj i sastav po mandatnim razdobljima. Njegov ustroj i djelokrug uspoređeni su s ustrojem i djelokrugom Prezidijuma Narodne skupštine FNRJ i prezidijuma drugih jugoslavenskih republika. Rezultati istraživanja prezentirani su kombinacijom tematskog i kronološkog pristupa, a dijelom su sistematizirani u obliku tabelarnih prikaza. ; This paper describes the scope, structure and the composition of the Presidium of Parliament of the People's Republic of Croatia (PRC) which was active as a political governmental body in Croatia from 1945 to 1953. According to the Yugoslav constitutional system of government, the same political body existed on the federal level as the Presidium of the People's Assembly of the Federal People's Republic of Yugoslavia (FPRY), as well as in every republic-member of the Yugoslav federation and the scope, organization and composition of the Presidium of Parliament are compared with the scope, organization and composition of those bodies. The foundations of the activities of the Presidium of Parliament, as well as other central governmental institutions in Croatia (namely, Parliament, Government, and Supreme Court) were laid in the work of the State Anti-Fascist Council for the National Liberation of Croatia (ZAVNOH) i.e. its Presidency, since until the end of the war they together performed the legislative, executive and judiciary government. During the 4th session that took place in Zagreb from 24 to 25 July 1945 ZAVNOH changed is title to the People's Parliament of Croatia and since then its Presidency worked as the Presidency of the People's Parliament of Croatia. In the period from 1945 to 1953 its activity can be divided into four mandate periods: the Presidency of the People's Parliament of Croatia/the Presidium of the Parliament of the PRC (25 July 1945–30 November 1946), the Presidium of the Constituent Parliament of the PRC (30 November 1946–20 January 1947), the Presidium of the 1st Session of the Parliament of the PRC (20 January 1947–4 December 1950) and the Presidium of the 2nd Session of the Parliament of the PRC (4 December 1950–6 February 1953). Its existence in the system of governmental power is the result of taking over the Soviet constitutional solutions about organizing the state and governmental institutions in the 1946 constitution of the FPRY and through it also in the constitutions of each federal unit. It was the main legislative body in the period until the constituting of the Constituent Parliament of the PRC, since the Parliament of the PRC only had a single short five-day session in late August 1946. This is confirmed by the information about 29 laws passed by the Presidium of Parliament in the period from 8 September 1945 to 20 November 1946. Besides legislative, it also performed other functions from the jurisdiction then belonging to the Parliament. The constitution of the PRC from 1946 bestowed upon it performing tasks that are usually given to the president of the state (representing in the country the people's and state sovereignty of the PRC, calling the general elections, granting pardons, awarding medals and recognitions), as well as other executive tasks partly closely linked to the legislative activities. The special function pertained to supervising the people's committees. The important difference in the scope in relation to the Presidium of the People's Assembly of the FPRY was that it did not have the authority in the area of foreign affairs. Even though the constitution of the PRC from January 1947 lists it together with the Parliament in the chapter on the highest bodies of the governmental power in Croatia, the sources and constitutional-legal texts of the time, in accordance with the principle of unity of power, define it as a body which "stems from the Parliament" and is subordinated to it. Also, despite being formally constitutionally defined as one of the highest bodies of governmental power in Croatia, in reality it was the Party's transmission, since the actual power and monopoly in decisionmaking was in the hands of the bodies of the Communist Party of Yugoslavia/the League of Communists of Yugoslavia i.e. the Communist Party of Croatia/the League of Communists of Croatia. It was a collegiate body comprised of members of the Parliament. The decision of its composition was formally passed by the Parliament, but based on the conclusions reached during sessions of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the League of Communists of Croatia. It was elected for the same term as the Parliament, but it continued to perform its duties after the dissolution of the Parliament, until the election of the new Presidium of Parliament. From 1945 to 1953 the total of 45 MPs were included in its activities. 13 of them were members during all four mandate terms, 11 during two and 14 during only one. The structure and the way of work were determined by the Rulebook dated from 7 August 1947. They were the exact copy of the structure and the way of work of the Presidium of the People's Assembly of the FPRY, with differences deriving from different jurisdictions (federal, republic) of these two bodies.

Autori u radu daju osvrt na postanak i razvitak stanarskog prava, te presjek domaćih pravnih propisa koji su se odnosili na stanarsko pravo, kao i propisa kojima je izvršena pretvorba stambenih odnosa. Pišu o značaju stupanja na snagu Zakona o najmu, kada je prestalo stanarsko pravo osobama koje su to pravo stekle prema ranijim propisima te su one po sili zakona postale najmoprimci (u pravilu, zaštićeni najmoprimci). Podsjećaju da pitanja vezana uz pretvorbu iz stanarskog prava u vlasništvo na stanovima te brojni sudski sporovi koji su proizašli iz te materije još uvijek nisu, niti stvarna niti sudska, prošlost. Autori navode stajališta i praksu Ustavnog suda Republike Hrvatske, te Europskog suda za ljudska prava (ESLJP). Posebno ističu presudu ESLJP-a Statileo protiv Hrvatske, u kojoj je Europski sud uvažio činjenicu da su hrvatske vlasti tijekom tranzicije bile suočene s teškim zadatkom stvaranja ravnoteže između prava najmodavaca i zaštićenih najmoprimaca koji su stanovali u stanovima dugo vremena, te je zaključio da u konkretnom slučaju nije postojala pravedna raspodjela socijalnog i financijskog tereta koji je nastao kao posljedica reforme u stambenom sektoru. Umjesto toga, prema ocjeni ESLJP-a, na podnositelja je stavljen nerazmjeran i pretjerani pojedinačni teret, budući da je morao snositi većinu socijalnih i financijskih troškova stambenog zbrinjavanja zaštićene najmoprimke i njezine obitelji, zbog čega je ESLJP utvrdio povredu članka 1. Protokola br. 1. ; The authors of this paper provide an overview of the creation and development of tenancy rights, and of the domestic legislation dealing with tenancy rights, as well as legislation that was used to reform tenancy relations. They mention the significance of the enactment of the Lease of Flats Act, when tenancy rights were withdrawn from persons who were entitled to that right pursuant to earlier legislation, and consequently, they became lessees (tenants) by force of law (generally, protected lessees). The authors recall that issues related to the transformation of tenancy rights into ownership of flats and to the numerous court cases that followed from this matter have not yet become either general, or court, history. The authors cite the positions and case law of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Croatia, and of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). They stress in particular the ECtHR judgment Statileo v. Croatia, where the ECtHR took into consideration the fact that the Croatian authorities during the transition were faced with the difficult task of striking a balance between the right of the lessor and that of protected lessees who had lived in the flats for a long time, and concluded that in the given case there was no fair distribution of the social and financial burden resulting from the reform of the housing sector. Rather, the ECtHR held that a disproportionate and excessive individual burden was placed on the applicant as landlord, as he was required to bear most of the social and financial costs of providing housing for the protected lessee and her family, due to which the ECtHR found a violation of Article 1 of Protocol no. 1.

U legitimiranju komunističke vlasti u Hrvatskoj/Jugoslaviji nakon Drugog svjetskog rata važnu ulogu imale su i tradicionalne institucije zakonodavne, izvršne i sudbene vlasti. Njihovo oblikovanje u Federalnoj Državi/Narodnoj Republici Hrvatskoj započelo je 1943. te je nastavljeno do donošenja Ustava NRH 18. siječnja 1947., kojim dobivaju ustavnu potvrdu. U odnosu na njihove ustavne pozicije, u dosadašnjim istraživanjima poslijeratnog političkog sustava u Hrvatskoj zaključeno je da su stvarnu vlast i monopol odlučivanja imala najviša tijela KPJ, tj. KPH. Pri tome stvarni položaj i uloga središnjih državnih tijela u funkcioniranju političkog sustava vlasti u Hrvatskoj nakon 1945. do sada nisu sustavno istraženi te se ovim radom daje doprinos na tom području. Prezentiraju se rezultati istraživanja organizacije i djelovanja Sabora NRH u sustavu vlasti u Hrvatskoj u razdoblju formalnog federalizma i stvarnog centralizma (1945. – 1953.). Postavljeno je više istraživačkih ciljeva: odnos između njegova formalnog ustavnog (de iure) i stvarnog (de facto) položaja u sustavu vlasti, ustroj, sastav, zakonodavna djelatnost i druge funkcije, odnosi s KPH/SKH i republičkim institucijama vlasti, te utjecaj njegova djelovanja na svakodnevni život stanovništva. Njegova organizacija i djelovanje uspoređeni su s organizacijom i djelovanjem Narodne skupštine FNRJ, institucija zakonodavne vlasti drugih jugoslavenskih republika, te drugih država u kojima je bila uspostavljena komunistička vlast, ponajprije Ruske Sovjetske Federativne Socijalističke Republike (RSFSR) i Saveza Sovjetskih Socijalističkih Republika (SSSR). Postavljeno je nekoliko hipoteza koje su istraživanjem i potvrđene: ustavni položaj vrhovnog tijela državne vlasti u Hrvatskoj Sabor NRH nije ostvarivao u praksi; bio je organiziran po uzoru na Narodnu skupštinu FNRJ; njegova zakonodavna djelatnost nije uključivala stvarnu raspravu, već samo formalno normiranje prethodno definiranih političkih ciljeva i ideja KPH/SKH; u Saboru NRH nije bilo pluralizma političkoga mišljenja; građani su se obraćali Saboru NRH prvenstveno s ciljem ostvarivanja osobnih prava, ponajprije socijalnih. Osnovne metode korištene u istraživanju su kritička analiza izvora i komparativna metoda. Rezultati su prezentirani kombinacijom tematskog i kronološkog pristupa, a u pojedinim poglavljima sistematizirani su u obliku grafičkih i tabličnih prikaza. Doktorskim radom daje se doprinos boljem poznavanju institucija i političkog sustava vlasti FD/NRH u razdoblju 1945. – 1953. Istraživanje može biti poticaj sličnim istraživanjima i u drugim bivšim jugoslavenskim republikama. Omogućuje se usporedba s političkim sustavima vlasti u drugim europskim državama u kojima je bila uspostavljena komunistička vlast. ; The important role in legitimising the communist system of government in Croatia/Yugoslavia after the Second World War was played by the traditional institutions of legislative, executive and judicial government. Their organization in Federal State / People's Republic of Croatia began in 1943, and continued until the Constitution of the People's Republic of Croatia adoption on 18th January 1947, which gave them constitutional confirmation. As the supreme state governing institutions were declared People's Republic of Croatia's Parliament and its Presidium; Government of the People's Republic of Croatia was declared as the supreme executive and administrative governing institution, and Supreme Court of the People's Republic of Croatia was declared as the supreme judicial institution. In relation to their constitutional position, in previous researches of post-war political system in Croatia, was concluded that the real authority and decision-making monopoly had the highest body of the Communist Party of Yugoslavia, ie. Communist Party of Croatia. In doing so, the actual position and the role of republic governmental institutions in the communist system of government in Croatia after 1945 haven't been systematically researched, and this doctoral thesis makes a contribution in this scope. The doctoral thesis presents the results of researching the organisation and activity of People's Republic of Croatia's Parliament during the period of formal federalism and actual centralism (1945 – 1953). The aim is to explain the realation between the constitutional and actual position of the Parliament in the communist system of government, its structure, composition, legislative activity, relations with the Communist Party of Croatia/League of Communists of Croatia and republic governmental institutions, as well as the influence of its activities on everyday lives of the population. Parliament's organisation and activity is also compared to the organisation and activity of the National Assembly of Yugoslavia, as well as with legislative institutions of the former Yugoslavian republics and other European states with established communist rule, primarily Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic (RSFSR) and Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). A number of hypotheses are confirmed by research: the constitutional position of the supreme state governing institution, Parliament of the People's Republic of Croatia didn't achieve in practice; it was organized on the model of the National Assembly of Yugoslavia; its legislative activity didn't include the actual debate, but only a formal adoption and promulgation of pre-defined political goals and ideas of the Communist Party of Croatia/League of Communist of Croatia; in People's Republic of Croatia'a Parliament, there wasn't pluralism of political opinion; citizens addressed the Parliament, primarily with the aim of solving personal problems, especially social. Main methods used in research were critical analysis of resources (notably original, unpublished archival documents) and comparative method. The research results are presented by a combination of thematic and chronological approach. In certain chapters, they are systematized in the form of graphical and tabular overviews. Doctoral thesis is structured as follows. In the first, introductory chapter are explained the research topic, main goals, hypotheses and scientific contribution, methodology, as well as literature and resources used in the research. The chapter gives an overview of the previous researches relevant to the topic, and the classification of legislatures in such researches. The second chapter gives an overview of the Yugoslav/Croatian communist system of government and the position of legislatures in this system in theory. There are explained the main characteristics of the then revolutionary ideology of the ruling Communist Party, as well as formal constitutional provision. They are compared with the main characteristics of the Soviet communist system of government. It also gives an overview of the classical Marxist theory about the state, government and legislatures, and demonstrates how it was used in the writings and speeches of Yugoslav theoreticians and politicians. The third and fourth chapter give an overview of the People's Republic of Croatia's Parliament organization and activity in practice, divided into two chronological periods: until the adoption of the People's Republic of Croatia's Constitution in January 1947, and thereafter up in 1953. The fifth, concluding chapter, summarizes the main research results. Chapter six contains several appendixes: the results of parliamentary elections in Croatia 1946, 1947 and 1950; a list of councilors, ie. representatives in State Anti-fascist Council for the National Liberation of Croatia and in People's Republic of Croatia's Parliament 1943 – 1953; a list of members of the Presidium of the Parliament of the People's Republic of Croatia 1945 – 1953; a list of representatives from Croatia in Constituent Assembly of the Democratic Federal Yugoslavia / National Assembly of the Federal People's Republic of Yugoslavia 1945 – 1953; a list of laws adopted by the National Assembly of the Federal People's Republic of Yugoslavia 1946 – 1953; a list of tables and figures used in doctoral thesis). Seventh chapter contains a list of sources and literature used in the research. Doctoral thesis contributes to better understanding of institutions and the political system of government in Croatia in the period 1945 – 1953. Comparative approach in the presentation of research results, gives a contribution to knowledge of the political system of government and central governing institutions in the former Yugoslavia, as well in the other former Yugoslavian republics. At the same time, it can be a impulse for similar researces in those states. It also enables comparation with the political systems of government and legislatures in other European states with established communist rule. Through the analysis of the influence of its activities on everyday lives of the population, it gives contribution to the history of everyday life in communist Croatia and Yugoslavia.

Kroz prikaz povijesti plemićke obitelji Adamović Čepinski tekst pridonosi poznavanju kulturne, gospodarske i političke povijesti prostora današnje Hrvatske, ali i Slovenije, Srbije, Austrije te Bosne i Hercegovine. Adamovići su početkom 18. stoljeća upravljali Valpovačkim vlastelinstvom, a potom u Slavoniji i Podunavlju posjedovali imanja Čepin, Tenje, Aljmaš, Erdut, Bačko Novo Selo. S vremenom se obitelj podijelila na čepinsku i tenjsku granu. U tekstu se donose manje poznati podatci iz povijesti tenjske grane obitelji Adamović, koja je od sredine 19. stoljeća posjedovala imanje sa sjedištem u Velenju (Slovenija), a obiteljskim vezama bila u bliskim odnosima s brojnim plemićkim obiteljima Austro-Ugarske Monarhije. Uz sintezu dosadašnjih publiciranih istraživanja, rad se temelji na informacijama i arhivskom gradivu nasljednika ove obitelji koji su i danas povezani s Hrvatskom. ; The noble family of Adamović Čepinski was from the 18th century in possession of the Čepin, Tenje, Aljmaš and Erdut estates in Slavonia and Podunavlje as well as of some estates in Bačka; over the course of time, it split into the Čepin and Tenje factions. This text provides less known and yet unexplored data on the history of the Tenje family faction which from the 19th century owned an estate that had its seat in Velenje (Slovenia). They left significant traces in economic, cultural and political life and constituted a connection between present-day eastern Croatia and Slovenia at the time when these areas belonged to the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy, i.e. to the same constitutional and cultural circle. Although they sold the Tenje estate in the late 19th century, they remained connected to the estates in Erdut, Bačko Novo Selo and Ostrožac; after they sold Velenje, they continued to live there up until World War II. They strengthened their social position additionally through marital ties between notable families the relations of which reached to the Viennese Court, the Russian Imperial Court and the Court of Victorian England. A significant family bond was created with the politician and landlord Ervin Cseh de Szent-Katolna, the grand prefect of the Syrmia County. His stepson Ivan Albrecht Baron Adamović of Čepin was also prefect of the Syrmia and subsequently the Virovitica County. After World War II the family was deprived of all its estates in then Yugoslavia; however, after decades in exile the heirs were able to reclaim their estates in Croatia in part.

U radu se istražuju ustroj i djelovanje Izvršnog vijeća Sabora NRH, republičkog izvršnog tijela vlasti, u razdoblju od njegova osnivanja Ustavnim zakonom NRH 1953. godine do donošenja novog Ustava SRH 1963. godine. U navedenom razdoblju rad Izvršnog vijeća prati se kroz tri mandatna razdoblja: prvo 6.2.-18.12.1953, drugo 18.12.1953.-10.4.1958. te treće mandatno razdoblje 10.4.1958.-27.6.1963. godine. Istraživanje se prvenstveno temelji na analizi arhivskoga gradiva fondova Izvršno vijeće Sabora SRH 1953-1990. i Sabor SRH 1945-1982. u Hrvatskom državnom arhivu te zakona, podzakonskih propisa i drugih akata objavljenih u službenim listovima (Narodne novine, Službeni list FNRJ). U prvom dijelu rada analiziraju se odredbe o postupku izbora Izvršnog vijeća te donosi pregled i popisi izabranih članova po mandatnim razdobljima. U nastavku rada naglasak je na definiranju poslova iz stručne nadležnosti, te pregledu organizacije i rekonstrukciji unutarnjeg ustroja Izvršnog vijeća (upravljanje Izvršnim vijećem, stručna tijela: odbori i komisije, administracija Izvršnog vijeća). U posljednjem poglavlju analiziraju se osnovna obilježja i rezultati rada Izvršnog vijeća u promatranom razdoblju, s posebnim osvrtom na rad u sjednicama, pripremanje prijedloga zakona, te donošenje podzakonskih propisa i drugih akata iz njegove nadležnosti. ; The article presents Executive Council of Parliament of the People's Republic of Croatia (1953-1963), as one of the central governing institutions, with special interest i n its organization, functions and activity. The first chapter gives an overview of the provisions about constitution and procedure of members' election. It was constituted by 15 to 30 members, elected from members of the Republican Chamber of the Parliament of the People's Republic of Croatia. Three mandate periods were established within which the activity of the Executive Council should be monitored: The first mandate from 6th February till 18th December 1953, the second mandate from 18th December 1953 till 10th April 1958 and the third mandate from 10th April 1958 till 27th June 1963. The same chapter brings the list of all members organized according to mandates. The second chapter gives an overview of the functions defined in regulations. According to the provisions of Constitutional Law from 1953, it is defined which functions has the Executive Council taken over from the authority of the abrogated Government of the People's Republic of Croatia and Presidium of the Parliament of the People's Republic of Croatia. Further analysis points that in period from 1953 to 1956 Executive Council was acting as executive-administrative body and from 1956 to 1963 primarily as executive-political body. In 1956, due to the reorganisation of the public administration, the majority of administrative functions until then under the jurisdiction of the Executive Council were transferred to the authority of the Republic's governing bodies. According to that, Executive Council acts primarily as executive-political body, under which authority is enforcement of general politics and measures, as well as adoption of acts and putting precise tasks to governing bodies for their accomplishment. The next chapter gives an analysis of its organization, divided in three parts: guidance of Executive Council, working bodies (boards and commissions) and administrative and professional service. The last chapter gives an analysis of the activity of Executive Council. It is concluded that the most of the activity concerns the discussion of questions, preparation of laws and adoption of acts related to economy and finances, organization of central Republic's institutions, republican and regional (local) governing bodies, as well as education, science and culture. Less activity concerned the discussion of questions, preparation of laws and adoption of acts related to other administrative fields, first of all, system of justice and home affairs, health care system and social policy, as well as labour relations.

Djelovanje Hrvatskog sabora u komunističkom razdoblju (1945.-1990.) nije cjelovito obrađena tema. Ovim člankom daje se prilog poznavanju njegove organizacije u razdoblju od 1963. do 1974. godine. Detaljno je opisana razgranata struktura i aktivnost njegovih pet vijeća (Republičko, Privredno, Prosvjetno-kulturno, Socijalnozdravstveno i Organizaciono-političko) i radnih tijela, koju ilustrira i broj održanih sjednica. Između ostalog, to je trebalo pokazivati položaj Sabora kao formalno najvišeg tijela vlasti, odnosno centra u kojem se donose najvažnije političke odluke o svim područjima života u Hrvatskoj. U vezi s tim, naznačena je potreba za detaljnom analizom odnosa između formalnog (de iure) i stvarnog (de facto) položaja Sabora u tadašnjem političkom sustavu vlasti, kako bi se odgovorilo na pitanje je li, na koji način i u kojoj mjeri taj položaj bio oslabljen u odnosu na druga državna politička tijela (ponajprije Izvršno vijeće Sabora), odnosno instrumentaliziran od strane središnjih tijela Saveza komunista Jugoslavije/Hrvatske. Rezultati istraživanja prezentirani su kombinacijom tematskog i kronološkog pristupa, a na kraju članka sistematizirani su u obliku tabličnog prikaza. ; The organisation and the activities of the Croatian Parliament in the communist period (1945-1990) is not a fully researched topic. The paper gives a contribution to the knowledge of its organisation in the period from 1963 to 1974. Its branched structure and the activities of its councils and working bodies are described in detail, which is also illustrated by the number of held sessions. By the Yugoslavian constitution adopted in April 1963, also called "the charter of selfmanagement", the name of the state was changed from People's to Socialist, its socialist attributes were emphasized, and selfmanagement was introduced in all segments of the society. By the new republican constitutions, such changes were also carried out in all then-existing Yugoslavian republics, including Croatia. In the forefront were placed »the sovereign rights of the working people and the Yugoslavian nations which they exercise«, inter alia, as representatives of the working people in councils of federal and republican assemblies. It had affected the organisation of the highest formal political institutions of the government, including federal and republican assemblies, which were declared as »the highest state and self-government authorities, under the law and obligations« of federation, i.e. the republic. The declarative constitutional concept on the assemblies as the highest state and self-government authorities implied the shift in their organisation and activities from the traditional legislative bodies and »law factories« towards »the responsible policy holders«. In other words, »becoming the working selfgovernment bodies«, assemblies were meant to become the centres in which »the whole social practice and harmonised politics is gathered«. Thus, for example, by the constitution of the Socialist Republic of Croatia from April 1963, it was declared that the Parliament (Sabor) can discuss and adopt declarations and resolutions »on all issues of common interest for the Republic [.] laying down values on politics in certain area and the means of its achievement«. The Croatian Parliament's Rules of Procedure from 1965 provided the possibility of convening a General Croatian Conference (Opći sabor Hrvatske), i.e. joint sessions »on all issues of the common interest for the Republic« of all of Parliament's councils with the Central Committee of the Socialist League of Working People of Croatia and the Republican Committee for Croatia of the Association of Trade Unions in Yugoslavia. The main characteristic of the organisation of the Croatian Parliament in the period from 1963 to 1974 was its complex structure. In order to express its working character and central role in the political decision-making process in all spheres of life in Croatia, it was organised as a five-cameral institution. It was the highest number of its chambers in the whole socialist period: until 1953 it was unicameral, in the period 1953-1963 bicameral, and in the period 1974-1990 a three-cameral institution. Those five chambers were: the Republican Council, the Economic Council, the Educational and Cultural Council, the Social and Health Council and the Organisational and Political Council. The Republican Council had 120 representatives, directly elected by the municipal assemblies and citizens. The other four councils had 80 representatives each, elected by the municipal assemblies among the workers across the working areas within the competence of each council. Except the Presidency of Parliament and its five councils, during the whole period 110 different permanent or temporary working bodies were established. Of that total, there were 27 joint working bodies of Parliament as a whole; the Republican Council had 20, the Economic Council 14, the Educational and Cultural Council 15, the Social and Health Council 18, and the Organisational and Political Council 16 permanent or temporary working bodies. The Parliament's councils and working bodies held in total 3 960 sessions, i.e. 360 per year. By comparison, in the period 1947-1953 during which it was organised as a unicameral body, the Parliament and its working bodies held in total 220 sessions (around 30 per year). In the period 1953- 1963 during which it was organised as a bicameral body, the Parliament and its working bodies held in total 1224 sessions, i.e. around 120 per year. More detailed data on the number of sessions held in the analysed period are listed in the table at the end of this paper. The table also includes a systematic overview of all working bodies which were described earlier in this paper, llustrating at the same time the dynamics of changes in their establishment and elimination. Some authors describe the Parliamentary institutions in the communist states with the metaphor rubber stamp legislatures, meaning the institutions with small practical power in the political decisionmaking process, which automatically put a stamp on the legislative proposals of their governments, i.e. communist parties as the real owners of the political power. Some of the researches singled out as exceptions the Polish Sejm and the Yugoslavian Federal Assembly (in the frame of the political system established by the Yugoslavian constitution from 1974). That opens a new research topic about whether the Croatian Parliament in the period 1963-1974 was also "a paradoxical institution" or an exception. In other words, the relation between the formal (de iure) and the real (de facto) position of Croatian Parliament in the political system of that time should be more closely researched, as well as to find whether its position was weakened, in what way and to what extent by the comparison with other state political institutions (notably the Executive Council of Parliament of the Socialist Republic of Croatia), i.e. instrumentalized by the central bodies of the League of Communist of Yugoslavia/Croatia.

Glavni cilj disertacije je analizirati ideologiju glavnih predstavnika radikalne desnice u Poljskoj. Ova doktorska disertacija dizajnirana je kao studija slučaja unutar okvira kulturalnog pristupa u političkim znanostima. Kao metoda istraživanja odabrana je kombinacija kvalitativne analize sadržaja i konceptualne analize ideologije Michaela Freedena. Iako je najveći fokus istraživanja na dvjema političkim strankama (Zakon i pravda i Liga poljskih obitelji) kao glavnim predstavnicima radikalno desne političke scene u Poljskoj, istraživanje se bavi i drugim akterima, prije svega organizacijama civilnog društva, društvenim pokretima i medijima, koji sudjeluju u konstruiranju i promoviranju ideologije radikalne desnice. Pritom istraživanje nije ograničeno na sadržaj ideologije i aktere koji tu ideologiju promoviraju, već ono uključuje i analizu procesa putem kojih se ideologija radikalne desnice eksplicira i formulira, kao i analizu dinamičnih odnosa među akterima procesa proizvodnje ideologije doprinoseći istraživanju ideologije radikalne desnice kao i istraživanju procesa konstruiranja političkih ideologija općenito. Kao polazište za navedenu analizu u disertaciji se koristi ponešto modificirana definicija radikalne desnice poznatog politologa Casa Muddea prema kojoj su konstitutivna obilježja radikalne desnice integralni nacionalizam, autoritarnost i populizam. Analizom je utvrđeno kako su sve tri ideološke karakteristike tipične za radikalnu desnicu prisutne kod glavnih aktera istraživanih u ovoj disertaciji. Na tragu konceptualne analize, ova disertacija je pokazala kako središnji konstitutivni koncept radikalno desne ideologije u Poljskoj predstavlja nacija, i kako svi ostali okolni koncepti detektirani analizom, poput solidarnosti, jednakosti šansi, pravde, demokracije, slobode, zadobivaju svoje značenje na temelju svog odnosa prema središnjem konstitutivnom obilježju ideologije. ; In the last thirty years or so, the influence of the radical right has been constantly growing throughout Europe. This political success has been accompanied by an increasingly intensive scientific research on the phenomenon of the radical right, which has resulted in several studies that address various aspects of the radical right phenomenon in Europe. Paradoxically, despite such an abundance of research papers, their review suggests that there are relatively few papers that have a systematic and in-depth approach to the political ideology of the radical right. This doctoral dissertation fills this research gap and focuses on the political ideology of the radical right, taking into account the thesis of the well-known researcher of political ideologies Michael Freeden, that political ideologies are the center of political analysis because the study of ideologies can provide relevant insights necessary for understanding politics and political processes. In the context of the debate on the wave of radicalism in Europe, Poland is a particularly interesting case. Firstly, it is the largest and most populous post-communist country that became a member of the EU and a country in which the radical right won three parliamentary and three presidential elections between 2005 and 2020. Secondly, in academic papers and media Poland is often portrayed as an example of a country that has successfully gone through the process of transformation to liberal democracy and as an example of the most successful transition economy in Europe. The Polish case is also interesting because it is a a country with more than 90% of declared Catholics and where, primarily due to historical development, Catholicism plays a significant role in political, social, and cultural life; it has become a key component of the Polish national identity. In contrast to Western European countries, in Poland Political Catholicism, did not spark the development of strong Christian- Democratic parties, it rather gave rise to radical right-wing parties instead. In addition to cultural factors, historical heritage is often considered a fertile ground for the emergence of this type of parties, especially its influence on political processes and on the processes of building a national identity. Namely, the Polish historical heritage, specifically the one related to the 20th century, was marked by a short period of democratic rule (1918-1925), and two long periods of authoritarian rule, that of Jozef Pilsudski (1925 to 1939), and that of the communist authoritarians (1945 to 1989). Thus, the main goal of the dissertation is to analyze the ideology of the main representatives of the radical right in Poland by exploring its discursive manifestations, as well as the way in which the radical right ideology is produced. This doctoral dissertation is designed as a case study within the framework of a cultural approach in political sciences. The cultural approach is characterized by the insistence on the importance of context, which, on the other hand, makes it difficult to define clear independent, dependent, and intervening variables. Therefore, in the cultural approach, a case is most often taken as the analytical unit taking into consideration all the complexity of its historical and socio-political distinctiveness. Qualitative content analysis was chosen as the research method, and conceptual analysis of Michael Freeden's ideology was added to it, since this approach allows us to better understand the morphology of ideologies and their operationalization in politics. The first chapter is about the theoretical and methodological framework. Since the concept of the radical right is one of the deeply contested concepts which there is no consensus about in political science, and since the aim of this doctoral dissertation is to explain this concept, the first part of the chapter consists of a review and analysis of recent literature. The notion of the radical right was analyzed through comparison with related terms such as the extreme right, right-wing populism, and the far right. As a starting point for analysis in the dissertation, a somewhat modified definition of the radical right by the well-known political scientist Cas Mudde is used. According to him, the constitutive features of the radical right are integral nationalism, authoritarianism, and populism. Like the concept of the radical right, the concept of ideology is also ambivalent and can be understood in different ways which result in multiple uses of the term ideology which are often contradictory. This doctoral dissertation is largely based on the morphological approach to the study of ideology developed by Michael Freeden. The second chapter deals with the history of Poland before 1989. The first part of the chapter explains the early context of the emergence of Polish nationalism, which has its roots in the 'noble democracy' of the 17th century, as well as in the national struggles for independence of the 19th century. However, the chapter focuses on two periods that significantly influenced the emergence and growth of Polish political nationalism in the early 2000s. The first is the interwar period (1918-1939) in which two traditions of Polish political thought, Sanacja and Endeca, crystallized, and from which two visions of the Polish nation, national identity, and the nation-state, emerged. The second period is after the Second World War, i.e., the period of the People's Republic of Poland in which the legitimization and institutionalization of the nationalist discourse take place. Equally, in this period there emerged and formed social groups with different visions of the Polish state after the fall of communism. The third chapter deals with the transformation of the People's Republic of Poland into the The third Republic and with an account of political and social events in the first decade after the fall of communism. This chapter sheds light on the political and social context within which the dominant social divisions in Polish society emerged, which in large part resulted in the evolution of radical right-wing parties in the early 2000s. In particular, the very nature of the transformation process emerged as the main subject of dispute. Namely, the Polish right believes that due to the contractual transformation of the system, the 'revolution' is not over and that the left-liberal groups have made an agreement with the former communist establishment. They believe that the Third Republic is a product of this agreement and that it serves the left-liberal and former communist elites to maintain positions of power and rule the The third Republic to the detriment of the oppressed people. This conspiratorial narrative represents the foundation around which the politics and ideology of the radical right have been built in Poland since 2000. The fourth chapter deals with the emergence and profiling of two radical right-wing parties, Law and Justice (Polish: Prawo I Sprawiedliwość – PiS) and the League of Polish Families (Polish: Liga Polskich Rodzin – LPR) . The chapter is structured in such a way as to first present the history of the formation of these parties, with an emphasis on the main actors who participated as the originators and implementers of these projects. In both cases, these are largely the 'family projects' of the Kaczynski brothers (Law and Justice) and father and son Giertych (League of Polish Families). From the Kaczynskis' biographies, it is obvious that they come from an environment dominated by the legacy of Sanacja, while father and son Giertych openly presents themselves as the heirs of the interwar Endecja. After presenting their political activities and the first successes in the elections, the ideology of these two parties is reconstructed, primarily from their programs and other party publications. The research showed that until 2005 both parties contained all the constitutive elements of the radical right according to Mudde's conceptualization. While these constitutive elements have been present in the League of Polish Families since its founding, the party Law and Justice gradually became radicalized. This period, at least from the perspectives of PiS and LPR, is dominated by the conflict between the post-communist elites (former communists and left-liberal intellectuals) gathered around the left Democratic Left Alliance (Polish: Sojusz Lewicy Demokratycznej, SLD) and the so-called "patriotic' camp that emerged from Solidarity. This chapter also covers the period between 2005 and 2007 when these two parties, together with the Self-Defense party, formed a government that lasted less than two years. This first, shorter coming to power of the radical right in Poland is not important because of the public policies they pursued during that period, but because of the experience and lessons gained by PiS during its rule in the liberal democratic system. Namely, after 2007, the LPR disappeared from the Polish political scene, leaving the PiS as the only relevant political actor of the radical right. The fifth chapter covers the period between 2007 and 2015. It is the period of rule by the Civic Platform (Polish: Platforma Obywatelska, PO), a center-right party with strong pro-EU views and liberal economic and social policies. Due to the disappearance of the left from the Polish political scene, the main social and political conflict underwent a radical change. PiS formulated a new conflict – the struggle between solidarity and liberal or corporate Poland – and built its ideology around this conflict. This period in Polish political and social life was marked by the immigration crisis that hit Europe and the debate on the acceptance of the Council of Europe Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women, the so-called Istanbul Convention. Both topics as well as the pro-European orientation of the PO government led to the mobilization of radical right-wing social groups and media that skillfully occupied public space by successfully imposing their topics on the public agenda. As this dissertation will show, PiS has adapted its discourse to that of radical right-wing organizations and has successfully presented itself as their political representative. On the one hand, this 'alliance' helped the PiS succeed in the 2015 presidential and parliamentary elections, while on the other it marked the further radicalization of the PiS, especially when it comes to issues of morals and values. The sixth chapter deals with the period between 2015 and 2020. During that period, the PiS won both the presidential and the parliamentary elections twice. This chapter emphasizes how PiS translates its ideology into public policies. Namely, during this period PiS focused its efforts on two projects: 'repairing the state' and rebuilding the community (nation). The first project was marked by the judicial reform and the crisis related to the Constitutional Court; it aimed to strengthen the executive branch to the detriment of other branches of government. The PiS community reconstruction project was conceived as a change in the material and spiritual dimension of the community. The first is mostly related to social policies, the emphasis being on family policies. Changes in the spiritual dimension imply changes in cultural policy, within which there has been a reform of public media and the announcement of the "recolonization" of private media. In changing the spiritual dimension, PiS placed special emphasis on the defense of the traditional way of life on the one hand, and on the politics of history on the other, in which the Institute of National Remembrance played an exceptional role. The seventh chapter takes the form of a final discussion in which the basic theses of the radical right ideology in Poland are reconstructed. The aim of this discussion is to position the topic of this dissertation within the framework of a broader theoretical discussion between liberals and their critics. Finally, the conclusion summarizes the main research results in this doctoral dissertation and points to the possible direction of future research, especially research of countries with a strong radical right and with a similar historical and cultural heritage. Equally, the conclusion points to the fact that this dissertation has not fully answered the research question related to finding out how ideology is constructed, and the actors involved in the process. Namely, the problem was the research design and selection of the analysis method. The conclusion is that a more complete answer to this research question would require some field research, preferably using the method of interview or survey. Finally, we believe that some future research on ideology should move in that direction.