Suchergebnisse

V magistrskem diplomskem delu je predstavljena Konvencija Združenih narodov proti korupciji, prvi in edini univerzalni mednarodnopravno zavezujoči protikorupcijski instrument. Ta je rezultat večletnih naporov številnih držav in iskanja potrebnega konsenza za njeno sprejetje, danes pa ima že 182 pogodbenic. Konvencija obravnava preventivne ukrepe, inkriminacijo, kazenski pregon, mednarodno sodelovanje, povračilo premoženja, strokovno pomoč in izmenjavo informacij. Vzpostavljen je ocenjevalni mehanizem implementacije Konvencije, ki se v ciklih posveča vsem njenim določbam, tudi pravno nezavezujočim, katerih število in odsotnost strogega režima izvrševanja neizbežno pomeni, da Konvencija sama po sebi ne bo odpravila korupcije. Kljub temu državam nudi skupni okvir na katerega se lahko oprejo ter dodatno vzpodbudo za sodelovanje. Zato je ključno uporabiti in po potrebi nadgraditi regionalne mehanizme, ki lahko kakovostno dopolnjujejo cilje Konvencije. Končno poročilo prvega cikla ocenjevanja implementacije III. in IV. poglavja je za Slovenijo vzpodbudno. Izdana so bila določena priporočila, a hkrati prepoznani številni primeri dobre prakse. Učinki Konvencije bodo vidni postopoma, ko in če bodo države upoštevale izdana priporočila, počakati pa je treba še na zaključek drugega cikla in s tem pregled II. in V. poglavja. Za prihodnost brez korupcije je bistveno, da ob spoštovanju nacionalne suverenosti države ohranijo voljo za skupen mednarodni boj, Konvencija pa zaenkrat deluje kot dober skupni imenovalec na tej poti. ; This master thesis analyses United Nations Convention against Corruption, first and only universal legally binding anti-corruption instrument. The latter is a result of years of efforts made by numerous states in search of required consensus to adopt a document, which has 182 parties by now. Convention deals with preventive measures, criminalization, law enforcement, international cooperation, asset recovery, technical assistance and information exchange. An implementation review mechanism has been established, which will address all the Convention's provisions in cycles, including the non-binding ones. The number of those and lack of a strict enforcement regime inevitably means that Convention on its own cannot put an end to corruption. What is crucial, is a common framework for states to lean on and above all, encouragement for cooperation. Therefore it is vital to utilize and, depending on the needs, upgrade existing regional mechanisms, which can complement goals of the Convention. Final report of the first review cycle of the implementation of chapters III. and IV. is reassuring for Slovenia. Certain recommendations were made, but numerous examples of good practice were also recognized. Effects of the entire Convention will be seen gradually, when and if states follow issued recommendations, plus we need to wait for the end of the second cycle and with it the review of chapters II. and V. For a future without corruption it is crucial that states, while respecting national sovereignty, preserve their will for the joint international fight. And so far Convention works as a good common denominator on this path.

Abstract. The article addresses the question of the role of the state in the protection of human rights and freedoms. Like states, rights and freedoms are also created on the basis of social conventions, and any reference to the universal nature or natural character of rights and freedoms is only an ideological moment in the pursuit of political goals. The basic prerequisite for the protection of rights and freedoms is the establishment of organised coercion in the form of state power which brings under its authority the multitude of different interests and diverse ways of implementing justice. The conclusive findings show that for its successful introduction into the lives of individuals, the moral discourse of universal human rights and freedoms needs effective state authority that embeds these rights and freedoms into the foundations of the legitimacy of its own existence. Keywords: Constitutionalism, the state, human rights and freedoms, Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes

The decision by the Council of Europe to ter minate the Russian Federation's membership of the Council of Europe on 16 March 2022 makes the issue of legal certainty for aliens actively participating in the war in Ukraine as part of the Ukrainian Armed Forces completely unpredictable. The academic literature and the case law of the European Court of Human Rights in the field of the legal status of alien combatants is limited, and the International Criminal Court has not complet ed any cases on this topic. This article addresses the prin ciple of case law and, above all, the principle of legality with regard to aliens and their active participation in the armed forces of Ukraine. This issue has become cen tral since the Russian Federation may or may not grant these persons the status of prisoner of war according to the Third Geneva Convention, relating to Protocol I, or may characterise them as criminal offenders or terro rists. Keywords: aliens, combatants, mercenaries, prisoners of war, war, armed conflict, terrorists

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.

Listina o temeljnih pravicah Evropske unije predstavlja osrednji dokument varstva temeljnih pravic v Evropski uniji, ki so se razvila skozi prakso Sodišča Evropske unije. Kot deklaracija je bila najprej slovesno razglašena 7. decembra 2000, pravna veljava in status primarnega prava Evropske unije pa ji je bil podeljen devet let kasneje z Lizbonsko pogodbo. Vsebina Listine o temeljnih pravicah Evropske unije temelji na skupnih ustavnih tradicijah in mednarodnih obveznosti držav članic, Evropski konvenciji o varstvu človekovih pravic, socialnih listinah Evropske unije in Sveta Evrope, sodni praksi Sodišča Evropske unije ter Evropskega sodišča za človekove pravice. Kljub temu pa je njena vsebina tudi inovativna in v nekaterih primerih širša. Tako je z Listino o temeljnih pravicah Evropske unije, zagotovljena pravica do azila, kar predstavlja redkost v mednarodnih dokumentih varstva temeljnih pravic. V praksi jo tako Sodišče Evropske unije kot nacionalna sodišča velikokrat uporabljajo na področju migracij in azila. Sodišče Evropske unije igra pomembno vlogo pri harmonizaciji Skupnega evropskega azilnega sistema in zagotavljanju minimalnih standardov varstva pravic prosilcev za mednarodno zaščito skozi interpretacijo skladnosti določb sekundarne zakonodaje Evropske unije na področju azila in nacionalne zakonodaje z Listino o temeljnih pravicah Evropske unije. ; "Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union" represents a core bill of rights document within the European union which developed through the case law of the European Court of Justice. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union was solemnly announced on 7 December 2000 as a Declaration, only becoming legally binding nine years later with the entry into force of the Lisbon treaty, which granted it the status of primary law of the European Union. The contents within the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union is based on the constitutional traditions and international obligations common to member states, the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights, Social Charters of the European union, and the Council of Europe, the case law of the European Court of Justice, and the European Court of Human Rights. However, it is also innovative and broader in some cases. Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union provides a right to be granted asylum, which represents a rarity in international instruments of fundamental rights. It is often used in practice by the European Court of Justice and national courts in the field of migration and asylum. The European Court of Justice plays an important role in harmonization of the Common European Asylum System and in setting of minimum standards for protection of the rights of applicants for international protection through its interpretation in compliance of secondary legislation of the European Union and national legislation with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

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.