U klasičnom prirodnom pravu pojam ustava odnosio se na zakone, institucije i praksu organiziranja i usmjeravanja države i političkog sustava. Prema ovom shvaćanju, svaki je politički sustav grada-države imao ustav. Suvremeno značenje ustava dobija pak specifično i vrijedonosno utemeljenje: ustav se danas odnosi na uspostavu posebnog oblika političkog poretka. Suvremeni ustavi govore o ograničenoj vladi (limited government). Ustavom se politička vlast konstituira i ograničava u isto vrijeme. Neke su države ustavne zato jer imaju ograničenu i odgovornu vlast, a druge nisu. U potonjem slučaju govorimo o državama koje imaju ustav, ali nemaju konstitucionalizam. Nakon građanskih revolucija, konstitucionalizam je postao središnji mehanizam kontrole političke vlasti i osiguranja slobode. U tekstu se otvara pitanje da li Statut Korčule iz 2014./1265. godine, kao normativna projekcija komunalnih organa u Gradu i na Otoku Korčuli (skupština čitavog naroda, knez, veliko vijeće, malo vijeće, kurija, komunalne službe.), omogućuje podlogu istraživanja (dis)kontinuiteta "starog konstitucionalizma" (ancient constitutionalism) i kasnijih racionalnih, jednoobraznih i kontraktualističkih oblika modernog konstitucionalizma koji se temelje na ustavu kao najvišem pravnom aktu i sudskoj kontroli ustavnosti. Zaključuje se da je Statut grada i otoka Korčule, kao svojevrsna normativna križaljka medijevalnih institucija, posebnih sloboda i višerazinskih jurisdikcija, predstavljao stvarnu povijesnu platformu s koje su se mogli kontrolirati i balansirati svi oni nositelji vlasti koji su prakticirali vlast bilo u granicama prava ili su pak težili njenom apsolutiziranju i korumpiranju. ; In classic natural law the issue of constitution was related to the laws, institutions and practice of organising and directing states and the political system. According to this understanding, every political system of town-state had a constitution. The contemporary meaning of constitution nevertheless gained specific and valuable foundation: today the constitution means the establishment of a special form of political organisation. Contemporary constitutions talk of limited government. With a constitution, political power is constituted and limited at the same time. Some states are constitutional because they have a limited and responsible government and others are not. In the latter case, we are talking about states that have a constitution, but do not have constitutionalism. After civil revolutions, constitutionalism becomes the central mechanism of control of political power and ensuring freedom. This text opens up the question of whether the Statute of Korčule of the year 1214/1265, as a normative projection of municipal organs in the Town and Island of Korčula (assembly of all people, duke, grand council, small council, curia, utility services.), provided the base for researching the (dis)continuity of "ancient constitutionalism" and classic rational, uniform and contractualistic forms of modern constitutionalism which is based on the constitution as the highest legal act and court control of constitutionality. In conclusion, the Statute of the Town and Island of Korčula, as a unique normative crossword puzzle of medieval institutions, special freedoms and multi-level jurisdictions, represented a real historical platform. From this platform all those bearers of power who implemented power could be controlled and balanced either within legal boundaries or they strived for absolutism and corruption.
Predmet rada je analiza granica dopuštenosti državne upotrebe oružane sile kao reakcije na terorističke napade koje počine terorističke skupine kao nedržavni akteri. Poseban naglasak stavljen je na međunarodnopravni okvir koji određuje pretpostavke za upotrebu oružane sile u ostvarivanju prava na samoobranu, čije tumačenje u posljednjih nekoliko godina u teoriji i praksi podliježe modifikacijama kojima se želi opravdati upotreba oružane sile u samoobrani protiv nedržavnih aktera, dakle, preko granica određenih međunarodnim pravom. Autorica se u radu kritički osvrće na spomenuto proširivanje tumačenja prava na samoobranu i predlaže primjenu drugih, u međunarodnom pravu utemeljenih mjera kojima države, predvođene Vijećem sigurnosti Ujedinjenih naroda, mogu odgovoriti na terorističke napade. ; The subject of this paper is an analysis of the limitations of the legality of the use of armed force by States as a response to terrorist attacks committed by terrorist groups as non-State actors. A special emphasis is placed on the international legal framework which prescribes prerequisites for the use of armed force in the implementation of the right to self-defence. Modifications in the interpretation of the right to self-defence, initiated by a rising number of terrorist attacks, tend to justify the use of armed force in self-defence against non-State actors, which is not in accordance with international law. The author critically examines the expanded interpretation of the right to self-defence and proposes that other instruments be applied in accordance with the international legal framework, which States led by the UN Security Council can use in response to terrorist attacks.
The future of the contemporary state is considered genealogically via a reconstructive review of Rousseau's theory of political law, which depicts the original project of the constitution of the democratic state as a political community of citizens. Rousseau envisaged the modern state as an epochal legal/political program of the concurrent subjectivization of a nation (as ethos) into a people (as demos) & the selfish man (raisonneur violent) into the citizen (citoyen). The rationale of this subjectivization is expressed in the theory of the general will. A people exist as a political subject, as a law-giver, only as a subject of the general will, just as individuals become free citizens through the process of democratic generalization of their political will. The logic of the process of the generalization of the will, as political emancipation, lies within one nation as demos. A legitimate state is possible only if it realizes the individuality of a people as a substantial totality. General will is always solely public, the political will of a people, its will for its own identity. The national democratic state is not a historical given; the free will is a creation, a project of the actualization of the rule of the general will realized by a sovereign people. The state is an unavoidable space of the equalization of the general will of a people & the will of all free individuals, in which citizens within the legislative process accomplish their collective, inter-subjective autonomy. From the point of view of the prospects of the realization of this project, contemporary states are unfinished, even unfinishable. Although in the contemporary plural society, the national democratic state is no longer the sole space of the political & the legal subjectivization of the citizens, it is still undoubtedly the central one. Rousseau's theory of the general will offers the epochal criteria for the recognition of the political character of any citizen's "political association," not only with the state, but also with sub-state or supra-state formations. Each & every political association is a genuine democratic community only if it is the "work of art" of the citizens themselves who self-confidently shape their collective activity, since a community of citizens is possible only if this integration represents the will of all of them as a sum of the irreducible differences among them. 47 References. Adapted from the source document.
The author analyzes the theoretical postulates of Emile Durkheim's concept of solidarity, which in Croatia -- due to the circumstances -- has outstanding theoretical & practical significance. The author looks into the theories that shaped Durkheim's idea of solidarity: that of legal solidarity, a major theoretical development, particularly within French administrative law of the time (with a special emphasis on the seminal book by Leon Bourgeois); & that of the theory of community, focusing on German sociologist Ferdinand Tonnies as well as on some of his predecessors such as Otto von Gierke, Henry Sumner Maine, & Fustel de Coulanges. The author claims that this mental framework immensely influenced Durkheim's concept of solidarity, which he put forward in his famous study De la division du travail social in 1893. The author reviews Durkheim's central postulates & discusses the distinctions between the so-called "mechanical" & "organic" solidarity. Finally, certain faults in Durkheim's theory are pointed out. Nevertheless, & despite these well-founded objections, Durkheim's solidarity theory remains an "object lesson" in understanding solidarity. 25 References. Adapted from the source document.
The author analyzes the theoretical postulates of Emile Durkheim's concept of solidarity, which in Croatia -- due to the circumstances -- has outstanding theoretical & practical significance. The author looks into the theories that shaped Durkheim's idea of solidarity: that of legal solidarity, a major theoretical development, particularly within French administrative law of the time (with a special emphasis on the seminal book by Leon Bourgeois); & that of the theory of community, focusing on German sociologist Ferdinand Tonnies as well as on some of his predecessors such as Otto von Gierke, Henry Sumner Maine, & Fustel de Coulanges. The author claims that this mental framework immensely influenced Durkheim's concept of solidarity, which he put forward in his famous study De la division du travail social in 1893. The author reviews Durkheim's central postulates & discusses the distinctions between the so-called "mechanical" & "organic" solidarity. Finally, certain faults in Durkheim's theory are pointed out. Nevertheless, & despite these well-founded objections, Durkheim's solidarity theory remains an "object lesson" in understanding solidarity. 25 References. Adapted from the source document.
Predmet ovoga rada je pregled zakonskog uređenja i sudske prakse u pogledu personalne subrogacije, regresne obveze i regresnog potraživanja osiguratelja na isplatu naknade iz osiguranja kao i utvrđivanje visine isplate regresnog potraživanja u parničnom postupku pred sudom te ustupanje tražbine – cesija. U radu se polazi od stajališta da su pojmovi i instituti subrogacija, regres i cesija vrlo slični te da često dolazi do njihova poistovjećivanja pa se pokušava jasno razlučiti na što se točno koji pojam odnosi. U hrvatskom pravu pod pravom subrogacija osiguratelja najčešće se podrazumijeva zakonska personalna subrogacija gdje isplatom naknade iz osiguranja osiguratelj stupa u pravni položaj svojega osiguranika odakle i izvodi svoje pravo potraživanja prema osobi odgovornoj za štetu. Uz navedeno, u radu se razmatra i zastara prava regresa osiguratelja. Nadalje, autor polazi od stajališta da je u sudskom postupku pokrenutom radi regresne isplate nužno da sudski vještak jasno odredi parametre na temelju kojih će sud moći ocijeniti u određenom postotku eventualni doprinos oštećenika za nastalu štetu te s obzirom na to umanjiti regresnu obvezu osiguranika, tuženika u tome postupku prema tužitelju, osiguratelju. ; The subject of this paper is a review of legislation and case law regarding personal subrogation, recourse obligation and recourse claim of the insurer for payment of insurance compensation as well as determining the amount of payment of recourse claim in civil proceedings before the court and assignment of the claim - cession. The paper starts from the point of view that the terms and institutes of subrogation, recourse and cession are very similar and that they are often identified, so we try to clearly distinguish what exactly the term refers to. In Croatian law, the right of subrogation of the insurer is most often understood as legal personal subrogation where by paying the insurance compensation the insurer assumes the legal position of its insured and consequently enabling the insurer to claim damages against the responsible person . In addition to the above, the paper also considers the statute of limitations for insurers' recourse rights. Furthermore, the author starts from the point of view that in court proceedings initiated for recourse payment it is necessary for the court expert to clearly determine the parameters based on which the court will be able to assess in a certain percentage the possible contribution of the injured party to the damage towards the plaintiff, namely the insurer.
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.
The author is critical of the introduction of the euro from the point of view of national & political economy. His criticism is based on four assumptions. The first is that the introduction of the euro gives rise to certain legal concerns. Some countries had not met the criteria for the introduction of the euro, yet it was introduced, which means that the European parliament & the national governments & their parliaments no longer respect the due process of law. The second is that the foreign debt, which amounts to 120% of GNP, is impossible to repay in those democracies that are not in the position to impose austerity measures that would include several legislatures. The third criticism is based on the fact that European countries are at different levels of development, which makes the monetary union much too vulnerable. The fourth criticism refers to the fact that common currency means common policy, &, consequently, the end of nation-states in Europe. Croatia may join the EU, but this would pose a challenge to its national sovereignty. 2 Tables. Adapted from the source document.
Djelatnost neprofitnih organizacija usmjerena je javnom interesu. Organizirana je u većini slučajeva kroz pravni oblik udruga i u funkciji je pružanja usluga neprofitnog karaktera. Financijsko poslovanje i računovodstvo neprofitnih organizacija uređeno je Zakonom o financijskom poslovanju i računovodstvu neprofitnih organizacija te pripadajućim pravilnicima. Zbog porasta broja neprofitnih organizacija, a time i povećane potrošnje javnog novca dolazi do većih kontrola i nadzora poslovanja. U tom kontekstu, zakonom je određena i obveza dostave financijskih izvještaja neprofitnih organizacija nadležnom tijelu te njihova objava kroz Registar neprofitnih organizacija vođenim od strane Ministarstva financija. Predmet rada je prikaz računovodstvenog okvira s naglaskom na specifičnosti djelatnosti sportskih udruga. U radu je istražena djelatnost i financiranje sportskih udruga te je na primjeru udruge, Školskog sportskog saveza Grada Zagreba prezentirana primjena tog zakonskog okvira s naglaskom na izvore financiranja, računovodstvo i sadržaj financijskog izvještavanja. ; The activities of non-profit organizations are focused on the public interest. In the most cases, non-profit organizations are organized through the legal form of the association and in the function of providing non-profit services. The financial operations and accounting of non-profit organizations are regulated by the Law on Financial Operations and Accounting of Non-Profit Organizations, which belong to the associated regulations. Due to the increase in the number of non-profit organizations and thus increase in the spending of public money, it leads to greater controls and supervision of business. In this context, the law also states the obligation to submit financial reports of non-profit organizations to the competent body for their publication through the Register of non-profit organizations maintained by the Ministry of Finance. The subject of the paper is the presentation of the accounting framework with an emphasis on the specifics of the ...
Specifičnost nadzora nad radom izvršnih i upravnih tijela lokalne samouprave leži u opreci između upravnih obilježja jedinice lokalne samouprave i njezinih samoupravnih obilježja. Stoga on treba biti ustrojen na način kojim se respektiraju samoupravne ovlasti lokalne samouprave, ali pritom istodobno štiti zakonitost u cjelokupnom pravnom sustavu. U radu se istražuju oblici nadzora nad izvršnim i upravnim tijelima jedinica lokalne samouprave u Hrvatskoj, pri čemu se, nakon razmatranja prirode nadzora, subjekata nadzora i nadzornih ovlasti, posebice analizira nadzor unutar samih tijela lokalne samouprave, hijerarhijski upravni nadzor od strane tijela područne (regionalne) samouprave te upravni i inspekcijski nadzor od strane Ministarstva uprave, upravnosudski nadzor kao i nadzor od strane pučkoga pravobranitelja. Poseban naglasak stavljen je na instrumente provođenja svakoga pojedinoga nadzora te na nadzorne ovlasti kojima raspolažu nadzorna tijela. Pritom se skreće pozornost na utjecaj koji na učinkovitost i djelotvornost nadzora imaju broj i veličina lokalnih jedinica i posljedično njihova objektivna sposobnost obavljanja poslova iz samoupravnog djelokruga. ; The specificity of supervision over the work of executive and administrative bodies of local self-government lies in the contradiction between administrative characteristics of units of local self-government and its self-administrative characteristics. Therefore, it should be organised in a way that respects the self-administration powers of local self-government, but at the same time, protects legality in the entire legal system. This paper investigates the supervision of executive and administrative bodies of units of local self-government in Croatia. Here, after considering the nature of the supervision, subjects of supervision and supervisory powers, in particular the forms of supervision are analysed over executive and administrative bodies of units of local self-government, hierarchical administrative supervision by bodies of regional self-government ...
(Originally published in the collection Wirklichkeit als Tabu [(Reality as a Taboo) Munich: Oldenburg, 1986].) The author argues that the word homeland disappeared from the political language & that it has been replaced by the unpolitical word: identity. This raises a question: what is identity to a German if the state cannot provide it? The consequence of Hitler's legacy is that the tradition is troublesome so that the identity is now linked with the constitution. The author looks into the idiosyncrasies of the German constitutional/legal system by which the old state thinking has been replaced with the "constitutional thinking." In this way patriotism becomes "constitutional patriotism," & the constitution becomes the homeland. The consensus about the constitution -- the result of the general acceptance of antitotalitarianism -- was challenged by students in 1968, when this antitotalitarianism was replaced by antifascism. At the same time, however, an entire political culture of disobedience against institutions evolved, & declared the constitution the "system's life's lie." The system took a long time to recover, but it rehabilitated the state authority within a constitutional state. Nevertheless, this has not restored the individuality of German statehood, ie, the state does not become the homeland. Although the author is aware that this idea is outmoded, he nevertheless points out that the consensual base would be broader if Germans were allowed to be what they are by their history & their position, & not only what they should be according to the constitution. Adapted from the source document.
Dugo je vremena koncept suvereniteta smatran kamenom temeljcem domaćeg i međunarodnog prava te političke misli. Koncepcija suvereniteta blisko je povezana s koncepcijom države. Bilo je to »normalno« stanje države, u kojem ona ima vrhovnu ili konačnu vlast u unutarnjim političkim i pravnim pitanjima, a svojstvo neovisnosti prema drugim državama. Međunarodnu zajednicu činile su ravnopravne i neovisne države. Danas, na početku 21. stoljeća, koncept suvereniteta izložen je mnogim izazovima, od kojih je najznačajniji proces globalizacije koji je doveo do sve veće međupovezanosti ljudi širom svijeta vidljive na svim poljima: političkim, vojnim, ekonomskim, kulturnim i pravnim. U ovom radu usredotočit ćemo se na pitanje kako globalizacija utječe na državni suverenitet te da ti pregled argumenata korištenih u novijoj literaturi. ; The concept of sovereignty was for a long time considered as one of the cornerstones of national and international law, and of political thought. The concept of sovereignty was closely connected with the concept of the state. It was a »normal« situation of a country where it had supreme or final power in political and legal matters in its domestic affairs, while at the same time it was independent in relation to all other countries. The international community used to consist of equal and independent states. At the beginning of the 21st century, the concept of sovereignty is faced with many challenges, both in theory and in practice. What happens within a country's territory and to its inhabitants is now less a consequence of national politics than the result of international circumstances – the difference between internal and foreign affairs is becoming increasingly vague. Several processes are happening simultaneously: globalisation (the development of information and communication technology; increase in foreign investments, the development of multinational corporations, and strengthening of the international economic and trade organisations' role), the process of European integration, the development of international protection of human rights (the development of cogent rules of international law, humanitarian interventions, the role of transnational non- governmental organisations), and the phenomenon of »failed states«. All the above mentioned has created a need to redefine the concept of sovereignty.
Dugo je vremena koncept suvereniteta smatran kamenom temeljcem domaćeg i međunarodnog prava te političke misli. Koncepcija suvereniteta blisko je povezana s koncepcijom države. Bilo je to »normalno« stanje države, u kojem ona ima vrhovnu ili konačnu vlast u unutarnjim političkim i pravnim pitanjima, a svojstvo neovisnosti prema drugim državama. Međunarodnu zajednicu činile su ravnopravne i neovisne države. Danas, na početku 21. stoljeća, koncept suvereniteta izložen je mnogim izazovima, od kojih je najznačajniji proces globalizacije koji je doveo do sve veće međupovezanos- ti ljudi širom svijeta vidljive na svim poljima: političkim, vojnim, ekonomskim, kulturnim i pravnim. U ovom radu usredotočit ćemo se na pitanje kako globalizacija utječe na državni suverenitet te dati pregled argumenata korištenih u novijoj literaturi. ; The concept of sovereignty was for a long time considered as one of the corner- stones of national and international law, and of political thought. The concept of sovereignty was closely connected with the concept of the state. It was a »normal« situation of a country where it had supreme or final power in political and legal matters in its domestic affairs, while at the same time it was independent in relation to all other countries. The international community used to consist of equal and independent States. At the beginning of the 21st Century, the concept of sovereignty is faced with many challenges, both in theory and in practice. What happens within a country's territory and to its inhabitants is now less a consequence of national politics than the result of international circumstances - the difference between internal and foreign affairs is becoming increasingly vague. Several processes are happening simultaneously: globalisation (the development of information and communication technology; increase in foreign Investments, the development of multinational corporations, and strengthening of the international economic and trade organisations' role), the process of European integration, the development of international protection of human rights (the development of cogent rules of international law, humanitarian interventions, the role of transnational non/governmental organisations), and the phenomenon of »failed States«. All the above mentioned has created a need to redefine the concept of sovereignty.
In searching for a consistent theoretical framework of the political science understanding of the state, one should rely on valid substantial & methodological markers. The author identifies them in this article by means of a critical & productive dialogue with three major contemporary contributions to the pertinent understanding of the state: the theory of the state by A. Passerin d'Entreves, the history of states by B. Barret-Kriegel & the history of the modern concept of the state by Q. Skinner. In the first part of the article their key insights into the (modern) state are briefly outlined. The seminal work is that by Passerin d'Entreves, in which he presents the categorial set essential for a comprehensive understanding of the state in general, & the logic of sovereignty in particular. The state as such should be understood as might or force (from the perspective of effectiveness), as power (from the perspective of legality), & finally as authority (from the perspective of legitimacy). To conceptually define the state, comprehensively & accurately, means to be able to explain & understand how force (or might), first legalized as power, gains legitimacy in the form of authority. The concept of sovereignty marks the transepochal project of the transformation of might into power through the mediation of law which subjects it to laws. These key insights are made more precise & are partly corrected by the research done by Barret-Kriegel & Q. Skinner. The sovereign state is a doubly abstract public authority & is not a transepochal category but an epochal legal-political project, modernity's distinguishing feature. The sovereign state is an epochal political novum, as it is the first organization of political power in history that self-limits its might to ensure personal security & independence of citizens as legal subjects. As a notion of the rational & legitimate power it historically affirms itself as an antithesis to oriental despotism & the ancient patrimonial-seniorical regime. References. Adapted from the source document.
The paper elaborates on national provisions regulating the conduct of safety and administrative investigations for marine casualties and incidents in the Republic of Croatia. On 5 November 2015, the Government of the Republic of Croatia adopted the Regulation on the Methods and Conditions for Conducting Safety Investigation of Marine Casualties and Incidents, which transposes in the legal order of the Republic of Croatia Directive 2009/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 establishing the fundamental principles governing the investigation of accidents in the maritime transport sector and amending Council Directive 1999/35/EC and Directive 2002/59/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council. The conducting of administrative investigation in the Republic of Croatia is regulated by the Ordinance on the Methods, Requirements and Powers for Conducting Administrative Investigation of Marine Casualties enacted in 2016. Unlike safety investigation, administrative investigation is conducted to collect evidence and data for detecting the perpetrator of a maritime accident and to ascertain his/her misdemeanour and criminal responsibility. The authors present the outcomes of safety and administrative investigation procedures to effectively establish the circumstances and causes of such casualties and incidents for the purpose of improving maritime safety and reducing the risk of future casualties involving passenger ships and preventing pollution from ships. ; U radu se analiziraju nacionalne odredbe kojima se regulira provođenje sigurnosnih i upravnih istraga u slučaju nastanka pomorskih nesreća i nezgoda u Republici Hrvatskoj. Vlada Republike Hrvatske donijela je 5. studenoga 2015. godine Uredbu o načinu i uvjetima za obavljanje sigurnosnih istraga pomorskih nesreća i nezgoda, koja u pravni poredak Republike Hrvatske prenosi Direktivu 2009/18/EZ Europskog parlamenta i Vijeća od 23. travnja 2009. o određivanju temeljnih načela o istraživanju nesreća u području pomorskog prometa i ...
