Suchergebnisse

Članak prikazuje recentne studije o novcu kao pravnom fenomenu, putem čijeg kreiranja različiti "stakeholderi" uređuju raspodjelu resursa i odnose između pojedinih dijelova društva. U ovoj koncepciji novac formira tržište, a ne obratno. Na primjeru "slobodnog kovanja" karakterističnog za Englesku od 12. do 14. stoljeća analizira se dilema nominalizam – metalizam, te tri ograničenja robnog novca u kojima se očituje Greshamov zakon, odnosno kontroverza likvidnosti. U članku se ne analizira na koje proturječnosti nailazi nominalistička politika novca. Pokazuje se da se ni u suvremenoj koncepciji robnog novca, eksplicitnoj u Hayekovoj studiji The Denationalization of Money, zbog proturječja likvidnosti ne može – u kreiranju i održanju novčanog sustava – izbjeći uloga društvenih, izvantržišnih faktora, uz ostalo i prava. Kako mnogi autori zaključuju da je i zajednička europska valuta koncipirana po uzoru na zlatni standard (robni novac), slijedi da i uspjeh njezina dizajna i funkcioniranja ne može biti prepušten samo tržišnom mehanizmu, nego ovisi o društvenoj, političkoj i pravnoj potpori. ; The paper describes money as a legal phenomenon, which means that stakeholders use money to allocate resources and manage social relations. In this understanding money creates markets and not vice versa. The system of money creation called free minting, which was common in England from the 12th to the 14th century, is described. Three constraints of commodity money are explained and the nominalism – metalism dilemma is analysed. The focus of the analysis is on Gresham's law and the problem of liquidity of commodity money. The similarity between medieval commodity money and a modern concept of commodity money in the book The Denationalization of Money by Friedrich von Hayek is shown. The conclusion is that the market mechanism cannot solve the problem of liquidity without social agents not included in the market exchange. Since the common European currency is to some degree similar to the gold standard, the same conclusion works for the euro.

"There has been a lot of controversy among the Hungarian jurisprudence regarding the creation of the new Hungarian Criminal Procedure Act. It was also raised whether there was a need for a new code of procedure at all, whether it was not enough to adapt the existing regulations of the old Criminal Procedure Act to the new Criminal Code.
The Criminal Procedure Act, which has been in force since July 1 2018, may seem a distant start compared to Ferenc Finkey's work, but we will see that knowledge of the legal history and the processes involved are essential to understanding the changes in the present.
This is specially true for changes that affect the principles on which criminal proceedings are based. One of the biggest changes in the new Criminal Procedure Code – at the level of the priciples – is undoubtedly the relegation of the principle of official proceedings to the background, as it often turns to opportunism rather than officiality in order to increase simplification and efficiency.
In fact, in his work, Finkey has already perfectly described the mechanisms that we can discover in today's changes. Perhaps it is no exaggeration to say that his work may have provided a basis for fundamental changes in the new Criminal Procedure Code. His theories presented in this study shed excellent light on the dynamics that have permeated all areas of legal history in law and on the processes that, if we recognize them help us understand why it is necessary for our laws to be recreated sometimes.
All in all, we can see that the principles are never of absolute value, but their meaning is constantly changing, as the legislatorial ways breath in the spirit of the current age. When these principles are no longer able to keep up with change, they must be re-formed. And if we are to form such an important principle, we need to enforce a new vision throughout criminal proceedings that makes it necessary not only to make amendments to the Code of Criminal Procedure but also to create a whole new law.
In order to see the real effects of the present innovations and the actual processes it has initiated in our criminal procedural law, a comprehensive analysis of the practice will be needed. We need to examine how quickly law enforcement can respond to the loss of space in centuries-old traditions. It may also be a question of whether we can talk about a real loss of space at all, as it is also conceivable that the principle of officiality has narrowed at the level of the normative text, but the old routine, attitude, and instincts live on in the application of law. The outcome of this examination may also raise important questions, including legal certainty. It is essential that once our procedural law has reached the point where it had to be born again, the application of the law be reborn with it."

Međunarodni kazneni sud novo je međunarodno tijelo kojem je glavni cilj istraga i suđenje slučajeva genocida, ratnih zločina, te zločina protiv čovječnosti u zemljama članicama. Iako su Sjedinjene Američke Države u 2000. potpisale Rimski statut, međunarodnu povelju iz 1998. koja predstavlja osnovicu Međunarodnog kaznenog suda, Busheva vlada napravila je velik zaokret godinu dana kasnije, potpuno se ograđujući od svake ideje o suđenju Amerikancima izvan zemlje. Tekst analizira glavne argumente američke vanjske politike povezane s Međunarodnim kaznenim sudom, od navodne pristranosti Suda, te odnosa između Suda i Ujedinjenih naroda, pa sve do pitanja američkog suvereniteta. Također, ponuđena je i međunarodnopravna politička kritika nedavnih poteza američke vlade, koji štete i američkim nacionalnim interesima, i međunarodnoj sigurnosti. ; The International Criminal Court is a new international body constituted with the aim of prosecuting and trying cases of genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. Although in 2000 the United States signed the 1998 Rome Statute, which is the foundation of the International Criminal Court, the Bush Administration took a radically different position the following year, protecting itself from any idea of trying American citizens abroad. This text analyses the main U.S. foreign policy arguments pertaining to the ICC, from the alleged impartiality of the Court and the relationship between the Court and the United Nations, to the question of American sovereignty. In addition, the text offers an international legal and political critique of the recent U.S. policy actions, which harmed both American national interests, as well as international security.

In my article, I examine some of legal opinions of Ferenc Finkey's with regard to substantive criminal law, from the perspective of today's criminal lawyer. I present the concept of criminal offence in Finkey's works, dealing with the issues of unlawfulness and guilt, also pointing to aspects not discussed in the previous literature. In the case of the act of trying to kill a dead person, my opinion is that it is more proper to establish criminal liablity for an unsuitable attempt of homicide instead of excluding liability. Regarding to the continued offence, I accept the the young Finkey's position, while with regard to the concurrence by one act, I do not agree with Finkey at all. My conclusion is that Ferenc Finkey's books and articles would be welcome for today's criminal lawyers to get acquainted with them as well.

Pokrovčeva knjiga Slobodno stvaranje prava: Herman U. Kantorowicz i slobodnopravni pokret (2018) nameće pitanje izraženo naslovom ovog rada na koje rad odgovara u tri koraka: prvo, pretpostavkom da je pitanje odgovorivo samo idealnim tipovima pravnih disciplina / funkcija; drugo, upućivanjem na kontekst Kantorowiczevih gledišta, osobito na objavu presuda; treće, ocjenom da je Kantorowicz podijelio pravnu znanost u prepletene funkcije a ne u odvojene discipline. U tu svrhu rad nudi idealne tipove disciplina i funkcija pravne dogmatike, pravne historije, pravne teorije i, kao najsloženiji i najkorisniji skup funkcija, pravnopolitičku analizu. Pretpostavka je, koja se ne dokazuje, da ne postoji ni oštra granica između pravne znanosti i susjednih znanosti: sociologije, ekonomije, psihologije, filozofije. ; Is Herman U. Kantorowicz's classification of legal disciplines - which includes general legal science, legal dogmatics, legal history, sociology of law, philosophy of law, and legal policy - a division of scholarly knowledge of law into distinct disciplines/sciences or into intertwined functions of a single scholarly discipline/science? The question is prompted by the book written by Zoran Pokrovac entitled Slobodno stvaranje prava: Hermann U. Kantorowicz i slobodnopravni pokret (Free Law: Hermann U. Kantorowicz and the Free Law Movement ) and published by "Breza" and the Faculty of Law of the University of Split in 2018. Answering this question may assist Croatian legal scholars in finding standards of scholarly excellence, especially of research de lege ferenda. This paper offers an answer in three steps. The first is the recognition that scholarly practices differ considerably, which means that the question may be answered only by construing and correlating ideal types of legal disciplines / functions that are compatible with Kantorowicz's general ideas, prominent interpretations of legal scholarship, and Croatian mainstream legal scholarship since. The second step provides a context of Kantorowicz's ...

In my short essay, I tried to present the changes in the criminal procedure law of the last one hundred and fifty years, the means of proof, and, wherever possible, to find a connection, as well as Ferenc Finkey's work, who was born 150 years ago. It can be said about Finkey's work, his textbooks that his conception of material and procedural law marked a new era in Hungarian scientific life. He established a modern system, proclaiming the principles that meet the theoretical and practical requirements of a modern criminal procedure based on individual freedoms, acquiring a state-of-the-art approach with a European perspective. As a result, his views are not let out of the latest scientific life either. His theoretical conception and dogmatic theorems still define legal thinking.

In my article, I deal with the prohibition of customary law and analogy to the detriment of the perpetrator. Both mentioned prohibitions arise from the principle of legality. The starting point of the analysis is a decision of the Hungarian Supreme Court in 1898 dealing with the criminal offence of theft related to electricity. I presented examples of the extensive and then of the restrictive interpretation by Hungarian criminal courts. My conclusion is that the principle of legality may obviously infringe, for example, criminal liability extended by analogy. However, an overly restrictive interpretation must also be avoided, as this could threaten to violate the state's obligation for criminalization.

On 20 November 2018, the Hungarian Museum Association of Transylvania and Sapientia Hungarian University of Transylvania organized a round table discussion on the legal history of Transylvania. The event took place as part of a series of events on the Hungarian Science Day in Transylvania, at the Sapientia building on Calea Turzii Cluj-Napoca. The participants were Dr Gyula Fábián (minority law), Dr Zsolt Fegyveresi (constitutional history), Dr László Nánási (history of criminal law), Dr Zsolt Kokoly (history of legal education), Dr János Székely (history of civil procedure law), and Dr Emőd Veress (history of civil law). The event was moderated by Előd Pál. The participants presented their research studies related to the legal history of Transylvania and explored the legal and social situations of the past hundred years.

The principle of favor defensionis (principle of protection) nowadays basically expresses that the Criminal Procedural Act seeks to eliminate and somewhat compensate for the disadvantage of the accused by certain detailed provisions. In dubious cases, the law is interpreted in favour of the accused in the spirit of the principle, even against the equality of arms principle. By this principle, Finkey meant cases where the rules of procedure allow for multiple interpretations, in which case they must be interpreted in favour of the accused. The principle also often appears in today's law enforcement.

Pursuant to the First World War, Romania's territory increased, and thus it inherited a complex social, economic, and legal environment different from that of the predecessor states. The Romanian state's response to these challenges is to be found in the political goal of building a homogeneous nation-state. This political agenda has had an impact on all areas of law, not only on legislation but also on the application of the law. The use of essentially ethnically neutral legal instruments of criminal law for state policy purposes can also be seen as an element of exclusionary nationality policy. The Romanian state's actions have thus not only failed to resolve existing internal tensions but have also made the relations between the majority and minorities, as well as the possibility of consolidation impossible for the past century.

Predmet ovog rada jest pravo na branitelja, i to pravo na branitelja na teret države (formalna obrana siromašnih okrivljenika) kao njegov element te kako proizlazi iz Direktive (EU) 2016/1919 Europskog parlamenta i Vijeća od 26. listopada 2016. o pravnoj pomoći za osumnjičenike i okrivljenike u kaznenom postupku i za tražene osobe u postupku na temelju europskog uhidbenog naloga i Direktive 2013/48/EU Europskog parlamenta i Vijeća od 22. listopada 2013. o pravu na pristup odvjetniku u kaznenom postupku i u postupku na temelju europskog uhidbenog naloga te o pravu na obavješćivanje treće strane u slučaju oduzimanja slobode i na komunikaciju s trećim osobama i konzularnim tijelima tijekom trajanja oduzimanja slobode. Kroz analizu mjerodavne prakse Europskog suda za ljudska prava cilj je pokazati u kojoj mjeri praksa pristupa branitelju i hrvatsko odvjetništvo odgovaraju zahtjevima direktiva. Spomenuta praktična implementacija direktiva o pravu na pristup branitelju i pravnoj pomoći u hrvatskom odvjetništvu predstavlja posebni dio rada. U tom se dijelu rada analiziraju obveze koje iz direktiva proizlaze za odvjetništvo, a poseban se naglasak stavlja na cjeloživotno obrazovanje odvjetnika, njihovu organizaciju putem braniteljskih lista unutar odvjetničkih zborova, kao i na učinkovit sustav disciplinske odgovornosti odvjetnika. ; The subject of this paper is the right to a lawyer, specifically, a lawyer financed by the state (formal defence of persons lacking sufficient means), as regulated by Directive (EU) 2016/1919 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2016 on legal aid for suspects and accused persons in criminal proceedings and for requested persons in European arrest warrant proceedings, and by Directive 2013/48/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 on the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings and in European arrest warrant proceedings, and on the right to have a third party informed upon deprivation of liberty and to communicate with third persons and with consular authorities while deprived of liberty. By analysing the relevant jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, we aim to demonstrate the degree of compliance of the Croatian lawyers` approach with the Directives. The practical implementation of the mentioned Directives is a specific part of this work. In this respect, we analyse the obligations for lawyers stemming from the directives, with an emphasis on the education of lawyers, their organisation via specific lists, as well as an effective system of disciplinary responsibility.

The author's comprehensive research project, of which this article is but an introductory outline, inquires into the kind of history written out by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY). In order to investigate the interrelation between criminal law & history, the author faced the following question: what would the history of the disintegration of Yugoslavia & of conflicts in its territory look like if all we had were the judgments of the Hague Tribunal? The author bases his reply on an analysis of first-instance judgments of the Trial Chamber, from which he singles out "historical facts," & rejects the reflections of the Chamber on legal & procedural issues. As a model case he uses the first ICTY judgment pronounced against Dusko Tadic (the trial started on May 7, 1996, & the judgment was pronounced a year later). Although he estimates that the first judgment was not written in an optimal way, the author deems that most preliminarily established historical facts were relevant to historiography, & that, in particular, the judgment offers a universally acceptable notion of the history of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia & of socialist Yugoslavia. He is of the opinion that the extensive documentation of ICTY (the "Hague Tribunal") will have a major influence on the work of future generations of historians. Such a unique & replete archive of historical material is increasingly available to the public & to scientists through ICTY's online database. The most recent scientific works dealing with the former Yugoslavia also make use of the Tribunal's judgments & documentation. Scientists will have to pay due attention to the narratives included therein. Adapted from the source document.