Suchergebnisse

Demokratični deficit je že več desetletji stalnica akademskih razprav o Evropski uniji. Vsebina raziskovanj se je skozi čas bistveno spremenila, ohranja pa se temeljna misel, da se demokracija v Evropski uniji sooča z velikimi težavami. Zaupanje Evropejcev v Evropsko unijo je nizko, podobno velja tudi za občutek povezanosti z njenimi organi, zato je očitno, da so spremembe nujno potrebne. Z vsako večjo reformo pride do sprememb, ki bistveno vplivajo na razmerja moči med evropskimi institucijami in na njihov odnos do Evropejcev. Najvidnejše spremembe v zadnjih desetletjih so krepitev moči Evropskega parlamenta, ki se je razvil v vplivno institucijo, uvajanje institutov neposredne demokracije in druge reforme, ki jih je prinesla Lizbonska pogodba. Napredek pa je, žal, na drugi strani uravnotežen s pojavom mehanizmov in institutov, ki demokratična varovala zaobidejo. To so na primer ukrepi, ki so bili sprejeti kot odziv na dolžniško krizo evroobmočja in v velikem delu sploh ne spadajo med formalne pristojnosti Evropske unije. V svojem magistrskem delu sem analiziral in kritično ovrednotil procese, ki so bistveno vplivali na ključne organe Evropske unije, njihove spreminjajoče se medsebojne odnose ter predvidene učinke aktualnih reform. Pregledal sem širok izbor literature preteklih desetletji in predstavil različna teoretska izhodišča, na podlagi katerih avtorji skušajo opredeliti in analizirati demokratični deficit in z njim povezane tematike. Ključna ugotovitev mojega magistrskega mojega dela ni le, da so aktualne reforme premalo ambiciozne in demokratičnega deficita ne morejo odpraviti, ampak predvsem da demokratični deficit ni le kategorija akademskih razprav, temveč je zelo močno politično orodje in odločilno usmerja razvoj Evropske unije. Demokratični deficit je zato stalnica evropske demokracije in ne more nikoli biti povsem odpravljen, saj se ob razvoju Evropske unije vedno znova pojavlja v drugačnih oblikah, ki terjajo nove reforme in kritične analize akademikov, intelektualcev, državljanov, politikov in vseh drugih zainteresiranih strani. ; The democratic deficit has been a constant of all academic research on the European Union for the past few decades. While the scope of the research has changed considerably, the basic idea remains the same – democracy in the European Union is in serious trouble. Europeans' trust in the EU is low and the same goes for their connection with European institutions, therefore it is clear that changes are required. Every major reform alters the balance of power between European institutions and their relationship with European citizens. The most visible changes of the past decades are: the empowerment of the European parliament that has been transformed into an influential institution, the introduction of instruments of direct democracy and other reforms brought upon by the Treaty of Lisbon. Unfortunately, progress is balanced out by the emergence of various mechanisms and instruments that surpass all democratic checks and balances. For example, the measures that were adopted as a response to the European debt crisis were mostly not based on formal competencies of the EU. In my Master's thesis I analysed and critically evaluated the processes that crucially influenced the most significant European institutions, their ever-changing relationships and the anticipated effects of the current reforms. I examined a substantial body of literature from past decades and presented diverse theoretical starting points that the authors use to define and analyse the democratic deficit and related topics. The most significant finding of my Master's thesis is not only that the current reforms lack ambition and cannot eliminate the democratic deficit, but also that the democratic deficit is more than just a category of academic research and can often act as a strong political tool that decisively influences the development of the European Union. Therefore, the democratic deficit is a permanent element of European democracy and can never be fully eliminated as it always reappears in new forms that require constant reforms and critical analysis by academia, intellectuals, citizens, politicians and other stakeholders.

Skrajno desne ideje so v evropskem prostoru prisotne že stoletja. Včasih zaradi določenih situacij pridejo na plano, v kratkem pa potem tudi izginejo. Evropska unija, ki se je izgradila na pogorišču skrajnih idej in sistemov, se je ponovno srečala s težko situacijo. V letu 2008 je staro celino zajela svetovna finančna kriza, ki je do temeljev pretresla dotedanjo uspešno evropsko integracijo in pri tem obudila skrajne ideje. Finančni krizi je po nekaj letih sledila migrantska, ki je že tako težko situacijo naredila še težjo. V določenih državah so se začele prebujati skrajne populistične in nacionalistične ideje, ki so krivca za nastalo situacijo iskale znotraj Evropske unije, v njenih institucijah in migrantih, ki so zaradi različnih razlogov prihajali v varno Evropo. Vzpon skrajno desnih strank je imel v posameznih državah različne motive, zakaj je stranka prišla na oblast oz. je imela v državi velik pomen. Vprašanje, ki se pojavlja ob trenutni situaciji v Evropski uniji, je, kako bodo skrajne ideje vplivale na nadaljnjo integracijo oz. dezintegracijo Evropske unije. ; Far-right ideas have been present in the European area for centuries. Certain situations cause them to emerge every now and then, before they disappear again not long after. The European Union, which was built on the ruins of radical ideas and political systems, is once again facing this menacing threat. In 2008, the old continent was hit by the global financial crisis, which shook the so far very successful European integration to its core and began to awake certain extremist notions. After a few years, the financial crisis was followed by the migrant crisis, which had since only exacerbated the situation. Populist and nationalist ideas, which were starting to resurge in some European countries, were looking for a scapegoat for the new state of affairs in the European Union and within the walls of its institutions and migrants, who were arriving into safe Europe for various reasons, made for a perfect target. The rise of far-right political parties had different motives in individual countries, regardless whether a particular party seized power or simply grew in prominence. The question that the European Union is facing at the moment is how these extremist ideas will influence further integration or disintegration of Europe.

Turkey first applied for EU membership in 1987 and started negotiations for full membership in October 2005 after lengthy and challenging negotiations between EU member states. This master's thesis attempts to examine the relationship between the negotiations for EU membership that are going on between Turkey and the EU Commission and the public discussion on the subject. The research material consists of selected posts on the Financial Times discussion forum and the Acquis communautaire and Copenhagen criteria. By comparing the research material this thesis attempts to investigate if the public deliberation and official negotiations focus on the same issues and requirements for membership. The theoretical background for this analysis is deliberative democracy, according to which public debate should be a prerequisite for agenda setting and decision making. The findings of the thesis reveal that the public discussion does touch on the acquis communautaire and Copenhagen criteria to some degree, but the public is also concerned with non-acquis issues such as the culture and history. A unique feature of the accession negotiations is also the amount of commentary from heads of state regarding the negotiations, which was also noted in the research material. In the light of deliberative democratic theory it can be noted that the public may take part in the discussion over Turkey's membership, but it has little or no chances of setting the agenda for the negotiations.

Vprašanje kolektivnih pravnih sredstev v Evropski uniji je v zadnjih letih zaradi pobud evropskih institucij pridobilo veliko pozornosti. V praksi se ja namreč pokazalo, da je intervencija Evropske unije na tem področju potrebna, saj se instituti kolektivne tožbe v državah članicah zelo razlikujejo. Razlikujejo se po vrsti kolektivne tožbe, ki je na voljo, aktivni legitimaciji, uporabi sistema vključitve ali izključitve, financiranja tožbe itd. Heterogenost na tem področju je problematična, saj niso vsi državljani držav članic Evropske unije deležni enake pravne zaščite v primerih množičnih oškodovanj. Različne ureditve držav članic pa imajo tudi negativni vpliv na enotni notranji trg. V nalogi sem analizirala izbrane postopke s kolektivnimi tožbami v državah članicah Evropske unije in osvetlila razlike med njimi. Ugotovila sem, da je ukrepanje organov Evropske unije potrebno, da se zagotovi ustrezno urejene in uravnotežene mehanizme, ki prispevajo k učinkoviti zaščiti in izvrševanju pravic v primerih množičnih oškodovanj. ; The issue of collective redress procedures in the European Union has received a great deal of attention in recent years due to initiatives by the European Union institutions. In practice, however, it has become clear that the European Union intervention in this area is necessary, as institutes of collective redress vary greatly from one-Member State to another. They differ in type of collective action available, legal standing, use of an opt-in or an opt-out system, financing of the action, and so on. Heterogeneity in this area is problematic, as not all citizens of the Member States of the European Union enjoy equal legal protection in cases of mass harm. Moreover, different Member States arrangements also have a negative impact on the single internal market. In this thesis, I have analysed selected collective redress procedures in the Member States of the European Union and highlighted the differences between them. I have identified the need for actions by the European Union institutions to ensure that mechanisms are properly regulated and balanced to contribute to the effective protection and enforcement of rights in cases of mass harm.

Magistrska naloga se ukvarja z vprašanjem dejanskega in ne zgolj deklarativnega strateškega partnerstva med Evropsko unijo in Rusko federacijo. Dobri odnosi so namreč ključnega pomena v luči pogajanj o novem sporazumu. Ruska federacija je ena izmed najpomembnejših gospodarskih partnerk Evropske unije. Ta povezanost ju sili, da skušata kljub ne vedno enakim in včasih celo nasprotujočim si pogledom globalne in regionalne izzive reševati z medsebojnim sodelovanjem. Magistrska naloga podrobno predstavi odnose med Evropsko unijo in Rusijo ter analizira dejavnike, ki prispevajo tako k pozitivnemu razvoju odnosov kot k naraščanju napetosti. Na podlagi analize magistrsko delo zaključi z ugotovitvijo, da se soodvisnosti med partnerkama ni mogoče izogniti in da je napočil čas, da konfliktne predpostavke izkoristita kot možnosti za poglobljeno sodelovanje in vzpostavitev stabilnih politik za reševanje skupnih izzivov. ; The thesis discusses the question of actual and of not just declarative strategic partnership between the European Union and Russian Federation. Good relations are namely key in the light of negotiations on the new agreement. Russian Federation is one of the most important economic partners of the European Union. Despite not always equal and sometimes even divergent positions this relation forces them to solve global and regional challenges with cooperation. The relationship between the European Union and the Russian Federation is presented in great detail. Individual factors, which contribute to a positive development of relations on the one side and to the increase of tensions on the other, are also analyzed. On the basis of the analysis the thesis concludes that interdependence is inevitable and therefore the time has come to turn conflicting suppositions into possibilities of profound cooperation and establishment of stable politics to cope with common challenges.