Suchergebnisse

The Secretary-General is appointed by the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the Security Council. Due to the veto power of the permanent members, lack of transparency and the recommendation of only one candidate, the appointment of the Secretary-General is basically a decision of the Security Council. UN member states, civil society organizations and schoolars point out the need for a more active role of the General Assembly during the appointment of the Secretary-General. Formation of the ad hoc working group for the revitalization of the work of the General Assembly raised this problem to a higher level. Current procedure of appointment of the Secretary-General was reasonable at the time of the adoption of the UN Charter. The circumstances of the 21st century require different solutions. The paper aims to show the necessity and possibilities of strengthening the role of the General Assembly in the process of appointment of the Secretary-General and obstacles existing in this regard. The long-term activities of the ad hoc working group for the revitalization of the work of the General Assembly gave positive results in terms of more active role of the General Assembly during the appointment of the Secretary General in 2016. The paper aims to show that the results achieved by the ad hoc working group are not long-term efficient. The most effective solution for strengthening the role of the General Assembly in the appointment of the Secretary-General is the revision of the UN Charter.

From the very beginning the steps towards unification of European countries have been founded on the personal incentives of politicians, but not on broad democratic agreement of the people. That method has never been abandoned: even the huge administrative apparatus in Brussels that makes important decisions without any democratic control could be seen as natural consequence of such praxis. It is just because of such political behaviour where important political documents and decisions are made out of the eyes of the public, which the great political incentives, such as referendum on the European Constitution, have failed. If we ask ourselves where it has gone wrong the possible answer is that EU has been made according the needs of the rich and mighty countries. The states that are located on the periphery of EU have no political influence on the main decisions, and cannot decide about their own economic development. They are simply forced to adapt ourselves to the interests of the most advanced. But the protests all over EU show that the general economic concept of the EU is wrong and that it will generate crises in the long run.

Post-cold war concept of security is based on realistic postulates and emphasises a concept of state, forces,power and national interests. Military and political concept of security was dominant while the relations between the superpowers was based on the so called bipolar balance of power. Identity of states was realised by membership in military, political and economic organisations. The strategy of returning to the era of nuclear weapons reaches its full flowering. The crucial point of security after the end of Cold war consists of searching for giving answers to the threats coming from the outside and abilities of states to maintain their independent integrity against changed relations among the powers, which potentially may become enemies. Under such circumstances powers should not be ignored in any interpretation of any aspect of security, for realistic theories of international relations are still of great influence in the field of security. They will be modified in different conditions and will act in the sense of enlarged concept of security - instead of dominant concepts of political and military security typical for the Cold War era, economic, social and environmental factors will appear. Basic weakness of the realistic theories of security is in the lack of recognising the importance of cooperation between main factors in international community. This failure will be replaced neo realistic and liberal and institutional theories of security which emphasises the concept of cooperation in the first place. Concepts of power, forces and integral processes will be observed within the context of changes in the international relations.

The author constrasts the normativity of Europe with the center-periphery issue. He argues that the normativity of Europe has been challenged by the center-periphery problem. In the first part of the article, the author discusses the normativity of Europe and proposes a new concept – embeded normativity. In the second part, he presents several theories on the center-perifery relations and stresses the relevance of structural assymetries. In the third part, Central and Eastern Europe is compared to Latin America in three historic sequences. The last part is a summary of the arguemts and their relevance for the present crisis that can be understood as an ensemble of structural and systemic tendencies. ; U članku se kontrastira normativnost Evrope sa problematikom centar/periferija. Tvrdi se da je normativnost Evrope izazvana pomenutom problematikom. Shodno tome, u prvom delu se razmatraju elementi normativnosti u Evropi i pokušava se promisliti kategorija utkane normativnosti. U drugom delu se tretiraju teorije o odnosima između centra i periferije, te naglašava se relevantnost teorija koje artikulišu strukturalne asimetrije. U trećem delu se logikom komparativne metode stavljaju u odnos postignuća Srednje i Istočne Evrope i Latinske Amerike, i tematizuje se analitička relevantnost pomenute komparacije s obzirom na tri izabrane istorijske sekvence. U poslednjem delu se rezimira izvedena argumentacija s obzirom na sadašnju krizu i pokazuje da se reperiferijalizacija krize može razumeti kao sklop između strukturalnih i sistematskih tendencija.

This paper show why the standardization of administrative procedure is important for the state legal system that, in the last two decades, the administrative procedure codes were adopted in almost all of the European states. Afterwards author analyzed main driving forces for development of administrative procedural law at the level of the European Union and the Council of Europe. The most important legal sources of European administrative procedural law (basic standards, principles, recommendations and guidelines in this area) are concisely presented but it is clearly indicated that there are certain ambiguities, that these sources don't apply equally to all institutions of the Union, and that they still don't make finished, complete and forever given system that can be automatically transferred to jurisprudence of the member states and candidate countries. Moreover, often administrative process laws of the member states contain rules that are not existing in this kind of regulation at European Union level and that is why the process of adopting the first European Union general law on administrative procedure was initiated, which would further improve the standards of European administrative process in general. When it comes to the general administrative procedure of the Republic of Serbia it has been shown that in spite of the strategic orientation towards the reform of the Law on Administrative Procedure expressed in numerous strategies, our executive authorities in this area have not yet moved beyond the development of the third version of the Draft Law on General administrative Procedure which was afterward adopted by the Government as the Bill. In his final remarks the author concludes stating that the largest number of European standards of administrative process are included in the final version of the Draft, but without eliminating the shortcomings of the existing Law, and without normative adjusting to the circumstances in which the Serbian administration operates, and with unnecessary abandonment of some solutions that have proved to be right in the decades-long practice of administrative authorities.

International police and other cooperation is a necessity of the modern world and imperative for the survival of human civilization. The goal of cooperation is that states and the international community unite in opposing crime as the greatest peacetime evil in the world. This is particularly in relation to organized crime, terrorism, and corruption and other most serious forms of crime in contemporary society. Cooperation takes place at the bilateral, regional and multilateral levels. Bilateral cooperation mainly has a trans-border character of neighboring countries, while the regional cooperation between states within certain areas such as the SEE region (Western Balkan) or Europe (e.g. Europol). Multilateral cooperation is mainly on a broader level, e.g. in the field of combating terrorism or through universal organizations (e.g. Interpol). International police cooperation in Europe has a long tradition. One part takes place today in this area through the OSCE, with the caveat that this is a global organization that deals with security issues. The Council of Europe is the next organization through which co-operation began in the past and is partly carried out to this day, given that it brings all European countries together (except Belarus). Cooperation is more intensive still throughout the European Union, its forerunners, the current forms of the organization and present mechanisms (EAW- European surrender and arrest warrant).53 The cooperation in the EU, that takes place through Europol as a specialized agency of the Union is especially current, but with minimal operational competencies. In the SEE region, a significant cooperation between countries of the former Yugoslavia and countries in its neighborhood has been achieved. This cooperation is not only based on bilateral and multilateral acts, but primarily regional documents of which the most important are the International Convention on Police Cooperation in SEE and SELEC Convention. According to these and other acts, all the countries in the region have taken part in regional cooperation, since the fight against crime is the common interest of all. This applies in particular to organized crime, terrorism, corruption and other most serious forms of crime. Extremely important shapes, forms and mechanisms of international police cooperation are: exchange of information, joint investigation teams, joint operational actions, liaison officers, contact points, regional centers for police and customs cooperation, joint police stations and others. To recap, international police cooperation in the world today is an expression of anti-criminal solidarity between states and its prospects are clear, because the danger of crime is global and requires a harmonized response at the international level.

The Paper observes the foundation and development of OSCE as the most important contemporary security organization from the perspective of historical and political dynamics and the interests of international subjects. Originally founded as Forum for the reduction of tensions between ideologically confronted East and West, OSCE (than: CSCE) has evolved into permanent security organization with diversified activities and jurisdictions. However, that evolution failed to be up to the new challenges, so the needs for further reforms of OSCE reemerged. Second part of the Paper follows the propositions of OSCE system reforms, made by its member states, by Panel (formed on Council of Ministers in Sofia, in December 2004) and by Russia that has even proposed 'Agreement of European security' as the basis for completely new remaking of European security out of the existing OSCE system. In the final part of the Paper, influences of contemporary political crises in OSCE member states on the possible reform of this security organization are being analyzed.

In this paper the authors examine the dynamics of security relations of the three key security actors in the Euro-Atlantic area - NATO, Russia, and the European Union. Based on their findings, and using a comparative analysis of the actors' doctrinal and strategic documents, as well as their observations of contemporary challenges, risks and threats, the authors discuss if, and to what extent, their productive security cooperation is possible, or their positions are opposed in such a way that in short and medium terms only disputes or less or more open conflicts are likely to be expected between them. This leads to a conclusion that a majority of recognized security challenges, risks and threats are shared, as well as that these actors see each other not only as competitors but also as partners in the struggle against those challenges, risks and threats, which opens possibilities of security cooperation.