In this paper, we focus on terrorism through the criminal legislation of Bosnia and Herzegovina. In the existing scientific fund, professional literature, various organizations, institutions, political entities, there is not a sufficient degree of agreement to be able to form a court that there is, in general, a generally accepted definition of terrorism. On the other hand, given the various activities and actions, results, effects and consequences of terrorist organizations and terrorists, we must state that there is a very high degree of agreement, that terrorism is one of the biggest security and security threats today. The growing increase in terrorist actions and threats has led to the implementation of new legislative norms in order to better counter terrorism. Organized crime at the international level and terrorist activities increasingly require the connection of states, international organizations through Conventions, Resolutions or Laws. Terrorism acts ambivalently and as a threat to the stability of society, states and their development on a global level. The expansion of terrorism over time has surprised many organizations, institutions, whose goal is to preserve security, where the need for reforms has arisen. Through the laws in Bosnia and Herzegovina, we will see how the legislator has solved the issue of terrorism and what are the consequences for those who do not adhere to them.
Корупција представља једну од најважнијих тема међународне политике сузбијања криминалитета. Управо нас она упућује, заједно са савременим облицима коруптивног деловања, на потребу увођења одговорности правних лица за дела корупције. Дуго година владајућа максима societas delinquere non potest, која је одбацивала идеју о кривичној одговорности правних лица, у савременом кривичном законодавству је доведена у питање. О неопходности законског уређења проблематике одговорности правних лица за кривична дела говоре многобројни међународни документи које је наша земља ратификовала и на тај начин преузела обавезу имплементације норми међународног права. Овом приликом проблематизујемо питање које се односи на одговорност правних лица за кривична дела и кривичноправно сузбијање корупције. На овом месту размотрићемо да ли је потребно да се говори о кривичној одговорности правних лица, или је примереније терминолошки и са становишта теорије говорити о казненој одговорности правних лица. ; Corruption is considered a social problem not only in Serbia. This phenomenon is given more and more attention at the international level as well. This primarily means coordinated efforts in opposing this obstacle and threat to the development of every country. It is surprising how material-criminal legal norms were narrowly determined in the field of one of the most important topics of international and national policy of crime suppression. For decades, and particularly thanks to sensations of the last years, the practitioners, especially those in the field of judiciary and police, have been warning of corruption and the need of its suppression and limiting. The connection between corruption and organized crime has intensified even more the discussions on counter measures that could be incorporated into the existing laws and remove their weaknesses. Every country should undertake a number of measures and activities in the field of battle against corruption taking into account the international standards in this field. These measures may be of preventive or repressive character. This paper deals with criminal legal intervention that represents ultima ratio, i.e. the last resort that should not be used until all other means and manners to protect someone have been exhausted. Our legislator has responded in the meantime, removed the most important flaws that distort the picture about our criminal legal regulations and incriminated corruptive behaviour, taking into account at that the obligations undertaken based on international conventions. Very delicate field of the responsibility of legal persons for criminal act remains unregulated. In this paper we point out to the need and state the reasons, with parallel study of the achieved solutions in some countries and Anglo-Saxon and continental legal culture, why the issue of responsibilities of legal persons for acts of corruption and even more widely should be regulated by a separate law.
The issue of security in the new social and political context has not stopped attracting the attention of strategic security studies, this time with the emphasis on contemporary concepts in response to non-military security issues, such as demographic changes or environmental degradation. It is obvious that we live in a world of fundamental political and economic changes in relations between states and non-state actors. Instability, military threats and conflicts are back in the focus of security policy, although in a completely new way that requires new understanding and a new attitude towards these categories, as well as a new response from the state and especially from the international community towards these kinds of threats or the use of force in a post-Cold-War order. In order to create a system in which all countries can function under the same rules, act in accordance with them and react in certain situations in compliance with those rules, it was necessary to create a single system of collective security. This system is a good basis for all countries to react according to the same rules and standards in certain situations when their safety is compromised. Integration processes and collective security are constants of a modern society and every country seeks to become a part of a specific system, whether it be a security-based, political or economic framework of integration. The main factor that was very important for the member states of NATO was the disappearance of the key danger coming from the East in the form of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact. On the other hand, the issue of NATO's existence and future arose, as did the issue of justifying its existence, bearing in mind the absence of threats and enemies that might jeopardize the Western world. Academia and a number of scholars believed that NATO would cease to exist. For them the existence of such an alliance no longer made any sense, and they thought that it would be best for all the member states to stop being a part of such an Alliance. vi By the Declaration of Independence adopted by Parliament on June 3, 2006, Montenegro clearly committed itself to Euro-Atlantic Integration. Montenegro's membership of NATO and the EU is one of the foreign policy priorities of the Government of Montenegro. At a time when all South-East European countries are included in the Euro-Atlantic integration process, Montenegro's commitment to becoming a part of the regional and international security system (UN, NATO, EU, and OSCE) is a realistic and the best solution for achieving long-lasting stability and prosperity in the region. Montenegro's strategic goal is to build a modern and functional security system that has the ability to respond in the most efficient manner to the challenges, risks and threats to the state. For every country, the Constitution is the basis of its future path towards the democratization of the society and membership of international organizations. As the supreme law of the country, it is necessary to include all the standards that will clearly indicate the commitment of the state to the direction it wants to go, how it will develop, and which principles related to human rights and freedoms it must have. The Constitution of Montenegro does not question in any of its parts Montenegro's commitment towards membership of NATO and the EU. This is very important not only from a constitutional point of view, but also from the point of view of the international standards and norms that apply in other countries and represent the democratic standards of developed countries. Also, in this way Montenegro as a country demonstrates that despite any possible change of government it will remain committed to the European and Euro-Atlantic integration processes. At this moment, this determination is very important, bearing in mind all other aspects that could potentially affect Montenegro's path towards the Euro-Atlantic family. Consideration of the changing security environment in Europe and worldwide, as well as the improvement of the security situation by a number of Eastern European countries entering the EU and NATO, which inter alia required a reform of their defense systems in accordance with NATO standards, raises the issue of the future use of the defense capacities of Montenegro. ; The issue of security in the new social and political context has not stopped attracting the attention of strategic security studies, this time with the emphasis on contemporary concepts in response to non-military security issues, such as demographic changes or environmental degradation. It is obvious that we live in a world of fundamental political and economic changes in relations between states and non-state actors. Instability, military threats and conflicts are back in the focus of security policy, although in a completely new way that requires new understanding and a new attitude towards these categories, as well as a new response from the state and especially from the international community towards these kinds of threats or the use of force in a post-Cold-War order. In order to create a system in which all countries can function under the same rules, act in accordance with them and react in certain situations in compliance with those rules, it was necessary to create a single system of collective security. This system is a good basis for all countries to react according to the same rules and standards in certain situations when their safety is compromised. Integration processes and collective security are constants of a modern society and every country seeks to become a part of a specific system, whether it be a security-based, political or economic framework of integration. The main factor that was very important for the member states of NATO was the disappearance of the key danger coming from the East in the form of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact. On the other hand, the issue of NATO's existence and future arose, as did the issue of justifying its existence, bearing in mind the absence of threats and enemies that might jeopardize the Western world. Academia and a number of scholars believed that NATO would cease to exist. For them the existence of such an alliance no longer made any sense, and they thought that it would be best for all the member states to stop being a part of such an Alliance. vi By the Declaration of Independence adopted by Parliament on June 3, 2006, Montenegro clearly committed itself to Euro-Atlantic Integration. Montenegro's membership of NATO and the EU is one of the foreign policy priorities of the Government of Montenegro. At a time when all South-East European countries are included in the Euro-Atlantic integration process, Montenegro's commitment to becoming a part of the regional and international security system (UN, NATO, EU, and OSCE) is a realistic and the best solution for achieving long-lasting stability and prosperity in the region. Montenegro's strategic goal is to build a modern and functional security system that has the ability to respond in the most efficient manner to the challenges, risks and threats to the state. For every country, the Constitution is the basis of its future path towards the democratization of the society and membership of international organizations. As the supreme law of the country, it is necessary to include all the standards that will clearly indicate the commitment of the state to the direction it wants to go, how it will develop, and which principles related to human rights and freedoms it must have. The Constitution of Montenegro does not question in any of its parts Montenegro's commitment towards membership of NATO and the EU. This is very important not only from a constitutional point of view, but also from the point of view of the international standards and norms that apply in other countries and represent the democratic standards of developed countries. Also, in this way Montenegro as a country demonstrates that despite any possible change of government it will remain committed to the European and Euro-Atlantic integration processes. At this moment, this determination is very important, bearing in mind all other aspects that could potentially affect Montenegro's path towards the Euro-Atlantic family. Consideration of the changing security environment in Europe and worldwide, as well as the improvement of the security situation by a number of Eastern European countries entering the EU and NATO, which inter alia required a reform of their defense systems in accordance with NATO standards, raises the issue of the future use of the defense capacities of Montenegro.
Vanredno stanje predstavlja neredovnu, izuzetnu situaciju u kojoj se mogu naći i najdemokratskije države. U takvim okolnostima obično se poziva na staro pravilo da je spas naroda (države) najviši zakon. Ipak, s obzirom na to da je tada, zbog višeg razloga (opstanak države), neophodan izvestan stepen koncentracije vlasti u rukama egzekutive, što neminovno otvara mogućnost zloupotreba, ustavotvorci moraju biti vrlo pažljivi prilikom normiranja ovako osetljivog pitanja. Centralni deo rada ukazuje na prednosti i mane sadašnjeg ustavnog rešenja u Srbiji, prvenstveno u odnosu na način uvođenja vanrednog stanja postavljen u Ustavu Srbije iz 1990. godine. U nekadašnjem srpskom ustavu predsednik Republike je bio ovlašćen za donošenje odluke o vanrednom stanju, što je danas u nadležnosti Narodne skupštine, koja je nesumnjivo najpotpuniji i najbolji reprezent narodne volje. Međutim, pitanje efikasnosti odlučivanja i brzine reagovanja u toj delikatnoj stvari i dalje ostaje sporno. Pored izvesnih nedoslednosti, pa čak možda i omaški, postojeći Ustav Republike Srbije iz 2006. godine ipak u osnovi pokazuje demokratska nastojanja da se donošenje odluke o uvođenju vanrednog stanja višestruko osigura, a pogotovo da se u vreme važenja vanrednog stanja u potpunosti poštuju ljudska prava u skladu sa preuzetim međunarodnim obavezama. ; State of emergency marks an irregular, exceptional situation, which potentially may hit the most democratic countries as well. Since ancient times, under those circumstances, the rule salus populi suprema lex (safety of the people is supreme demand) is applied and used as an excuse. However, as under those circumstances a kind of concentration of power within the executive branch is unavoidable, there is a need to have very cautiously measured constitutional norms regulating that balance. The main goal of this paper is to examine advantages and shortcomings of the current regulation of that issue in Serbia according to the 2006 Constitution, particularly in connection with the previous, 1990 Constitution and the experience of introducing state of emergency in the country. According to the previous Serbian Constitution, President of the Republic was engaged to introduce the state of emergency, while according to the current one, that decision was moved into hands of the National Assembly – which is undeniably the best and the most prominent representative of the will of the people. However, the issue of efficiency and properly quick reaction is at stake. Although the existing 2006 Constitution has some inconsistencies, and even more some omissions, it basically reflects democratic tendencies to secure in many ways the decision on emergency state introduction, and particularly to ensure respect of the human rights during the state of emergency in compliance with the established international obligations.
The Republic of Serbia represents an employer for civil servants and employees, for employees who perform tasks within the scope of state administration bodies, courts, public prosecutors' offices, for police officers as a separate category of civil servants, etc. The regulation of the labor legal status of these persons is also carried out through the conclusion of special collective agreements in addition to the normative. A significant part of the state administration is made up of public services that, by their significance and manner of carrying out tasks of general interest, as well as by the method of financing, represent the central level of the state that encompasses the entities which are responsible for the provision of predominantly non-market services which the state is obliged to provide in order to meet the general needs of its people. The concept of administration has been established as a profession of general interest. Administration carried out by the state authorities itself is viewed in a narrower sense, and when we look at the administration through public services or public administration, we have to bear in mind that non-state actors are also entrusted with administrative activities. Based on the nature of their work, state authorities have a significant administrative function in regulating tasks and prerequisites which are important for collective negotiations in the public sector. The state administration also carries out registration of social partners, tasks related to determining the representativeness of social partners, registration of collective agreements and decision-making on the extended effect of the collective agreement. Relevant authorities, councils, state administration boards and special organizations perform their activities through tripartite and bipartite social dialogue, and decisions are made by consensus. The state administration performs and ensures the performance of state functions important for collective negotiations in the public sector, conducts a procedure for obtaining the authority of representatives of state bodies and public services to start, negotiate and conclude a collective agreement. Also, the state administration has an active role in the process of registration of the collective agreements, as well as in the obligatory mediation and conciliation and arrangement of the minimum work process in activities of general interest. The state administration maintains the legal order and secures public interest through the procedure of concluding and applying collective agreements in the public sector. Through the realization of these activities, the participation of state entities in the conclusion of collective agreements opens the question of the legal nature of collective agreements, that is, leaves the possibility for the analysis and comparison of the collective agreement and the administrative contract. Collective agreement is a general act, but in its adoption, administrative-legal relationship is recognized as a significant relationship which is regulated by numerous norms of international and national law. Both contracts are concluded with the agreement of the contracting parties, and with the reduced authoritative function of the state administration. A particularly collective association of state bodies and public services can be considered as social acts that regulate rights, obligations and responsibilities from the employment of public sector employees, which contain mandatory and normative parts, but each is an autonomous source of labor law in the public sector.
