Suchergebnisse

In connection to the process of the public administration reforms which take place in most of the European countries and also in connection to the "European administrative space", the issues of studying and mutually comparing administrative systems of various European countries, especially EU member countries, become more and more topical. They focus not only on purposeful and effective mutual use of experience in administrative systems improvements, but also on improving orientation in the already mentioned "European administrative space". There is nodue attention devoted so far to the systematic study of administrative systems of (other) European countries. Most of the publications which focus on this issue (mostly study books, study materials, or occassional articles) describe it only on a "descriptive" (mostly simplified) level. The cause of this lies in (apart from time and financial demands) significant complexity of the given issue, in terminological complications and in difficulties of getting adequate (essentially necessary) factography and in practically non-existing adequate methodology. Legal comparative jurisprudence and comparative studies of political systems might inspire onewhen developing the methodology. Even under the current situation, it would be efficient to pay more attention to the comparative studies of the structure of administrative systems, or to some selected areas of the public administration, for example to personnel systems in the public administration, financing public administration or administration of the public property. A thorough "stock -taking" of all the materials which have ever been published about this matter (even in different contexts) in our country orabroad might serve as a basis of these fragmented studies.

Foreword by the Editors -- General Introduction -- 1. Status of Religious Communities -- 2. Relations between the State and Islam -- 3. State Support for Islamic Religious Communities -- 4. The Islamic Community of the Czech Republic -- 5. Muslims and the Law on Issues of Social Integration -- 6. Mosques and Prayer Houses -- 7. Burial and Cemeteries -- 8. Education and Schools -- 9. Further and Higher (Tertiary) Education -- 10. Islamic Chaplaincy in Public Institutions -- 11. Employment and Social Law -- 12. Islamic Slaughter and Food Regulation -- 13. Islamic Goods and Services -- 14. Islamic Dress -- 15. Criminal Law -- 16. Family Law -- Bibliography -- Index.

The paper presents a wide spectrum of the existing theories of sociology, law & political science dealing with the discretion of officials in public & social policy. Concretely, the paper focuses on three different ways of how to understand the existence of discretion (definition perspective), its functions (role perspective), & its use by officials at the state & local levels (structural perspective). These perspectives are presented in order to identify factors that determine officials' discretion & to grasp the concept of discretion as a tool that reveals the limits of officials' behavior. In the end the paper summarizes the constituent factors determining public officials' discretion. 42 References. Adapted from the source document.

The aim of the contribution is to examine and analyse prosecutor's notice by which prosecutor performs supervision of compliance with the law and generally binding legal regulations by public administration. The contribution's aim is not just a description of current legal state but in addition of that the authors try to make reference to problem issues of the legislation de lege lata as well as several unclear theoretical and application questions whose analysis and answering is part of the content of this contribution. In connection with processed issues the authors off er certain recommendations and propositions which could pro futuro fi nd its application not only in the legal regulation of the prosecutor's notice, but also in the case of supervision of compliance with the legitimacy in public administration.

"This article deals with the relationship between public opinion and rumour from ancient times, through the Middle Ages and right up to today. It will examine the terms which were used and which often depended not just on a particular author but usually an entire social class. The most often used terms to describe opinion, fama and existimatio, occurred in the speeches of politicians which were presented as the valuable opinions of the elite whereas the concepts opinio, rumor or sermo were considered as low value and unreliable opinions of plebeians to whom the ruling classes attributed the spreading and creation of rumours. The concept of fama, more often fama publica, indicated in the Middle Ages a local network of knowledge, a mechanism for the collective evaluation of an individual. In this sense it played an important role in the courts of law. The issue of rumours is common to all subsequent historical periods because public opinion usually both generated, and was supported, by rumour. The article also puts forward a hypothesis why the all-powerful fama dissapeared from the courtrooms, why it lost its significance and became purely a rumour." (author's abstract)

The study examines public's perceptions of the political climate in the Slovak society before the Parliamentary Elections scheduled for 2002. It compares public's opinions and views during two specific periods-In October 1997-a year before Parliamentary Elections (three years into Vladimir Mečiar's government) and in September 2001 (approximately 3 years into the government of Mikulaš Dzurinda). Findings of two separate empirical sociological surveys, one conducted in October 1997, other in September 2001, conducted by the Institute for Public Affairs form the basis for analysis. The results of the analysis showed that despite the fact that the public perceived the socio-political situation as gradually worsening after the 1998 Parliamentary elections, their perceptions as recorded in September 2001, are qualitatively of a different nature than those observed in October 1997 (Vladimir Mečiar's government). This difference was observed mainly in the area of public's perception of problems in the society, evaluation of developments in specific areas [in society], as well as the degree of public's pre-election expectations. When it comes to public opinion, the general mood before the 2002 elections is dictated predominantly by the problems in the economy and the social sphere-it is not caused by any shortcomings in guaranteeing democracy and the rule of law, as was the case before 1998 election. ; The study examines public's perceptions of the political climate in the Slovak society before the Parliamentary Elections scheduled for 2002. It compares public's opinions and views during two specific periods-In October 1997-a year before Parliamentary Elections (three years into Vladimir Mečiar's government) and in September 2001 (approximately 3 years into the government of Mikulaš Dzurinda). Findings of two separate empirical sociological surveys, one conducted in October 1997, other in September 2001, conducted by the Institute for Public Affairs form the basis for analysis. The results of the analysis showed that ...

It is obvious that lobbying in European institutions is an inseparable part of the EU legislative process. The growth of lobbying & the greater sensitivity of European institutions to their public image have resulted in lobbying being more closely regulated now. The basic purpose of all regulation & codes is to bring lobbying into the open. The regulation of lobbying in Brussels seems essential so as to introduce greater transparency in EU law making. The aim of this paper is to outline the particularities of lobbying regulation in the European Commission & the European Parliament, ie., the two most lobbied EU institutions. The European Commission, with its monopoly of legislative initiative, offers a unique possibility to influence the process of legislation formation from the very beginning. The EP has been able to amend legislation since the enactment of the Single European Act in July 1987, thereby incorporating certain interests & policy aims in the decision making process. The paper aims to tackle the following questions: What is the development of European institutions' attitudes towards interest group actions? Are there any explicit regulation criteria for the assertion of interests? In this respect, does the EU act homogenously or not? And in the case that it does not, is there any substantiation for different approaches? Adapted from the source document.