Análisis feminista del derecho: teorías, igualdad, interculturalidad y violencia de género
In: Transformacions 4.3
11 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Transformacions 4.3
The Mediation Act has been applied in the Republic of Serbia since 2005. In the past period, the application of this Act has pointed out to a number of drawbacks and deficiencies in the system of resolving disputes through mediation. The dominant features of the current mediation system are some inadequate legal solutions, poor organization and insufficient preparation of the courts to internalize mediation, failure to provide relevant information about mediation to litigants and other participants in the judicial process, insufficient judicial training and education of lawyers and parties on mediation and other ADR methods, etc. Considering that the primary purpose of mediation is to diminish the litigation caseload and reduce the costs of court proceedings, the basic goal of introducing mediation into the Serbian legal system has not been accomplished. In order to improve the mediation system, the Serbian authorities launched a public debate in 2010 on designing a new legislative act which would eliminate the shortcomings of previous act and improve the efficiency of mediation. After nearly four years, the extensive debate and confrontation of different mediation concepts led to adopting a new Draft Mediation Act in 2013. As compared to the applicable 2005 Mediation Act, the Draft Mediation Act contains some innovations, such as the enforceability of a mediation agreement under specific conditions and the opportunity of introducing mandatory mediation in some cases. In this paper, the author analyzes the above issues on the basis of findings of economic theory and the results of the empirical study on the efficiency of mediation in Serbia in civil matters. In this context, the author argues that the achievement of the above objectives (to reduce the caseload and legal costs] calls for establishing a sustainable mediation system. In addition to instituting good legal solutions (such as mandatory mediation], the system should be supported by joint efforts and financial resources of responsible institutions and individuals. In a nutshell, mediation may come to life only if the legislative efforts are accompanied by a large-scale social action aimed at promoting this form of dispute resolution.
BASE
In: Universitat Rovira i Virgili 72
JOVES, GÈNERE I VIOLÈNCIES: FEM NOSTRA LA PREVENCIÓ GUIA DE SUPORT PER A LA FORMACIÓ DE PROFESSIONALS -- LEGAL -- SUMARI -- AGRAÏMENTS -- PRÓLEG -- 1. INTRODUCCIÓ -- PRIMERA PART -- SEGONA PART -- BIBLIOGRAFIA -- MATERIALS PEDAGÒGICS -- BIOGRAFIES DE LES AUTORES -- CAPÍTULO 2. -- CAPÍTULO 3. -- CAPÍTULO 4. -- CAPÍTULO 5. -- SESSIÓ A: -- SESSIÓ B: -- SESSIÓ C: -- SESSIÓ D
In: Politicka misao, Band 52, Heft 1, S. 48
What are the doctrinal implications of international responses to the demise of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY)? Faced with harshly conflicting internal visions of Yugoslav self-determination, the international order - taking direction from the Badinter Commission - reacted in an essentially ad hoc manner against the most manifestly virulent of the competing ethno-nationalisms. In ascribing international legal status to a particular set of constitutionally-established internal boundaries, the Badinter Commission gave a rationale that masked rather than highlighted its departure from existing doctrine, seeking thereby to minimize any implications for the future of sovereignty and s elf-determination. Any effort to invoke the Badinter Commission judgments as evidence of a broader doctrinal transformation, attributing international legal personality to constitutionally-delineated sub-national units more generally, neglects the peculiar context of those judgments and threatens to lend undue support to externally-promoted secessionist projects. Adapted from the source document.
The impact of 'glass ceiling' syndrome and party selection on participation of women in parliament and other political institutions are examined in this article. 'Glass ceiling' syndrome, which means invisible, but almost impenetrable border that women face in professional life, keeping them away from positions of influence and progress in career, is the main reason for the small number of women involved in politics. According to the focus of the research, there are three groups of barriers to women's political participation. Most researchers examine the influence of the political system, institutional and legal mechanisms, the question of their transparency and functional improvement. Significantly less frequent approach came from authors who are concentrated on the social and economic barriers, financial conditions and the broader social context. The third group consists of those who are considering the ideological and psychological barriers, patriarchal cultural patterns, traditional gender roles, self-confidence, ambition and women's desire to be involved in politics. Political parties are key actors in the process of discrimination against women, because they do not allow them to be selected in a number of political functions. There are many factors that determine that the issue of gender equality is variously interpreted in political parties. The most present are contextual and ideological factors, referring to a different definition of the status of women on the political agenda, the social climate in terms of gender equality and respect for human rights, the level of social development and political freedom. Then come organizational factors pertaining to the structure of parties, the manner in which the leadership is elected, whether there are internal women's pressure groups and lobbying, and are women leaders are visible on high positions in decision-making process. Finally, there are institutional-legal factors, which include the type of electoral system, the legal and constitutional framework and the prescribed quotas on national and / or party level.
BASE
The impact of 'glass ceiling' syndrome and party selection on participation of women in parliament and other political institutions are examined in this article. 'Glass ceiling' syndrome, which means invisible, but almost impenetrable border that women face in professional life, keeping them away from positions of influence and progress in career, is the main reason for the small number of women involved in politics. According to the focus of the research, there are three groups of barriers to women's political participation. Most researchers examine the influence of the political system, institutional and legal mechanisms, the question of their transparency and functional improvement. Significantly less frequent approach came from authors who are concentrated on the social and economic barriers, financial conditions and the broader social context. The third group consists of those who are considering the ideological and psychological barriers, patriarchal cultural patterns, traditional gender roles, self-confidence, ambition and women's desire to be involved in politics. Political parties are key actors in the process of discrimination against women, because they do not allow them to be selected in a number of political functions. There are many factors that determine that the issue of gender equality is variously interpreted in political parties. The most present are contextual and ideological factors, referring to a different definition of the status of women on the political agenda, the social climate in terms of gender equality and respect for human rights, the level of social development and political freedom. Then come organizational factors pertaining to the structure of parties, the manner in which the leadership is elected, whether there are internal women's pressure groups and lobbying, and are women leaders are visible on high positions in decision-making process. Finally, there are institutional-legal factors, which include the type of electoral system, the legal and constitutional framework and the prescribed quotas on national and / or party level.
BASE
Nowadays, there are divided opinions in Bosnia and Herzegovina when it comes to further mandate of the OHR and the institution of the High Representative. However, the e nd of the mandate of the High Representative is realistically expected in the near future. The need to abolish the office of the OHR and the institution of the High Representative has been mentioned increasingly in Bosnia and Herzegovina, especially in the Republic of Srpska. The reasons for the abolition of the function of the High Representative are different between the entities in Bosnia and Herzegovina as well as among its constitutive peoples. The authority of the High Representative has been increasingly questioned.It is on that basis that questions arise more frequently whether his (High Representative) legal acts will be valid, in particular individual decisions, such as deprivation of certain rights to citizens, the right to work, political action and passive right to vote. Representatives of the international community are worried that the interested domestic political circles could set a thesis (and be successful at it) that all acts of the High Representative will cease to apply at the moment when Annex X of the General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina is ended.A number of imposed laws not yet adopted by the local legislator himself, in the event of cancellation, would actually return BiH to the original competences under the Constitution BiH, as the legal consequence. The institution of the High Representative was set up by Annex X (Agreement on Civilian Implementation of the Peaceful Solution) of the General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina.Simultaneously, bearing in mind these facts, legally speaking, Bosnia and Herzegovina can not be classified into any known form of international dependence, however, the objective situation is such that Bosnia and Herzegovina with the powers vested in the High Representative and the actions that he is taking, can be considered a state with a specific form of international dependence and a special form of guardianship.
BASE
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.
BASE
El TJUE ha desarrollado una rica jurisprudencia en torno a la edad como causa de discriminación prohibida, si bien con una exclusiva proyección en el ámbito de las relaciones laborales, pues hasta ahora es el único ámbito donde el Consejo ha ejercido la competencia prevista en el art. 19 TFUE en relación con esta causa de discriminación. Tal y como se articula en la Directiva 2000/78, la edad es merecedora de un nivel intermedio de protección, sobre todo en comparación con otras discriminaciones prohibidas por el Derecho de la Unión, como el sexo o la nacionalidad. Ello se debe a la propia redacción de la Directiva 2000/78, que establece un marco general mínimo para luchar contra la discriminación por razón de edad, circunscrito al ámbito del empleo y la ocupación. No obstante, el TJUE aporta importantes precisiones respecto al alcance y la articulación de las causas de justificación de una diferencia de trato basada en la edad, tal y como se establecen en dicha Directiva, así como respecto a ciertos efectos jurídicos de la no discriminación por razón de la edad, especialmente en las relaciones entre particulares. En este sentido, el TJUE ha afirmado la aplicación supletoria e incluso independiente del principio general del Derecho que prohíbe la discriminación por razón de la edad, también en las relaciones horizontales, siempre que la situación litigiosa se englobe dentro del ámbito de aplicación del Derecho de la Unión. La jurisprudencia Mangold/Kücükdeveci confirma con certeza que la Directiva 2000/78 no ha establecido un principio general de no discriminación por razón de la edad, sino que esta norma está destinada a facilitar la aplicación concreta de este principio general del Derecho en el ámbito del empleo y la ocupación, pero sin alterar el contenido ni el alcance jurídico del mismo. Ahora bien, en el Asunto Kücükdeveci el TJUE ha revisado el fundamento de este principio general del Derecho al entender que, a partir de su positivación en el art. 21 de la Carta de los Derechos Fundamentales, es ésta la sede desde la que dicho principio despliega sus posibilidades y los límites de su eficacia. Este razonamiento ha sido utilizado por el TJUE para afirmar que otras manifestaciones específicas del principio de no discriminación, como la orientación sexual, también se benefician del estatus de principio general del Derecho de la Unión. ; The ECJ has developed a significant amount of case law on age as a prohibited ground of discrimination, this case law having been so far exclusively reflected in the labour relations field. This is the only field where the Council has exercised the competence set forth in art. 19 of TFEU on this ground of discrimination. Under Directive 2000/78, age is granted an intermediate level of legal protection, especially when compared to other prohibited grounds of discrimination under EU Law, such as sex or nationality. This results from the drafting of Directive 2000/78 itself, which establishes a minimal general framework to fight discrimination on the ground of age, one exclusive to the employment and occupation fields. However, the ECJ provides significant specifications as to the scope and wording of the pleas for unequal treatment on the ground of age, as established in the said Directive. Likewise, the ECJ, details the particular legal effects of non-discrimination on the grounds of age, especially on relations between individuals. In this sense, the ECJ confirms the supplementary, even independent, application of the legal general principle prohibiting discrimination on grounds of age to horizontal relations, provided that the dispute is framed within the EU Law scope of application. The Mangold/Kücükdeveci case law confirms that Directive 2000/78 does not establish a general principle of non-discrimination on grounds of age, but it facilitates the application of this legal General Principle of EU Law to the labour field, without altering the principle's legal content or scope. Yet, in the Kücükdeveci case, the ECJ has reviewed the basis of this General Principle of EU Law, enshrined in Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, upon considering the latter the legal framework within which the principle becomes effective. This has been the reasoning provided by the ECJ so as to hold that other specific manifestations of the principle of non-discrimination, as for instance sexual orientation, are granted the status of General Principles of EU Law as well.
BASE
The subject matter of research in this paper is theoretical controversy related to the definition of right-wing extremism. Given the fact that extremism is a variable, amorphous and insufficiently researched phenomenon, largely conditioned by time, space, political and cultural differences, there is a great confusion in the field of political science when defining right-wing extremism. The problem of researching right-wing extremism is additionally complicated by various terms that are being used in the contemporary literature as its synonyms, such as right-wing radicalism, neo-Fascism, ultra-radicalism, etc. In order to provide the most valid theoretical determination of right-wing extremism, the author provides a detailed analysis of all the components constituting this phenomenon and examines their causality. In the political praxis, the term extremism is extensively abused, which additionally complicates its determination. Videlicet, politicians often use term 'extremist' in order to discredit their political opponents. While during the French revolution aristocracy saw the bourgeoisie as extremists, the members of the working class later stated that the bourgeoisie were extremists. The problem lies in the fact that, in politics, extremists are not only the ones who use violence as modus operandi; indeed, it is also used by political opponents who do not belong to the extreme political option. Another aggravating factor in defining right-wing extremism is that many administrative and academic definitions do not make a clear distinction between extremism and related phenomena, such as terrorism, radicalism and populism. Extremism is most often equaled with terrorism, which gives rise to another problem in defining this phenomenon. The relation between extremism and terrorism is the relation of general and specific. Namely, every act of terrorism is concurrently considered to be an act of extremism, but not vice versa, given the fact that every act of extremism does not lead towards a higher level of political violence (i.e. towards terrorism). Even in the terms of legal sanctioning, it is much easier to incriminate terrorism in comparison to extremism. The Serbian criminal legislation envisages relevant punishment for committing an act of terrorism, without even mentioning extremism, which implies that there is no penalty prescribed for committing an act of extremism. Despite numerous academic and administrative definitions on the concept of extremism, there is still a lack of a balanced approach to defining right-wing extremism, which is also largely conditioned by political definitions. The most prominent problem in addressing the social phenomena such as right-wing extremism lies in the fact that these social phenomena are dynamic and, in order to be analysed in a scientifically objective manner, they must be examined in the specific temporal, spatial and socio-political context.
BASE