Suchergebnisse

Abstract. The article explores the significance held by political myths for
legitimacy and politics. To that end, we examine political myth in line with
the contemporary theory of political myth, which understands political
myths as an integral part of all political communities that is not inherent
to just authoritarian and totalitarian regimes. Every political community
has their own stories/narratives that are accepted by most of the population and form the base of the legitimacy of the political order, whether it be a democratic or a non-democratic political order. In the final part of the article, we examine which narratives had such a legitimising power by analysing the political speeches of Franjo Tuđman while he was in office.
Keywords: legitimacy, politics, political myth, political speech analysis,
Tuđman.

Magistrska diplomska naloga nosi naslov Odločanje Sodišča Evropske unije o pristojnosti. V nalogi sem sprva opisala temeljna načela, ki so vodilo delovanja Sodišča Evropske unije, ter se seznanila z njihovo uporabo in razlago v praksi. Ugotovila sem, da med pravnim redom Evropske unije in pravnimi redi držav članic velja načelo nadrejenosti ter da je pravni red Evropske unije superioren. Sledilo je raziskovanje, kako Sodišče Evropske unije odloča o pristojnosti, pri čemer sem spoznala, da ima Sodišče Evropske unije zelo pomembno vlogo, ko odloča o razmejitvi pristojnosti med državo članico ter Evropsko unijo. S sodno prakso namreč riše mejo med avtonomnostjo države članice ter posegi v njeno avtonomnost s strani Evropske unije. Nato sem opisala in spoznavala kakšne so njegove pristojnosti ter kakšni so postopki, ki jih Sodišče Evropske unije uporablja pri svojem odločanju. Ugotovila sem, da je temeljna naloga Sodišča Evropske unije skrbeti za enotno razlago in uporabo prava Evropske unije. Ugotovila sem, da Sodišče Evropske unije skozi sodno prakso čedalje bolj širi svoje pristojnosti in krepi svojo vlogo v razmerju do držav članic, čeprav v praksi vse države članice temu niso prav naklonjene. Na koncu naloge sem opisala in pojasnila, kako so se pristojnosti Sodišča Evropske unije okrepile po sprejemu Lizbonske pogodbe, ter poskušala poiskati razlike ter podobnosti med sistemom delitve oblasti v Evropski uniji ter sistemom delitve oblasti v zvezni državi, predvsem s strani odločanja Sodišča Evropske unije ter njegovih pristojnosti. ; In this assignment, I first described the fundamental principles that constitute the functioning of the Court of Justice of the European Union, and took note of their application and interpretation into practice. I have discovered that the principle of superiority is applied between the legal order of Member States and the rule of European Union in which the legal order of the European Union is superior. This was followed by a study of how the European Court of Justice decides on jurisdiction, and I realized that the Court of Justice of the European Union plays a very important role in deciding on the delimitation of competences between a Member State and the European Union. Through its case-law the Court of Justice of the European Union draws the boundary between the autonomy of a Member State and interference with Member States' autonomy by the European Union. I then described and learned about what its competences are and what are the procedures used by the Court of Justice of the European Union in its decision-making. I have found out that the fundamental task of the Court of Justice of the European Union is to ensure uniform interpretation and application of European Union law. I have found that the Court of Justice of the European Union increasingly expands its jurisdiction through jurisprudence and strengthens its role vis-à ; -vis Member States, although in practice all Member States do not favor this right. At the end of the thesis, I described and explained how the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the European Union was strengthened after the adoption of the Lisbon Treaty, and sought to find differences and similarities between the system of division of power in the European Union and the system of division of power in the federal state, notably through the decision-making of the Court and its powers.

Sodba ESČP mora biti ustrezno implementirana na nacionalni ravni, zato bodo uporabljeni nadzorstveni mehanizmi Sveta Evrope. Ko ESČP izda zoper državo obsodilno sodbo, je posredovana Odboru ministrov, ki mu je na podlagi EKČP zaupana naloga nadzora nad izvršitvijo dokončne sodbe. Odbor ministrov ugotavlja v običajnem ali v razširjenem postopku, ali je država sprejela vse potrebne ukrepe za izvršitev naloženih obveznosti iz pravnomočne sodbe. Če je država izpolnila vse obveznosti iz sodbe, Odbor ministrov sprejme resolucijo, s katero konča nadzor. Združeno kraljestvo in Rusija sta državi, ki v zadnjih letih močno kljubujeta avtoriteti ESČP in zavračata izvršitev nekaterih sodb tega sodišča. V Rusiji so sprejeli sporni Zvezni ustavni zakon z dne 14. 12. 2015 št. 7-FKZ, ki je omogočil Ustavnemu sodišču Ruske federacije, da presoja skladnost sodb ESČP z Ustavo Ruske federacije. V primeru ugotovitve neskladnosti lahko Ustavno sodišče prepreči izvršitev sodbe ESČP. V Združenem kraljestvu že več let kljubujejo sodbi v zadevi Hirst proti ZK, tako da zavlačujejo s sprejemom zakonodajnih sprememb, ki jih je zahtevalo ESČP. Neizvrševanje sodb ima v obeh državah skupno točko – obe sta namreč ogrozili učinkovitost izvrševanja sodb ESČP ravno zaradi volilne pravice zapornikov. Kljubovanje ESČP je v Združenem kraljestvu ostalo na politični ravni, medtem ko je šla Rusija po drugačni poti, saj je sprejela zakonodajne spremembe prav z namenom, da ne bo izvrševala protiustavnih sodb ESČP. V Rusiji ne gre samo za razpravo o razmerju med strasbourškim sodiščem in domačimi sodišči tako kot v Združenem kraljestvu, ampak za kljubovanje države odločitvam v celoti, kar je zaskrbljujoče. Če hočejo ohraniti učinkovit sistem varstva človekovih pravic, si morajo Svet Evrope in njegove članice odločneje prizadevati za dosledno uresničevanje sodb ESČP. ; A judgment of the European Court of Human Rights (abbreviated as ECtHR) must be properly implemented on a national level. For that reason, supervisory mechanisms of the Council of Europe will be used. When the ECtHR delivers a judgment against a state, it is passed on to the Committee of Ministers, which is entrusted with a task of supervising enforcement of a final judgment. The Committee of Ministers finds whether the State has taken all necessary measures to comply with obligations imposed by a final judgment. If the State has fulfilled all obligations, the Committee of Ministers shall adopt a final resolution. The UK and Russia are countries that have strongly defined authority of the ECtHR in the recent years. In several occasions, both states refused to enforce judgments. In Russia, they adopted controversial Federal Constitutional Law of 14 December 2015 no. 7-FKZ that has enabled the Constitutional Court to assess compliance of judgments of the ECtHR with the Constitution of the Russian Federation. If the Constitutional Court finds that a judgment of the ECtHR is not in compliance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, it may prevent execution of a judgment. For many years, the UK has defied execution of a judgment in the case of Hirst v. the UK by delaying adoption of legislative changes that were required by the ECtHR. Failure to enforce judgments is a common point in both countries. In the UK, resentment against the ECtHR remains at political level. While in Russia, they implemented legislative changes with clear intention not to implement unconstitutional judgments of the ECtHR. If we want an effective system of human rights protection, we must continue to strive toward consistent implementation of judgments of the ECtHR.

Although the new international economic
order (NIEO) has mostly been assessed as a failure, its
ideas still seem relevant in today's crisis environment.
The new context clearly shows that the existing liberal
international order is ineffective and calls for deep
changes like in the times of the developing countries'
fight for the NIEO. The article considers whether its
principles remain of relevance today, which ones have
been amended and which should be newly introduced,
all based on NIEO-related lessons. Dilemmas between
international law or a rules-based order as a framework for global governance and whether the proposed
new inclusive global economic order is to be based on
values (and if so, which) are evaluated.
Keywords: new international economic order, new
inclusive global economic order, rules-based order, values, principles, international law, global governance,
lessons

The decision by the Council of Europe to ter minate the Russian Federation's membership of the Council of Europe on 16 March 2022 makes the issue of legal certainty for aliens actively participating in the war in Ukraine as part of the Ukrainian Armed Forces completely unpredictable. The academic literature and the case law of the European Court of Human Rights in the field of the legal status of alien combatants is limited, and the International Criminal Court has not complet ed any cases on this topic. This article addresses the prin ciple of case law and, above all, the principle of legality with regard to aliens and their active participation in the armed forces of Ukraine. This issue has become cen tral since the Russian Federation may or may not grant these persons the status of prisoner of war according to the Third Geneva Convention, relating to Protocol I, or may characterise them as criminal offenders or terro rists. Keywords: aliens, combatants, mercenaries, prisoners of war, war, armed conflict, terrorists