Suchergebnisse

Abstract. The aim of this article to identify and highlight limitations and challenges of the legal regulation of the use of facial recognition technology for surveillance purposes. The UN and the EU are seeking to develop robust human rights safeguards to regulate such practices, whereas civil society calls for a complete ban on it use for mass surveillance. The type of this technology makes it difficult to impose legal and democratic control over its lawful use and to prevent abuse. We conclude that the regulation of this area, no matter how restrictive, amounts to tacit approval of the mass use of this type of technology that opens the door to various ways of abusing human rights and freedoms, and whose justification from the perspective of the public interest is questionable.
Keywords: video surveillance, facial recognition technology, right to privacy, protection of personal data, Clearview AI

Abstract. In which ways can we theorise the recent illegalised migrations in Europe? This article considers
theoretical novelties in the field of migration studies
that have emerged since the mass migration into the
European Union seen in 2015. Methodologically, the
authors combine critical (discursive) analysis with the
testing of certain still relevant theoretical concepts that
have yet to be applied in migration studies, based on
fieldwork along the Balkan Route over the last 5 years.
The analysis has shown that the defining and decisive
feature of the recent illegalised migrations, insufficiently considered by migrations scholarship, is the political
subjectivity and agency of the migrants. Recognition of
such agency makes migration the site of the critique of
global inequalities and the site of inclusive social transformation.
Keywords: Migrations; Europe; Political Theory; State;
Balkan Migrant Route

Vprašanje kolektivnih pravnih sredstev v Evropski uniji je v zadnjih letih zaradi pobud evropskih institucij pridobilo veliko pozornosti. V praksi se ja namreč pokazalo, da je intervencija Evropske unije na tem področju potrebna, saj se instituti kolektivne tožbe v državah članicah zelo razlikujejo. Razlikujejo se po vrsti kolektivne tožbe, ki je na voljo, aktivni legitimaciji, uporabi sistema vključitve ali izključitve, financiranja tožbe itd. Heterogenost na tem področju je problematična, saj niso vsi državljani držav članic Evropske unije deležni enake pravne zaščite v primerih množičnih oškodovanj. Različne ureditve držav članic pa imajo tudi negativni vpliv na enotni notranji trg. V nalogi sem analizirala izbrane postopke s kolektivnimi tožbami v državah članicah Evropske unije in osvetlila razlike med njimi. Ugotovila sem, da je ukrepanje organov Evropske unije potrebno, da se zagotovi ustrezno urejene in uravnotežene mehanizme, ki prispevajo k učinkoviti zaščiti in izvrševanju pravic v primerih množičnih oškodovanj. ; The issue of collective redress procedures in the European Union has received a great deal of attention in recent years due to initiatives by the European Union institutions. In practice, however, it has become clear that the European Union intervention in this area is necessary, as institutes of collective redress vary greatly from one-Member State to another. They differ in type of collective action available, legal standing, use of an opt-in or an opt-out system, financing of the action, and so on. Heterogeneity in this area is problematic, as not all citizens of the Member States of the European Union enjoy equal legal protection in cases of mass harm. Moreover, different Member States arrangements also have a negative impact on the single internal market. In this thesis, I have analysed selected collective redress procedures in the Member States of the European Union and highlighted the differences between them. I have identified the need for actions by the European Union institutions to ensure that mechanisms are properly regulated and balanced to contribute to the effective protection and enforcement of rights in cases of mass harm.

Pri izpolnjevanju svoje primarne naloge ohranjanja mednarodnega miru in varnosti, ki mu jo nalaga Ustanovna listina Organizacije združenih narodov, Varnostni svet Združenih narodov deluje predvsem v okviru II. in III. stebra odgovornosti zaščititi. Nabor ukrepov, ki jih pri tem uporablja, je kljub temu, da je Varnostni svet edini organ, ki lahko zakonito po VII. poglavju Ustanovne listine odobri izjemo od splošne prepovedi uporabe sile, bistveno širši od gole uporabe sile, ki je bila brez privolitve države doslej odobrena le enkrat, leta 2011 v Libiji. Hipoteza naloge je, da potencial, ki ga odgovornost zaščititi ponuja pri reševanju kompleksnih kriznih situacij, ki lahko vodijo k množičnim grozodejstvom, ni docela izkoriščen zaradi nepopolnega uveljavljanja, ki je predvsem posledica blokade Varnostnega sveta zaradi uporabe veta stalnih članic. Izziv so tudi različne razlage njegovih resolucij, ki so že večkrat privedle do očitkov, da izvajalci resolucij slednje izrabljajo z namenom menjave režima v posameznih državah. Zaradi hudih posledic neaktivnosti z vetom blokiranega Varnostnega sveta, kar se kaže zlasti v primeru Sirije, so se kot alternativne možnosti delovanja mednarodne skupnosti v situacijah, kjer je uporabljiva odgovornost zaščititi, pojavile delovanje preko Generalne skupščine Združenih narodov na podlagi resolucije ˝Združeni za mir˝, regionalnih organizacij (denimo po vzoru Afriške unije) ter intervencija ad hoc koalicij. Ker nobena od navedenih možnosti ne ponuja primerne alternative odločitvi Varnostnega sveta, sta se v okviru odgovornosti neuporabe veta oblikovali dve pobudi za reformo odločanja v Varnostnem svetu, ki predlagata vzdržanje stalnih članic od uporabe veta v primerih štirih grozodejstev, vendar je njuna uspešnost vprašljiva, saj zaenkrat nobena od njiju nima podpore vseh petih stalnih članic. ; Authorized by the Charter of the United Nations, the United Nation Security Council fulfills its primary task of maintaining international peace and security by acting primarily within Pillars II and III of the Responsibility to Protect. Despite the fact, that the Security Council is the only body entitled to legally authorize an exception to the general prohibition of the use of force, this is only one of many measures it can adopt. In fact, the use of force against the will of a state has only been carried out once, in 2011 in Libya. The hypothesis of the present thesis is that the potential that the Responsibility to Protect offers in addressing crisis situations that could lead to mass atrocities is not fully utilized due to a blockage imposed by a veto from a permanent member state. The rising reproaches that those carrying out the resolutions exceed their mandates by changing the regimes in some states also represent a great challenge. This is caused by different interpretations of the language of the resolutions. Due to major consequences of the Security Council's inactiveness, as seen primarily in Syria, some suggestions of alternative actions that could be taken by the international community include acting through the United Nations General Assembly and its ˝Uniting for Peace˝ resolution, regional organizations (following the example of the African Union) and intervention by ad hoc coalitions. Since none of the mentioned possibilities represent a suitable alternative to a decision of the Security Council, two petitions in light of the Responsibility not to Veto have arisen. They suggest the permanent members abstain from the use of veto in the cases of four mass atrocities. Their success, however, is questionable, since neither has so far obtained the support from all five permanent members.

The paper discusses the characteristics of modern American presidential political rhetoric with special reference to Barack Obama's speeches in which he addressed the highly publicized killings of black Americans. Three of the analysed speeches contain Obama's rhetorical reaction to the judicial decisions not to indict the police officers responsible for the killings, while one speech gives his immediate reaction to the mass murder of black parishioners by a white supremacist. The study is based on the discourse-linguistic analysis of attitudinal meanings and their functions, which are conceptualized as evaluative frames. Evaluative frames are used to highlight different kinds of discourse participants through judgments of behaviour, attributions of emotions and evaluations of semiotic phenomena and objects. The theoretical framework for the different categories of evaluative frames is based on the theory of news framing and theory of evaluative language within systemic-functional linguistics. The findings of the analysis show that Obama uses an interplay of positive and negative evaluations of different kinds to transcend racial categorizations and avoid a direct attribution of blame. When he acknowledges the continuing relevance of the racial divide in US society, he often applies evaluative frames in such a way that they unify rather than divide the discourse participants on both sides of the divide. ; The paper discusses the characteristics of modern American presidential political rhetoric with special reference to Barack Obama's speeches in which he addressed the highly publicized killings of black Americans. Three of the analysed speeches contain Obama's rhetorical reaction to the judicial decisions not to indict the police officers responsible for the killings, while one speech gives his immediate reaction to the mass murder of black parishioners by a white supremacist. The study is based on the discourse-linguistic analysis of attitudinal meanings and their functions, which are conceptualized as evaluative frames. Evaluative frames are used to highlight different kinds of discourse participants through judgments of behaviour, attributions of emotions and evaluations of semiotic phenomena and objects. The theoretical framework for the different categories of evaluative frames is based on the theory of news framing and theory of evaluative language within systemic-functional linguistics. The findings of the analysis show that Obama uses an interplay of positive and negative evaluations of different kinds to transcend racial categorizations and avoid a direct attribution of blame. When he acknowledges the continuing relevance of the racial divide in US society, he often applies evaluative frames in such a way that they unify rather than divide the discourse participants on both sides of the divide. ; The paper discusses the characteristics of modern American presidential political rhetoric with special reference to Barack Obama's speeches in which he addressed the highly publicized killings of black Americans. Three of the analysed speeches contain Obama's rhetorical reaction to the judicial decisions not to indict the police officers responsible for the killings, while one speech gives his immediate reaction to the mass murder of black parishioners by a white supremacist. The study is based on the discourse-linguistic analysis of attitudinal meanings and their functions, which are conceptualized as evaluative frames. Evaluative frames are used to highlight different kinds of discourse participants through judgments of behaviour, attributions of emotions and evaluations of semiotic phenomena and objects. The theoretical framework for the different categories of evaluative frames is based on the theory of news framing and theory of evaluative language within systemic-functional linguistics. The findings of the analysis show that Obama uses an interplay of positive and negative evaluations of different kinds to transcend racial categorizations and avoid a direct attribution of blame. When he acknowledges the continuing relevance of the racial divide in US society, he often applies evaluative frames in such a way that they unify rather than divide the discourse participants on both sides of the divide. ; The paper discusses the characteristics of modern American presidential political rhetoric with special reference to Barack Obama's speeches in which he addressed the highly publicized killings of black Americans. Three of the analysed speeches contain Obama's rhetorical reaction to the judicial decisions not to indict the police officers responsible for the killings, while one speech gives his immediate reaction to the mass murder of black parishioners by a white supremacist. The study is based on the discourse-linguistic analysis of attitudinal meanings and their functions, which are conceptualized as evaluative frames. Evaluative frames are used to highlight different kinds of discourse participants through judgments of behaviour, attributions of emotions and evaluations of semiotic phenomena and objects. The theoretical framework for the different categories of evaluative frames is based on the theory of news framing and theory of evaluative language within systemic-functional linguistics. The findings of the analysis show that Obama uses an interplay of positive and negative evaluations of different kinds to transcend racial categorizations and avoid a direct attribution of blame. When he acknowledges the continuing relevance of the racial divide in US society, he often applies evaluative frames in such a way that they unify rather than divide the discourse participants on both sides of the divide. ; The paper discusses the characteristics of modern American presidential political rhetoric with special reference to Barack Obama's speeches in which he addressed the highly publicized killings of black Americans. Three of the analysed speeches contain Obama's rhetorical reaction to the judicial decisions not to indict the police officers responsible for the killings, while one speech gives his immediate reaction to the mass murder of black parishioners by a white supremacist. The study is based on the discourse-linguistic analysis of attitudinal meanings and their functions, which are conceptualized as evaluative frames. Evaluative frames are used to highlight different kinds of discourse participants through judgments of behaviour, attributions of emotions and evaluations of semiotic phenomena and objects. The theoretical framework for the different categories of evaluative frames is based on the theory of news framing and theory of evaluative language within systemic-functional linguistics. The findings of the analysis show that Obama uses an interplay of positive and negative evaluations of different kinds to transcend racial categorizations and avoid a direct attribution of blame. When he acknowledges the continuing relevance of the racial divide in US society, he often applies evaluative frames in such a way that they unify rather than divide the discourse participants on both sides of the divide. ; V prispevku so obravnavane značilnosti sodobne ameriške predsedniške politične retorike s posebnim poudarkom na govorih Baracka Obame, s katerimi se je odzval na uboje temnopoltih Američanov. Trije od analiziranih govorov vsebujejo Obamov odziv na sodne odločitve, ki so zavrnile obtožbo policistov, odgovornih za uboj, v enem od govorov pa se je odzval na množični umor temnopoltih faranov s strani belega skrajneža. Študija temelji na analizi jezikovnih kategorij vrednotenja, ki so pojmovane kot okviri vrednotenja. Okviri vrednotenja udeležence v diskurzu osvetlijo s presojami vedenja in pripisovanja čustev ter z vrednotenjem predmetov in pojavov. Koncept okvirov vrednotenja temelji na spoznanjih teorije medijske komunikacije in teorije jezika vrednotenja v sistemsko-funkcijskem jezikoslovju. Ugotovitve analize kažejo, da Obama uporablja preplet pozitivnih in negativnih vrednotenj različnih vrst, da bi presegel rasno kategorizacijo in se izognil neposrednemu pripisovanju krivde. Raziskava pokaže tudi, da Obama rasne razdelitve pogosto uokvirja tako, da udeležence na nasprotnih straneh poenoti z istim okvirom.

For Le Corbusier, the architect was the authority on living and their role was to know what is best for humans, as it becomes evident from what he declares in The Athens Charter: "Who can take the measures necessary to the accomplishment of this task if not the architect who possesses a complete awareness of man, who has abandoned illusory designs, and who, judiciously adapting the means to the desired ends, will create an order that bears within it a poetry of its own? The paper is focused on the critique of the principles of the Athens Charter and its relation to the attempt to strengthen the articulations between architecture and its social, economic and political context. It examines Team 10's intention to replace the four functions — dwelling, work, recreation and transport — of the Charter of Athens by the concept of the "human association", on the one hand, and to incorporate within the scope of architecture reflections regarding the impact of scale on the design process, on the other hand. The CIAM X was structured around two groups representing the two conflicting generations. As Nicholas Bullock notes, in Building the Post-war World: Modern Architecture and Reconstruction in Britain, the group representing the older generation focused on the work of CIAM since its foundation in the form of a charter similar to the Athens Charter, while the group representing the younger generation tried to extend the work of CIAM to rethink, as Alison and Peter Smithson noted in 1956, "the basic relationships between people and life". The goal of the CIAM X, held in Dubrovnik between 19 and 25 July 1956, was to challenge the assumptions of the Charter of Habitat. During this meeting, which neither Le Corbusier nor Walter Gropius attended, the younger generation consisting of Aldo van Eyck, Jacob Bakema, Georges Candilis, Shadrach Woods, and Alison and Peter Smithson established a new agenda for mass housing, "Habitat for the Greater Number". It was at this CIAM meeting that the Smithsons presented their "Fold Houses". A number of meetings preceding the CIAM X were held in London, Doorn, Paris, La Sarraz, and Padua. The main objective of this paper is to show how the debates that preceded the CIAM challenged the Charter of Habitat.