Suchergebnisse

Evropski parlament je politično telo, ki že dolgo časa razdvaja javnost. Njegovi nasprotniki po eni strani trdijo, da je tako politično in kulturno heterogen organ nezmožen učinkovitega delovanja, po drugi strani pa naj bi evropski poslanci hitro izgubili stik s svojimi volivci ter glasovali predvsem tako, kot jim to naročijo vodje skupin. Zanimalo nas je, če evropski poslanci glasujejo dovolj avtomatično in predvidljivo, da bi lahko rezultate glasovanj uspešno napovedovali z modelom strojnega učenja. Da smo zmanjšali časovno kompleksnost smo se odločili za napovedovaje rezultatov glasovanj po političnih strankah. Najprej smo implementirali spletne pajke, s katerimi smo pridobili čim več rezultatov glasovanj in z njimi povezanih podatkov. Iz teh smo nato z interdisciplinarno kombinacijo metod podatkovnega rudarjenja ter strokovnega geopolitičnega znanja izluščili značilke in zgradili model. Rezultati so pokazali približno 80% uspešnost napovedovanja rezultatov glasovanj (uteženi oceni f1 in roc-auc). Napovedovanje je bilo bistveno bolj uspešno pri strankah s proevropsko,liberalno in globalistično politično usmeritvijo kot to velja za evroskeptične, ekonomsko socialne in nacionalistične stranke. S tem smo dodatno podprli tezo o obstoju in pomembnosti nove nacionalistično-globalistične politične delitve. Poleg tega predstavlja problem tudi razred vzdržanih glasovanj, ki ga je težko napovedati že s pomočjo človeške inteligence. ; European parliament is the major political legislative body of the EU that causes divides in public opinion since its beginning. While some of its opponents usually point out its political and culutural heterogenity as a major weakness and cause of inability to function eciently, others claim that MEPs often quickly lose their connection with voters and vote mainly as it is directed to them by the leaders of their politival groups. We wanted to nd out if MEPs voting patterns are predictable enough to be successfully predicted with machine-learning based computer model. To reduce time complexity of the problem we rather focused on joint votes of (national) political parties than individual MEPs. At rst we implemented web crawlers that we used to extract as many roll-call voting oriented data as we can. Than we combined data mining with expert geopolitcal approach to extract the features and build a model for voting prediction. Our predictions were overall nearly 80% successful (weighted f1, roc-auc), however results vary greatly between political groups. It became clear that we could easily predict votes of coallition parties with liberal-globalist political orientation while eurosceptic, economic social and nationalist parties seemed to be much more unpredictable. With that information we further backed the importance of the new nationalist-globalist political cleavage. A challenge to the model presents also a class of votes of abstention, which is hard to successfully predict even with expert human-knowledge.

ParlaMint 2.1 is a multilingual set of 17 comparable corpora containing parliamentary debates mostly starting in 2015 and extending to mid-2020, with each corpus being about 20 million words in size. The sessions in the corpora are marked as belonging to the COVID-19 period (from November 1st 2019), or being "reference" (before that date). The corpora have extensive metadata, including aspects of the parliament; the speakers (name, gender, MP status, party affiliation, party coalition/opposition); are structured into time-stamped terms, sessions and meetings; with speeches being marked by the speaker and their role (e.g. chair, regular speaker). The speeches also contain marked-up transcriber comments, such as gaps in the transcription, interruptions, applause, etc. Note that some corpora have further information, e.g. the year of birth of the speakers, links to their Wikipedia articles, their membership in various committees, etc. The corpora are encoded according to the Parla-CLARIN TEI recommendation (https://clarin-eric.github.io/parla-clarin/), but have been validated against the compatible, but much stricter ParlaMint schemas. This entry contains the linguistically marked-up version of the corpus, while the text version is available at http://hdl.handle.net/11356/1432. The ParlaMint.ana linguistic annotation includes tokenization, sentence segmentation, lemmatisation, Universal Dependencies part-of-speech, morphological features, and syntactic dependencies, and the 4-class CoNLL-2003 named entities. Some corpora also have further linguistic annotations, such as PoS tagging or named entities according to language-specific schemes, with their corpus TEI headers giving further details on the annotation vocabularies and tools. The compressed files include the ParlaMint.ana XML TEI-encoded linguistically annotated corpus; the derived corpus in CoNLL-U with TSV speech metadata; and the vertical files (with registry file), suitable for use with CQP-based concordancers, such as CWB, noSketch Engine or KonText. Also included is the 2.1 release of the data and scripts available at the GitHub repository of the ParlaMint project. As opposed to the previous version 2.0, this version corrects some errors in various corpora and adds the information on upper / lower house for bicameral parliaments. The vertical files have also been changed to make them easier to use in the concordancers.

ParlaMint 2.1 is a multilingual set of 17 comparable corpora containing parliamentary debates mostly starting in 2015 and extending to mid-2020, with each corpus being about 20 million words in size. The sessions in the corpora are marked as belonging to the COVID-19 period (after November 1st 2019), or being "reference" (before that date). The corpora have extensive metadata, including aspects of the parliament; the speakers (name, gender, MP status, party affiliation, party coalition/opposition); are structured into time-stamped terms, sessions and meetings; with speeches being marked by the speaker and their role (e.g. chair, regular speaker). The speeches also contain marked-up transcriber comments, such as gaps in the transcription, interruptions, applause, etc. Note that some corpora have further information, e.g. the year of birth of the speakers, links to their Wikipedia articles, their membership in various committees, etc. The corpora are encoded according to the Parla-CLARIN TEI recommendation (https://clarin-eric.github.io/parla-clarin/), but have been validated against the compatible, but much stricter ParlaMint schemas. This entry contains the ParlaMint TEI-encoded corpora with the derived plain text version of the corpus along with TSV metadata on the speeches. Also included is the 2.0 release of the data and scripts available at the GitHub repository of the ParlaMint project. Note that there also exists the linguistically marked-up version of the corpus, which is available at http://hdl.handle.net/11356/1431.

ParlaMint is a multilingual set of comparable corpora containing parliamentary debates mostly starting in 2015 and extending to mid-2020, with each corpus being about 20 million words in size. The sessions in the corpora are marked as belonging to the COVID-19 period (after October 2019), or being "reference" (before that date). The corpora have extensive metadata, including aspects of the parliament; the speakers (name, gender, MP status, party affiliation, party coalition/opposition); are structured into time-stamped terms, sessions and meetings; with speeches being marked by the speaker and their role (e.g. chair, regular speaker). The speeches also contain marked-up transcriber comments, such as gaps in the transcription, interruptions, applause, etc. Note that some corpora have further information, e.g. the year of birth of the speakers, links to their Wikipedia articles, their membership in various committees, etc. The corpora are encoded according to the Parla-CLARIN TEI recommendation (https://clarin-eric.github.io/parla-clarin/), but have been validated against the compatible, but much stricter ParlaMint schemas. This entry contains the ParlaMint TEI-encoded corpora with the derived plain text version of the corpus along with TSV metadata on the speeches. Also included is the 2.0 release of the data and scripts available at the GitHub repository of the ParlaMint project. Note that there also exists the linguistically marked-up version of the corpus, which is available at http://hdl.handle.net/11356/1405.

ParlaMint is a multilingual set of comparable corpora containing parliamentary debates mostly starting in 2015 and extending to mid-2020, with each corpus being about 20 million words in size. The sessions in the corpora are marked as belonging to the COVID-19 period (after October 2019), or being "reference" (before that date). The corpora have extensive metadata, including aspects of the parliament; the speakers (name, gender, MP status, party affiliation, party coalition/opposition); are structured into time-stamped terms, sessions and meetings; with speeches being marked by the speaker and their role (e.g. chair, regular speaker). The speeches also contain marked-up transcriber comments, such as gaps in the transcription, interruptions, applause, etc. Note that some corpora have further information, e.g. the year of birth of the speakers, links to their Wikipedia articles, their membership in various committees, etc. The corpora are encoded according to the Parla-CLARIN TEI recommendation (https://clarin-eric.github.io/parla-clarin/), but have been validated against the compatible, but much stricter ParlaMint schemas. This entry contains the linguistically marked-up version of the corpus, while the text version is available at http://hdl.handle.net/11356/1388. The ParlaMint.ana linguistic annotation includes tokenization, sentence segmentation, lemmatisation, Universal Dependencies part-of-speech, morphological features, and syntactic dependencies, and the 4-class CoNLL-2003 named entities. Some corpora also have further linguistic annotations, such as PoS tagging or named entities according to language-specific schemes, with their corpus TEI headers giving further details on the annotation vocabularies and tools. The compressed files include the ParlaMint.ana XML TEI-encoded linguistically annotated corpus; the derived corpus in CoNLL-U with TSV speech metadata; and the vertical files (with registry file), suitable for use with CQP-based concordancers, such as CWB, noSketch Engine or KonText. Also included is the 2.0 release of the data and scripts available at the GitHub repository of the ParlaMint project.

V članku, ki temelji predvsem na arhivskem gradivu in publicistiki, je predstavljeno politično delovanje Ivana Švegla, nekdanjega avstro-ogrskega konzula v Združenih državah Amerike in Kanadi, ki je po prevratu deloval na pariški mirovni konferenci. V Začasnem narodnem predstavništvu v Beogradu je predstavljal Trst, na volitvah leta 1927 pa je kandidiral na listi Hrvaške kmečke stranke Stjepana Radića. V tem prispevku so predstavljene širše okoliščine Šveglove povezanosti z Radićevo stranko. ; This article presents the political activities of the Slovene diplomat and legal expert Ivan Krizostom Švegel (a.k.a. Hans Schwegel, 1875–1962), who primarily served as an Austro-Hungarian consul in the United States and Canada before the First World War. Although his involvement in the delegation of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes at the Paris Peace Conference of 1919 has not passed unnoticed in Slovene historiography, less is known about his political career. Švegel already expressed his sympathies for the Croatian national demands at the Paris Peace Conference, especially by interceding with American diplomats for the incorporation of Rijeka by Yugoslavia and helping his Croatian counterparts settle the question concerning the affiliation of the Repaš (Hung. Répás) area along the Drava River. In the Temporary National Representation in Belgrade, Švegel represented Trieste and worked within the framework of the Yugoslav Club, headed by the president of the Pan-Slovene People's Party, Anton Korošec. However, Švegel soon parted ways with Korošec and withdrew from active politics for a few years. In the election of 1927, he ran on the ticket of the Croatian Peasant Party in the Gorski Kotar region at the personal proposal of Stjepan Radić and made his way into the Croatian parliamentary representation in the Belgrade assembly. Radić's decision to nominate Švegel as a Slovene candidate in one of the traditionally winnable Croatian constituencies for his party undoubtedly added to the chagrin of Korošec, who had long been at odds with Radić. Much to the surprise of Radić's most intimate circle, at the end of 1927 Švegel joined the rebellious faction of Ljudevit Kežman, a priest and long-standing secretary of the Croatian Peasant Party. Yet rather than hold him to blame, Radić continued to cooperate with Švegel until the fateful shooting incident in the Belgrade assembly on June 20th, 1928. During the assassination against Radić and his colleagues, Švegel, according to his own testimony, was composed enough to help lift Svetozar Pribićević from his bench to safety. In the early period of the royal dictatorship, Švegel maintained a low profile until the spring of 1930, when he joined the government as a minister without portfolio, together with three other dissidents from the former Croatian Peasant Party. After he was soon forced to leave his position in the royal government, he briefly returned to diplomacy in 1931 by being appointed envoy of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia to Buenos Aires. However, no later than 1932, he was forced to leave his office due to disagreements with other officials at the legation and the heads of the foreign ministry and to retire. As his correspondence with Marija Radić reveals, Švegel also remained a faithful adherent to Radić's views after the Second World War.

V institucionalni ureditvi Evropske unije je Evropski parlament (EP) tisti, ki direktno zastopa vse Evropejce, s čimer Uniji postavlja demokratične temelje. Pri tem igra pomembno vlogo njegova medijska prisotnost, če želijo politične skupine znotraj parlamenta svoje volivce povezati in jim učinkovito predstaviti delo te temeljne institucije. Dovoljšno pozornost morajo nameniti komunikacijskim strategijam, s pomočjo katerih občinstvo informirajo, želijo pa seveda (pri)dobiti tudi njihovo podporo ; govorimo lahko o političnem marketingu. V magistrskem delu analiziram, kako to počne Skupina naprednega zavezništva socialistov in demokratov (S&D) v EP, kako učinkoviti so pri komuniciranju z državljani ter kaj so pri tem izzivi in priložnosti. Analiza pogovorov z medijsko ekipo politične skupine S&D je pokazala, da v glavnem ubirajo tri načine: komuniciranje s pomočjo tradicionalnih medijev – preko sporočil za javnost, s povečano aktivnostjo na družbenih omrežjih in s politično iniciativo v obliki interaktivnih dogodkov po Evropi. Svojo komunikacijo poskušajo ne glede na kanal ali formo čim bolj poenotiti, jo narediti pan-evropsko in predvsem razumljivo vsakdanjemu državljanu, kar pa je zaradi kompleksnosti evropskih politik mnogokrat izziv. Nadalje sem ugotovila, da pri zastavljanju komuniciranja v imenu 27 držav članic pomembno vlogo igrata multikulturnost in večjezičnost. Kot najbolj učinkovit pristop v svoji komunikaciji so v medijski ekipi navedli čim večjo personifikacijo in osebni stik, za kar skušajo kar se da povečati sodelovanje z evropskimi poslanci. ; Among the bodies of the European union it is the European Parliament (EP) that directly represents all the Europeans, laying down the Union's democratic foundation. In that context, its media presence is playing an important role if the Parliament's political groups are to connect with their voters and effectively present to them the EP's work. A communication strategy has to be set out in order to determine how to inform the audience and, of course, gain their support ; essentially, we talk about political marketing. In my master's thesis, I analyse how the Group of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats (S&D) in the EP is doing that, how effective they are in communicating with the citizens, and what are the challenges and opportunities. I interviewed the S&D's media team, which showed me that they mainly communicate in three ways: through traditional media – with press releases, with increased activity on social media, and through a political initiative in the form of interactive events across Europe. They try to make their communication as pan-European and understandable to everyday citizens as possible, no matter the channel of communication, which is often a challenge due to the complexity of European policies. Furthermore, the analysis showed that multiculturalism and multilingualism play an important role when trying to communicate on behalf of the 27 Member States. Finally, personalising their messages as much as possible proved to be a successful approach, for which they try to increase the cooperation with the Members of the European Parliament.

POVZETEK Prvi del magistrske naloge zajema razlago ustavnih ureditev treh držav, Združenih držav Amerike, Francije in Slovenije, ter instrumente in institucije, podobne slovenski interpelaciji. Ustavne ureditve so vključene zaradi razumevanja razmerja med parlamentom in vlado, saj to igra ključno vlogo pri sprožitvi procesa interpelacije ter pri postavljanju poslanskih vprašanj. Interpelacija po slovenski ureditvi pomeni formalno vloženo pisno vprašanje skupine deset ali več poslancev z namenom, da bi odstavili bodisi ministra ali vlado. Interpelacija je orodje opozicije, da izpostavi trenutno oblast in jo postavi v položaj, kjer se mora javno zagovarjati. V ta kontekst so postavljeni primeri interpelacije v Sloveniji, ker so primer dejanskega nadzora parlamenta nad delovanjem vlade. Interpelacij se je v naši 26 let stari državi zgodilo kar nekaj, za magistrsko delo smo izbrali obdobje devete vlade Republike Slovenije, ki jo je vodil Borut Pahor. V času od novembra 2008 do februarja 2012 so se zgodile štiri interpelacije, ki so dober primer tega, kako je delovalo določeno ministrstvo v tistem obdobju, kakšen je bil sproten pritisk parlamenta na vlado in stališče opozicije do takratne oblasti. Z najprej opisanim razmerjem med parlamentom in vlado ter s primerjavo z drugimi državami smo pojasnili razmerje v slovenski ureditvi, nato pa s primeri interpelacije prikazali, kako to razmerje deluje v praksi. ; ABSTRACT The first part of the thesis consists of the overview of constitutional orders from three states: United States of America, France and Slovenia with the instruments and institutions similar to Slovenian interpellation. Constitutional orders are included because of the easier understanding of relationship between the Parliament and Government, which is crucial for the initiation of the interpellation process and for asking the parliamentary questions. Under the Slovenian constitution interpellation means a formal written question handed in by a group of ten or more members of the parliament with the intent to remove the minister or the government from its position. Interpellation is the instrument of the opposition, to call the coalition in question. In this context we have included the actual cases of interpellation in Slovenia, because they represent the control of Parliament above the work of Government. In our 26 years old country, there has been a significant number of interpellations, and the selected period is the ninth Government of Republic of Slovenia, which was under a leadership of Borut Pahor. In this precise time, from November 2008 to February 2012, four interpellations were processed, which show a good example of how a specific Ministry worked at the time, and what was the consistent pressure of Parliament on the Government, and the position of opposition towards the leadership at that time. With firstly described correlation between Parliament and Government and with the comparison with other countries, we have explained a relationship in Slovenian constitutional order, and afterwards I have presented how this relationship practically works with the cases of interpellations.

Demokratični deficit je že več desetletji stalnica akademskih razprav o Evropski uniji. Vsebina raziskovanj se je skozi čas bistveno spremenila, ohranja pa se temeljna misel, da se demokracija v Evropski uniji sooča z velikimi težavami. Zaupanje Evropejcev v Evropsko unijo je nizko, podobno velja tudi za občutek povezanosti z njenimi organi, zato je očitno, da so spremembe nujno potrebne. Z vsako večjo reformo pride do sprememb, ki bistveno vplivajo na razmerja moči med evropskimi institucijami in na njihov odnos do Evropejcev. Najvidnejše spremembe v zadnjih desetletjih so krepitev moči Evropskega parlamenta, ki se je razvil v vplivno institucijo, uvajanje institutov neposredne demokracije in druge reforme, ki jih je prinesla Lizbonska pogodba. Napredek pa je, žal, na drugi strani uravnotežen s pojavom mehanizmov in institutov, ki demokratična varovala zaobidejo. To so na primer ukrepi, ki so bili sprejeti kot odziv na dolžniško krizo evroobmočja in v velikem delu sploh ne spadajo med formalne pristojnosti Evropske unije. V svojem magistrskem delu sem analiziral in kritično ovrednotil procese, ki so bistveno vplivali na ključne organe Evropske unije, njihove spreminjajoče se medsebojne odnose ter predvidene učinke aktualnih reform. Pregledal sem širok izbor literature preteklih desetletji in predstavil različna teoretska izhodišča, na podlagi katerih avtorji skušajo opredeliti in analizirati demokratični deficit in z njim povezane tematike. Ključna ugotovitev mojega magistrskega mojega dela ni le, da so aktualne reforme premalo ambiciozne in demokratičnega deficita ne morejo odpraviti, ampak predvsem da demokratični deficit ni le kategorija akademskih razprav, temveč je zelo močno politično orodje in odločilno usmerja razvoj Evropske unije. Demokratični deficit je zato stalnica evropske demokracije in ne more nikoli biti povsem odpravljen, saj se ob razvoju Evropske unije vedno znova pojavlja v drugačnih oblikah, ki terjajo nove reforme in kritične analize akademikov, intelektualcev, državljanov, politikov in vseh drugih zainteresiranih strani. ; The democratic deficit has been a constant of all academic research on the European Union for the past few decades. While the scope of the research has changed considerably, the basic idea remains the same – democracy in the European Union is in serious trouble. Europeans' trust in the EU is low and the same goes for their connection with European institutions, therefore it is clear that changes are required. Every major reform alters the balance of power between European institutions and their relationship with European citizens. The most visible changes of the past decades are: the empowerment of the European parliament that has been transformed into an influential institution, the introduction of instruments of direct democracy and other reforms brought upon by the Treaty of Lisbon. Unfortunately, progress is balanced out by the emergence of various mechanisms and instruments that surpass all democratic checks and balances. For example, the measures that were adopted as a response to the European debt crisis were mostly not based on formal competencies of the EU. In my Master's thesis I analysed and critically evaluated the processes that crucially influenced the most significant European institutions, their ever-changing relationships and the anticipated effects of the current reforms. I examined a substantial body of literature from past decades and presented diverse theoretical starting points that the authors use to define and analyse the democratic deficit and related topics. The most significant finding of my Master's thesis is not only that the current reforms lack ambition and cannot eliminate the democratic deficit, but also that the democratic deficit is more than just a category of academic research and can often act as a strong political tool that decisively influences the development of the European Union. Therefore, the democratic deficit is a permanent element of European democracy and can never be fully eliminated as it always reappears in new forms that require constant reforms and critical analysis by academia, intellectuals, citizens, politicians and other stakeholders.

Magistrsko delo proučuje diskurzivni vidik varnosti izražen skozi parlamentarni diskurz poslancev, ki so delovali v slovenskem parlamentu v obdobju t. i. begunske krize, od septembra 2015 do marca 2016. Skozi mikrodiskurzivno in jezikovnostilno analizo poskuša prikazati, ali so poslanci begunce obravnavali skozi prizmo varnosti, torej vprašanje beguncev sekuritizirali. Z analizo parlamentarnih sej je prikazan proces sekuritizacije kopenhagenske šole, ki sekuritizacijo opisuje kot govorno dejanje, ki referenčnemu objektu predstavi vprašanje kot eksistenčno grožnjo in s tem zahteva izredne ukrepe, ki odstopajo od 'običajne' politike. Če občinstvo to sprejme je sekuritizacija uspešna. V parlamentarnem diskurzu so analizirana jezikovna sredstva, kot so vršilci dejanj, metafore in druge stilno zaznamovane besede, pomembna pa je tudi ustrezna raba terminov beguncev in migrant. V ozadju je predstavljena t. i. begunska kriza na ravni EU, zahodnobalkanski poti in v Sloveniji. Opisan je tudi slovenski parlament ter politični oziroma parlamentarni diskurz, ključne pa so varnostne študije, znotraj katerih je kopenhagenska šola predstavila teorijo sekuritizacije, ki jo proučuje magistrsko delo ; The master's thesis examines the discursive aspect of security, expressed through the parliamentary debates, which took place in the Slovenian parliament during the 'refugee crisis' in Slovenia, September 2015 – March 2016. Through micro-discursive and linguistic analysis, this work seeks to show whether refugees were securitized, treated by the members of Parliament as a security issue. The analysis of parliamentary debates tries to show the process of securitization initially outlined by the Copenhagen School, which focuses on the speech act, that presents an issue to the referent object as an existential threat and demands extraordinary measures outside of normal politics. If the audience accepts this, securitization is successful. The use of linguistic means is analysed in the parliamentary discourse, such as agents, metaphors and other expressive words, and the correct usage of terms refugee or migrant. The master's thesis background is presented by the 'refugee crisis' in the European Union, on the Western Balkan Route and in Slovenia. The emphasis is also on the Slovenian parliament and parliamentary discourse, but the most important are security studies, within which the securitization theory is presented by the Copenhagen School, which is analysed in the master's thesis.

Doktorska disertacija analizira konstituiranje funkcije predsednika republike v bivših socialističnih državah. Podrobneje je analiziran ustavni položaj predsednika republike Estonije, Latvije, Litve, Poljske, Češke, Slovaške, Slovenije, Hrvaške, Madžarske, Romunije ter Bolgarije, torej v enajstih državah članicah Evropske unije. Gre za ureditve, ki so funkcijo predsednika republike kot individualnega šefa države uvedle v devetdesetih letih prejšnjega stoletja. Preučevane države so se ob konstituiranju funkcije predsednika republike in umestitvi njegovega položaja zgledovale po etabliranih pravnih sistemih. Pri tem je ob upoštevanju lastnih zgodovinskih, kulturnih in političnih razlogov prelitje posameznih ustavnih institutov privedlo do vzpostavitve svojevrstnega institucionalnega (ne)ravnovesja, kar odločilno vpliva na razmerje med vlado, parlamentom in predsednikom republike ter posledično na samo delovanje državne oblasti. V nekaterih ureditvah so bile sprva prisotne tendence po uvedbi sistema z močnejšim položajem šefa države, povzetim po predsedniškem oziroma polpredsedniškem sistemu, vendar je večina teh držav skozi ustavni razvoj in stabilizacijo političnega prostora postopoma omejila predsednikove pristojnosti. Drugače je v tistih ureditvah, kjer je ustavodajalec predsedniku že ob konstituiranju funkcije podelil predvsem reprezentativne pristojnosti, zgledujoč se po sistemih z nadvlado parlamenta, in tako onemogočil, da bi lahko predsednik, skladno s svojo nevtralno vlogo, ustrezno razreševal »krizne situacije« povezane z blokado oblasti, do katere lahko pride zaradi konfliktov med parlamentom in vlado. Danes se v analiziranih ustavnih ureditvah prepletajo številni elementi, značilni za različne politične sisteme, ki determinirajo (specifičen) položaj šefa države. Položaj predsednika republike, zlasti obseg njegovih pristojnosti in iz tega izhajajoča razmerja do zakonodajnih in izvršilnih organov, pa je hkrati tudi eno izmed temeljnih meril klasične klasifikacije političnih sistemov. Na predsednikov položaj poleg pristojnosti, ki jih izvršuje (predvsem na zakonodajnem in izvršilnem področju), vpliva tudi način njegove izvolitve. V primerjavi s tradicionalnimi zahodnimi sistemi v večini obravnavanih bivših socialističnih držav način izvolitve predsednika republike ni v neposredni korelaciji z obsegom njegovih formalno določenih pristojnosti. Na podlagi opravljene primerjalnopravne analize je mogoče ugotoviti, da ima predsednik republike v slovenski ureditvi (kjer mu je ustavodajalec z neposrednimi volitvami okrepil legitimnost, na drugi strani pa mu hkrati določil šibke, predvsem reprezentativne pristojnosti) najšibkejši položaj izmed obravnavanih enajstih bivših socialističnih držav. ; This doctoral dissertation deals with the constituting i.e. formation of the function of the President of the Republic in former socialist countries. It analyses in greater detail the constitutional role of the President of the Republic of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia, Croatia, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria, i.e. eleven Member States of the European Union. These states put in place the office of President of the Republic as the individual Head of State in the 1990s. In the process of the formation of the function of the President of the Republic, the countries analysed took inspiration from other established legal systems. In this context, while taking into account their own historical, cultural and political reasons, these states have experienced a spill-over of individual constitutional institutions leading to the creation of a sui generis institutional equilibrium i.e. separation of powers, or lack thereof, which has a decisive impact on the relations between the Government, the Parliament and the President of the Republic, as well as, consequently, on the functioning of the authority of the state itself. Some political systems initially showed a tendency to introduce a system with a stronger head of state, inspired by presidential or semi-presidential republics, but the majority of these countries gradually limited the powers of the President through the constitutional development and stabilisation of their political space. The situation is, however, different in those countries where, from the very beginning of the formation of the function of the President of the Republic, the constitutional legislator conferred upon the President mainly representative powers, following the example of systems with parliamentary supremacy, thus preventing the President, in accordance with his or her neutral role, from being able to adequately address 'crisis situations' in relation to the blocking of authorities arising from conflicts between the Parliament and Government. Hence, the analysed constitutional regimes have now seen certain elements appear which are "alien" to different political systems and which determine the (specific) position of the Head of State. The position of the President of the Republic, and in particular the extent of his or her powers and the resulting relationship with the legislative and executive bodies, is also one of the fundamental criteria of the classic classification of political systems. In addition to the powers exercised (mainly in the legislative and executive domains), the President's position is also influenced by the way he or she is elected. Compared to traditional western systems, the way in which the President of the Republic is elected in most of the former socialist states in question is not directly correlated to the extent of his or her formally defined powers. Based on the analysis of comparative law carried out, it can be concluded that in a regime like the one set up in Slovenia (where the constitutional legislator strengthened the President's legitimacy by holding direct elections, but at the same time conferred upon him or her weak, mainly representative powers), the President's position is the weakest among the eleven former socialist states analysed.

Magistrsko delo obravnava povezavo med volilno udeležbo in informiranostjo volivcev. Ta je eden od številnih dejavnikov, ki lahko vpliva na to, ali se bo volivec udeležil volitev. Povezavo sem ugotavljala s študijo primera v dveh časovnih točkah: primerjala sem institucionalno kampanjo Evropskega parlamenta pred evropskimi volitvami leta 2014 in institucionalno kampanjo Evropskega parlamenta Tokrat grem volit pred evropskimi volitvami leta 2019 na primeru Slovenije. Za volitve v Evropski parlament je značilno padanje povprečja volilne udeležbe. Od prvih leta 1979 se je v državah članicah Evropske unije z 61,9 % zmanjšalo na 42,6 % v letu 2014, ko je bilo najnižje. Na evropskih volitvah 2019 se je trend padanja povprečja volilne udeležbe v EU prvič zaustavil in se dvignil na 50,6 %. V Sloveniji se je evropskih volitev 2019 udeležilo 28,9 % volilnih upravičencev, kar je v primerjavi z evropskimi volitvami leta 2014 za 4,4 odstotne točke več in hkrati največ od vključitve v EU. Ugotovila sem, da lahko dvig volilne udeležbe pripišemo tudi volilni kampanji Pisarne Evropskega parlamenta v Ljubljani, ki je bila v primerjavi s prejšnjimi prvič jasno določena ; predvsem skupine nagovarjanja volivcev in sporočilo kampanje ; organizirali so tudi bistveno več aktivnosti za volivce in intenzivno sodelovali z raznovrstnimi mediji. Toda glavne hipoteze magistrskega dela, da pomeni večji obseg aktivnosti tudi večjo informiranost volivcev in posledično višjo volilno udeležbo, na podlagi javnomnenjskih anket nisem mogla potrditi. Volilna udeležba je namreč odvisna od množice izjemno kompleksnih in med seboj prepletenih dejavnikov. ; The master's thesis discusses the connection between the turnout of voters and the voters' awareness. The latter is one of the numerous factors which can influence whether the voter will participate in the elections or not. I was ascertaining the connection with the case study in two points of time: I compared the institutional campaign of the European Parliament before European elections in 2014 and the This Time I'm Voting institutional campaign of the European Parliament before the European elections in 2019 on the case of Slovenia. A decline in the average of the turnout of voters is characteristic of the elections in the European Parliament. Since the first elections in 1979, the turnout of voters has reduced in the member states of the European Union from 61.9% to 42.6% in 2014 when it was the lowest. The decline in the average of the turnout of voters was stopped in 2019 and raised it to 50.6%. In Slovenia, 28.9% of eligible voters participated in the European elections in 2019 which is 4.4 percentage points more in comparison to the European elections in 2014 and the most since the joining to the EU at the same time. I ascertained that the raise of the turnout of voters can be attributed also to communication campaign of the European Parliament Liaison Office in Ljubljana, which was determined in the comparison with the previous ones for the first time clearly, above all the groups of addressing the voters and the message of the campaign. They also organized essentially more activities for the voters and cooperated intensively with different media. However, I could not confirm the main hypothesis of the master's thesis that a bigger scope of activities means bigger voters' awareness and, consequently, a higher turnout of voters. Namely, the turnout of voters depends on many exceptionally complex and intertwined factors.

Sistemi organizacije državne oblasti se razlikujejo po načinu delitve oblasti, organih, ki so nosilci te oblasti ter njihovih medsebojnih odnosih. Parlamentarni sistem, ki je uveljavljen tudi pri nas, temelji na načelu delitve oblasti. Organi državne oblasti med seboj sodelujejo, se nadzorujejo, med njimi pa je z namenom preprečitve zlorabe oblasti vzpostavljen sistem zavor in ravnovesij. V moderni demokraciji med strankami na volitvah vedno poteka tekma za čim višje število glasov, zmago na volitvah in prevzem oblasti. Zmagovalna večina se poveže ter oblikuje vlado, stranke, ki niso članice koalicijske večine, pa čakajo na svojo priložnost na naslednjih volitvah. Vendar mora biti njihov glas vseeno slišan, saj odločitve večine postanejo tudi odločitve manjšine, ki mora zato imeti možnost vpliva na sprejemanje odločitev, poleg tega je pomembna tudi možnost nadzora dela koalicijske večine in izvršilne veje oblasti, v ta namen pa ima opozicija na voljo različne instrumente nadzora. Opozicija ima možnost uporabe svojih sredstev na različnih področjih, v okviru zakonodajne, volilne ter nadzorne funkcije Državnega zbora. Nosilec izvršilne oblasti je v parlamentarnih sistemih vlada, ki je parlamentu odgovorna za svoje delo, brez njegove podpore pa ne more delovati. Parlament, znotraj njega zlasti tudi opozicija, ima na voljo več instrumentov nadzora nad delom vlade, najpomembnejši so poslansko vprašanje, interpelacija in konstruktivna nezaupnica. Nesoglasja med parlamentom in vlado lahko privedejo do politične krize, v končni posledici pa tudi do razpustitve parlamenta in novih volitev. Obstaja več različic parlamentarnega sistema, razlikujejo pa se po načinu oblikovanja, sestavi in delovanju vlade. Naša ureditev se zgleduje po nemškem modelu, pri čemer pa v smeri skupščinske ureditve od njega odstopa v nekaterih pomembnih elementih. Predvsem je tu mišljeno imenovanje ministrov s strani Državnega zbora ter s tem povezani instrumenti, ki povečujejo individualno odgovornost posameznih ministrov v razmerju do Državnega zbora, kar je neskladno z modernimi parlamentarnimi sistemi, ki poznajo predvsem kolektivno odgovornost vlade. Taka ureditev relativizira pomen instituta konstruktivne nezaupnice, ki smo ga sprejeli iz nemškega modela. Zaradi naše neučinkovite ureditve bi bile smiselne ustavne spremembe, kar je zaznal tudi Državni zbor, saj je skupina poslancev predlagala spremembo ustavnih določb, ki se nanašajo na oblikovanje Vlade, v odzivu na ta predlog pa je nastal še predlog Strokovne skupine, ki je predlog poslancev analizirala. Ta naloga obravnava predlagani spremembi Ustave, predlog poslancev in predlog Strokovne skupine, s poudarkom na učinke predlaganih sprememb na položaj opozicije. Poleg tega so v nalogi predstavljene tudi nekatere druge možne spremembe Ustave, ki se nanašajo na način oblikovanja Vlade. Vsak predlog spremembe Ustave našo veljavno ureditev približuje določeni podvrsti parlamentarnega sistema. Pred sprejetjem kakršnekoli spremembe Ustave je torej vredno razmisliti, kateri ureditvi se želimo približati in kakšen vpliv na našo trenutno ureditev bi imel sprejem določene spremembe Ustave. ; The systems of state authority differ in the way they separate powers, branches of power that are holders of the power and their relations. The parliamentary system, which is established also in Slovenia, is based on the principle of separation of powers. The branches of state authority collaborate with each other and control the work of one another. The system of checks and balances is set up to prevent the abuse of power. In the modern democracy there has always been a race to get as many votes as possible, win the elections and take over the power among parties in the elections. The majority that wins is united and forms the Government, while parties that are not members of the majority coalition wait for their opportunity in the next elections. However, their voice has to be heard, because the decisions of majority become the decisions of minority as well, that is why they have to have an impact on decision-making. Besides, the possibility of supervision over the part of the majority coalition and the executive branch is important, for this purpose the opposition has different instruments of supervision. The opposition has a possibility of the use of its means on various areas, within the legislative, electoral and supervisory functions of Parliament. The government, which answers to the parliament for its work, but without its support cannot work properly, is the holder of the executive body in the parliamentary systems. The Parliament, and within it, also in particular the opposition, has several instruments for controlling the work of the Government, the most important are parliamentary question, interpellation and constructive vote of no confidence. Disagreements between the Parliament and the Government can lead to the political crisis and ultimately to the dissolution of the Parliament and new elections. There are several variants of parliamentary system, they differ in the way of forming, structure and working of the Government. Our system follows the German model's example, but as far as assembly is concerned, it differs in some important elements. This mainly refers to the appointment of ministers coming from the National Assembly and instruments referring to it. These instruments are increasing individual responsibility of individual ministers in relation to the National Assembly and that is inconsistent with modern parliamentary systems which are familiar with collective responsibility of the Government in particular. Such system relativizes the meaning of the institute of constructive vote of no confidence which is based on the German's model. Constitutional changes would be logical due to our ineffective system, this was also noticed by our National Assembly. The group of members of the Parliament proposed a change for constitutional provisions which refer to the forming of the Government. In response to this proposal, the Professional group, which analysed the proposal of the members of the Parliament, formed another one. This master's thesis deals with the proposed change of the Government, the proposal of members of the Parliament and the proposal of the Professional group, with emphasis on the effects of proposed changes regarding the position of the opposition. The thesis also presents some of the other possible constitutional changes that refer to the way of forming the Government. Each proposal of the constitutional change brings about our valid system to get closer to the certain category of the parliamentary system. It is worth considering which system is better and what kind of effect would passing a certain constitutional change cause, before even considering constitutional changes of any kind.