Suchergebnisse

Most observers of Bosnia and Herzegovina's political situation have focused only on the problems that the Dayton Peace Accord created for the normal functioning of this Southeastern European state, but a workable solution is yet to be proposed. The Accord achieved peace by blocking any ability for effective governing and by diminishing the Bosnian state capacity through an excessive dispersion of power with an uncommon constitutional focus on internationalism, and an erroneous type of pluralism that undermines the normal functioning of a democracy. The solution for these problems is to be found by adjusting the procedural selection of the United Nations High Representative, who is the primary actor directly responsible for the implementation of the Accord, both in terms of the letter and intent of the document, and this paper explains how that change can be made and what problems it will resolve. ; Većina promatrača političke situacije u Bosni i Hercegovini fokusirala se samo na probleme koje je Dejtonski mirovni sporazum stvorio za normalno funkcioniranje ove jugoistočno-evropske države, ali još uvijek je potrebno predložiti izvodljivo rješenje tih problema. Dejtonski sporazum je postigao mir umanjujući kapacitet države, blokirajući svaku sposobnost za efikasno upravljanje BiH pretjeranim raspršivanjem moći, s neuobičajenim ustavnim fokusom na internacionalizam i forsiranjem pogrešne vrste pluralizma koji podriva normalno funkcioniranje demokratije. Rješenje za te probleme treba naći u prilagođavanju procedure odabira Visokog predstavnika UN-a, koji je direktno odgovoran za provedbu Sporazuma, kako u pogledu slova tako i namjere tog dokumenta, a ovaj tekst objašnjava kako se ta promjena može izvršiti i koje probleme će takva promjena moći riješiti.

Most observers of Bosnia and Herzegovina's political situation have focused only on the problems that the Dayton Peace Accord created for the normal functioning of this Southeastern European state, but a workable solution is yet to be proposed. The Accord achieved peace by blocking any ability for effective governing and by diminishing the Bosnian state capacity through an excessive dispersion of power with an uncommon constitutional focus on internationalism, and an erroneous type of pluralism that undermines the normal functioning of a democracy. The solution for these problems is to be found by adjusting the procedural selection of the United Nations High Representative, who is the primary actor directly responsible for the implementation of the Accord, both in terms of the letter and intent of the document, and this paper explains how that change can be made and what problems it will resolve. ; Na bosanskom jeziku je početkom oktobra, ove godine, objavljen moj prijevod knjige Muhammed poslanik mira usred sukoba imperija, američkog historičara Juana Colea, profesora historije na Univerzitetu Michigan, urednika i pokretača portala Informed Comment, autora znatnog broja studija koje tretiraju historiju i civilizaciju Bliskog Istoka. Kako stoji u uredničkom podnaslovu izdavača, sarajevske izdavačke kuće Kupola, koja je ovu knjigu objavila u sklopu svoje edicije "Stubovi vremena", radi se o "biografiji Poslanika, a.s., kao vjesnika tolerancije i mira u jeku vizantijsko- perzijskih ratova."

Poduzimanje pravne reforme postaje nužno onda kada pravni sistem ne odgovara na potrebe društva u promijenjenim društvenim okolnostima. Reformu pravnog sistema moguće je provesti na temelju postojećih izvora, unutar pravnog sistema koji se želi reformirati ili putem pozajmljivanja pravnih instituta iz naprednijih pravnih sistema, koji su od ranije poznati. Oživljavanjem funkcije države u Evropi od XI stoljeća sve više vladara poseže za reformom pravnog sistema kao odgovorom na narastajuće probleme s kojima se društvo suočava. Ova reforma započeta je na Siciliji 1140. godine, donošenjem Assize iz Ariana, a nastavljena je u Engleskoj donošenjem više assiza od strane kralja Henryja II. U pokušaju da ukažemo na mogući utjecaj koji se odvijao putem preuzimanja gotovih rješenja iz jedne pravne tradicije u drugu, koristili smo se historijskom i uporednom metodom. Pojedini pravni instituti u okviru ove reforme ukazuju na to da se radilo o pravnim transplantima koje anglosaksonska i normanska pravna tradicija nisu poznavale. Rješenja koja su usvojena ukazuju na sličnosti sa šerijatskom pravnom tradicijom a njihovo prenošenje u engleski pravni sistem moglo je doći posredstvom ljudi koji su bili u službi normanskih vladara na Siciliji (Rogera II) a koji su kasnije ušli u službu engleskog kralja Henryja II. ; Undertaking legislative reform becomes necessary when the legal system does not respond to the needs of society in changed social circumstances. The reform can be carried out on the basis of existing sources, within the legal system to be reformed, or by borrowing institutions from more advanced systems, which are already known. After the 11th century, following the revival of the function of the state in Europe, more and more rulers resorted to the reform of the legal system, as a response to the growing problems that society was facing. This reform began in Sicily in 1140, with the enactment of Assizes from Ariano and continued in England with the enactment of The Assize of Clarendon? (1166) by King Henry II. In an attempt to point out the possible influence that took place by taking ready-made solutions from one legal tradition to another, the historical and comparative method is used. Some legal institutions that were part of this reform indicate that these were transplants that the Anglo-Saxon and Norman traditions did not know. The solutions adopted point to similarities with the Sharia legal tradition, and their transposition into the English legal system could have come through people who were in the service of the Norman rulers in Sicily (Roger II) and who later entered the service of King Henry II.

The author discusses the reasons for relativization of the national minorities protection policy of the Council of Europe and the European Union in light of the problems with national minorities protection in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The minorities protection policies in Bosnia and Herzegovina had implications for minority rights protection in Hungary and Croatia after Croatia's accession to the EU . The European Union, the Council of Europe and other European institutions defined their position towards minority rights in light of the European Court for Human Rights decision in the Sejdić and Finci case. The decision specified mandatory constitutional changes in terms of equal protection of national minority rights. According to the demanded constitutional revisions, the representatives of national minorities would have a right to compete for legal and executive positions in the entire Bosnia and Herzegovina. Before the ECHR decision, only representatives of the three constituent peoples – Bosniaks, Serbs and Croats could be nominated for positions in the legislature and in the executive institutions. The Council of Europe mediated by CoE Parliamentarian Assembly and Committee of Ministers threatened to suspend BiH membership to the CoE until the decision was implemented. At the same time, coordinated European Union institutions made the ratification of the Stabilization and Association Agreement (SAA) negotiated with Bosnia and Herzegovina in 2008 conditional upon the implementation of the Sejdić and Finci decision. The threat wasn't carried through and BiH became presiding country of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe in 2014. In the meantime, the newly elected European Parliament as well as recently appointed European Commission accepted the SAA although the Sejdić-Finci decision was not incorporated in the constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina. ; Evropska unija, Savjet Evrope i druge evropske institucije bitno su odredile svoj odnos prema Bosni i Hercegovini u odnosu na primjenu Odluke Evropskog suda za ljudska prava "u slučaju Sejdić i Finci", koji nalaže obavezu ustavnih promjena u pravcu zaštite jednakosti prava pripadnika nacionalnih manjina. Tim promjenama i predstavnici nacionlanih manjina imali bi pravo da budu kandidovani na sve pozicije zakonodavne i izvršne vlasti u Bosni i Hercegovini. Do odluke u spomenutom slučaju, poznatom kao "Sejdić – Finci", samo su pripadnici tri konstitutivna naroda u Bosni i Hercegovini – Srba, Bošnjaka i Hrvata, mogli da budu kandidovani za te funkcije. U više navrata Savjet Evrope je posredstvom Parlamentarne skupštine ili Komiteta ministara prijetio suspenzijom, čak i izbacivanjem Bosne i Hercegovine iz ove međunarodne organizacije. Istovremeno, čak i koordinisano, institucije Evropske unije raznih nivoa uslovljavale su ratifikaciju Sporazuma o stabilizaciji i pridruživanju (SAA ), postignutog još 2008. godine, isto primjenom navedene odluke. Prijetnja se odnosila na nepriznavanja izbornih rezultata na lokalnim izborima 2012. i opštim izborima 2014. godine. To se nije desilo, a u međuvremenu BiH je bila zemlja – predsjedavajuća Komiteta ministara Savjeta Evrope. Novoizabrani saziv Evropskog parlamenta i nova Evropska komisija prihvatili su Sporazum o stabilizaciji i pridruživanju nakon opštih izbora u BiH 2014, iako odluka Evropskog suda za ljudska prava nije primijenjena. Predmet rada biće razlozi relativizacije manjinskih politika Savjeta Evrope i Evropske unije u politikama zaštite prava nacionalnih manjina u BiH. Time su postale vidljive i upozoravajuće i druge politike relativizacije položaja i prava nacionalnih manjina, poput Mađarske i Hrvatske, do čega je došlo nakon prijema ove dvije države u Evropsku uniju.