Suchergebnisse

Abstract. Among twentieth-century political philosophers, Americans
John Rawls and Robert Nozick are generally recognized as giants – both
for the boldness of their arguments and for the influence they have exerted. They sketched rival visions. Rawls, inspired by Immanuel Kant, argued for a world characterized by tolerance, equality, and justice as fairness. Nozick, claiming a Lockean heritage but actually inspired by Adam Smith (the "invisible hand") and Herbert Spencer ("survival of the fittest"), outlined a program for a minimal state, with very little taxation, offering no cushion at all against poverty, and providing no state assistance for the poor, the sick, the disabled, or the widowed. Rawls' vision is clearly part of the liberal tradition, while Nozick's championing of a minimal state contains illiberal elements.
Keywords: John Rawls, Robert Nozick, political liberalism, libertarianism, taxation, equality, justice.

Abstract. The article aims to explore the public's fear of data being misused when using European Covid-19 contact-tracing applications. The point of departure lies in considering the research question of whether the Covid-19 pandemic has influenced the platformisation of traditional institutions, i.e., whether the design of Europe's proximity-tracing applications mimic the dataintensive web services of commercial platforms, namely commercial APIs and their data policies, in order to bypass the right to privacy. We accordingly argue that is vital to address the public's fears of governmental and corporate dataveillance as well as data misuse while using such apps. The investigation entails of a critical analysis of the Exposure Notification System framework designed by Apple and Google (or GAEN) and the #OstaniZdrav application. The article rejects the justification of the public's fear of governmental dataveillance, while recognising the possibility of corporate data misuse. Keywords: Covid-19 contact-tracing application, right to privacy, GDPR, API, protocol, metadata, dataveillance

Magistrsko delo obravnava vpliv migracij na vzpon podpore ekstremističnim političnim strankam v EU. Toksična kombinacija evroskepticizma, dolgega obdobja gospodarske stagnacije in najhujše migrantske krize od konca druge svetovne vojne je vodila do povečanja nestrpnosti državljanov EU do migrantov, percepcije ogroženosti lastne države in EU, s tem pa tudi do raztezanja vzpona desnih ekstremističnih političnih strank po celotni celini. Raziskovalni cilj predstavlja analiza povezanosti njihovega vzpona v EU s predpostavljenim najmočnejšim pojasnjevalnim dejavnikom, tj. stopnja liberalizacije oziroma odprtosti migracijske politike posameznih držav, od česar je odvisno število sprejetih migrantov. Pri tem sem uporabila metode analize primarnih in sekundarnih virov, vključujoč uradne statistike, ter javnomnenjske in mednarodne primerjalne raziskave prepričanj in delovanja posameznikov. Na njihovi podlagi potrjujem porast migrantskega staleža in desnih ekstremističnih tendenc v EU ter hkrati tudi obstoj korelacije. Z izjemo Malte, Portugalske, Romunije, Slovenije, Hrvaške, Španije ter Irske, v katerih desne ekstremistične politične stranke niso prepoznane. Vpliv migracij na volilne rezultate se zaradi individualnih nacionalnih značilnosti posameznih držav članic EU izraža različno, zato posledično zavračam možnost predpostavljenih jasnih linearnih vzporednic. ; The master thesis addresses the issue of migration's impact on the rise of support for extremist political parties in the EU. The toxic combination of Euroscepticism, the long period of economic stagnation and the worst migrant crisis since the end of the Second World War has led to an increase of EU citizens' intolerance against migrants, the perception of the threat to their own country and the EU, as well as the extension of the rise of right-wing extremist political parties throughout the continent. The research objective is to analyse the correlation of their rise in the EU with the presumed strongest explanatory factor, i.e. the degree of liberalization or openness of the migration policy in individual countries, on which depends the number of migrants accepted. In doing so, methods of analysing primary and secondary sources, including official statistics, opinion polls and international comparative research on the beliefs and actions of individuals, were used. On their basis, I confirm the growth of the migrant stock and the right extremist tendencies in the EU, and at the same time the existence of a correlation. With the exception of Malta, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Croatia, Spain and Ireland, where the right-wing extremist political parties are not recognized. The impact of migration on election results is reflected differently due to individual national characteristics of EU Member States, consequently I reject the possibility of assuming clear linear parallels.

Abstract. The article addresses the question of the role of the state in the protection of human rights and freedoms. Like states, rights and freedoms are also created on the basis of social conventions, and any reference to the universal nature or natural character of rights and freedoms is only an ideological moment in the pursuit of political goals. The basic prerequisite for the protection of rights and freedoms is the establishment of organised coercion in the form of state power which brings under its authority the multitude of different interests and diverse ways of implementing justice. The conclusive findings show that for its successful introduction into the lives of individuals, the moral discourse of universal human rights and freedoms needs effective state authority that embeds these rights and freedoms into the foundations of the legitimacy of its own existence. Keywords: Constitutionalism, the state, human rights and freedoms, Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes

Skrajno desne ideje so v evropskem prostoru prisotne že stoletja. Včasih zaradi določenih situacij pridejo na plano, v kratkem pa potem tudi izginejo. Evropska unija, ki se je izgradila na pogorišču skrajnih idej in sistemov, se je ponovno srečala s težko situacijo. V letu 2008 je staro celino zajela svetovna finančna kriza, ki je do temeljev pretresla dotedanjo uspešno evropsko integracijo in pri tem obudila skrajne ideje. Finančni krizi je po nekaj letih sledila migrantska, ki je že tako težko situacijo naredila še težjo. V določenih državah so se začele prebujati skrajne populistične in nacionalistične ideje, ki so krivca za nastalo situacijo iskale znotraj Evropske unije, v njenih institucijah in migrantih, ki so zaradi različnih razlogov prihajali v varno Evropo. Vzpon skrajno desnih strank je imel v posameznih državah različne motive, zakaj je stranka prišla na oblast oz. je imela v državi velik pomen. Vprašanje, ki se pojavlja ob trenutni situaciji v Evropski uniji, je, kako bodo skrajne ideje vplivale na nadaljnjo integracijo oz. dezintegracijo Evropske unije. ; Far-right ideas have been present in the European area for centuries. Certain situations cause them to emerge every now and then, before they disappear again not long after. The European Union, which was built on the ruins of radical ideas and political systems, is once again facing this menacing threat. In 2008, the old continent was hit by the global financial crisis, which shook the so far very successful European integration to its core and began to awake certain extremist notions. After a few years, the financial crisis was followed by the migrant crisis, which had since only exacerbated the situation. Populist and nationalist ideas, which were starting to resurge in some European countries, were looking for a scapegoat for the new state of affairs in the European Union and within the walls of its institutions and migrants, who were arriving into safe Europe for various reasons, made for a perfect target. The rise of far-right political parties had different motives in individual countries, regardless whether a particular party seized power or simply grew in prominence. The question that the European Union is facing at the moment is how these extremist ideas will influence further integration or disintegration of Europe.

Demokracija je sistem, je paradigma, ki se je brez volitev in udeležbe volivcev, že zaradi njene izvorne filozofske in družbene ideje ne da vzpostaviti in uresničiti. Ni je mogoče in tudi smelo se je ne bi vpeljati kot družbeni red kar tako, samo po sebi, kot še eno avtoritarno možnost z dejanjem avtoritarnega posameznika ali ozke skupine. Če je vzpostavljena, pa je v njenem temeljnem izhodišču, ki sloni na doslednem spoštovanju človekovih pravic, svoboščin in pravičnosti, niti ni mogoče v celoti uresničiti. Kot družbenopolitična pojavna oblika se namreč kaže kot sistem posredne ali neposredne vladavine njenega izvornega nosilca. Neposredna prihaja v konflikt z njeno dejansko uporabnostjo za vsa področja moderno strukturirane družbe, posredna se globoko in neizogibno oddaljuje od njenega bistva in smisla. Kljub temu so demokratične volitve še vedno temeljni, družbenosistemski element in pogoj za vzpostavitev demokratične družbe, zato se od tako vzpostavljenega sistema kot celote utemeljeno pričakuje, da bo volivcem in kandidatom v polni meri omogočil uresničiti njihovo ustavno in mednarodnopravno uveljavljeno volilno upravičenje in poslanstvo, druge upravičeno vpletene subjekte pa v skladu z demokratičnimi volilnimi standardi zadolžil za njihovo demokratično izvedbo, kontrolo in nadzor. Ker uresničevanje volilne pravice na volišču kot klasična oblika volitev s prihodom volivcev v »volilno urejen prostor ali stavbo« in oddajo papirnatih glasovnic v volilno skrinjo počasi, a zanesljivo izgublja svojo družbeno in politično funkcijo kot temeljni pogoj za njeno izvrševanje, je temeljna hipoteza predstavljene naloge zastavljala vprašanje, ali je tradicionalno volišče kot prostor in pravna kategorija uresničevanja ustavnega načela ljudske suverenosti in demokratične oblasti (še vedno) ustrezno zakonsko regulirano in ali zaradi novih načinov in tehnologij glasovanja ta njegova vloga postaja ustavno sporna. ; Democracy is a system, a paradigm which, due to its philosophical and social idea, cannot be established and realised without elections and voters' participation. It cannot and should not be introduced as a social system just like that, spontaneously, as another authoritarian option carried out by an authoritarian individual or a select group. However, when it is established, it cannot be fully realised in its fundamental starting point based on a consistent regard for human rights, freedoms and justice. As a socio-political phenomenon it appears as a system of direct or indirect reign of its original holder. It is directly in immediate conflict with its virtual practicability in all spheres of a modern structured society and indirectly it deeply and inevitably deviates from its essence and meaning. Nevertheless, democratic elections are still a fundamental social system element and a condition for the establishment of a democratic society. Therefore it is reasonable to expect from the established system as a whole to enable the voters and candidates to fully realize their constitutional and internationally established electoral entitlement and mission and to make it possible for the other legitimately involved subjects to be charged with their democratic implementation, control and supervision in accordance with democratic electoral standards. Since the exercise of voting rights at the polling station as a classic form of elections with the arrival of voters in an "electoral space or building" and the delivery of paper ballots in the electoral box slowly but doubtless loses its social and political function as a fundamental condition for its implementation, the fundamental hypothesis of the presented task raised the question whether the traditional polling place as a space and the legal category of the implementation of the constitutional principle of the people's sovereignty and democratic authority are (still) suitably legally regulated, or this role is becoming constitutionally controversial due to new methods and technologies of voting.

This article addresses the deficiency in the area of human rights scholarship in International Relations (IR) by examining the theoretical advancements in IR theory that have led to the emergence of non-state collective actors as a pertinent research topic. It provides a review of the trajectory of the constructivist theoretical approach, which has brought major advancements in how international non-state actors are conceptualised in the human rights IR literature. This considers the limitations and implications of side-lining collective non-state actors within IR theory, arguing that expanding the theoretical understanding of how different collective actors are constituted and attributed with agency can enrich IR human rights scholarship. The article also proposes a potential way forward with respect to non-state collective actors in human rights in IR by identifying a research programme based on practiceoriented approaches to help broaden the ability of scholars to foster interdisciplinary conversations. Expanding along these lines would bridge the existing boundaries within scholarly and disciplinary contexts. Keywords: non-state actors, state-centrism, collectives, international relations, human rights, international actors, constructivism

Magistrsko diplomsko delo z naslovom Glavna obravnava v upravnem sporu kot človekova pravica celovito obravnava vprašanje (ne)izvedbe glavne obravnave v upravnem sporu. Mednarodni in slovenski predpisi predvidevajo javne sodne postopke z neposrednim ustnim obravnavanjem zadev. Prvi odstavek 6. člena Evropske konvencije o varstvu človekovih pravic in temeljnih svoboščin določa, da je javna obravnava sestavni del pravice do poštenega sojenja. Ustava Republike Slovenije posredno ureja glavno obravnavo v upravnem sporu, in sicer zlasti v 22. členu (enako varstvo pravic), 23. členu (pravica do sodnega varstva) in 24. členu (javnost sojenja). Glavno obravnavo kot zakonsko materijo podrobneje urejajo določbe Zakona o upravnem sporu in Zakona o pravdnem postopku. Izhajajoč iz ugotovitev Evropskega sodišča za človekove pravice, Ustavnega sodišča Republike Slovenije in Vrhovnega sodišča Republike Slovenije v magistrskem diplomskem delu zagovarjam dosledno izvedbo glavne obravnave, predvsem v primeru spornega dejanskega stanja in ko stranka njeno izvedbo izrecno zahteva. Vrhovno sodišče Republike Slovenije in Ustavno sodišče Republike Slovenije sta v novejši sodni praksi zavzela enotno stališče, da ima glavna obravnava v upravnem sporu enako naravo in smisel kot glavna obravnava v katerem koli drugem sodnem postopku. Ustavno sodišče Republike Slovenije je pravico do glavne obravnave v upravnem sporu opredelilo kot samostojno človekovo pravico, ki jo zagotavlja 22. člen Ustave Republike Slovenije. Pravica ni absolutna, zato morajo biti posegi vanjo zakonsko določeni ter prestati ustavna testa legitimnosti (tretji odstavek 15. člena Ustave Republike Slovenije) in sorazmernosti (2. člen Ustave Republike Slovenije). ; The master's thesis titled The main hearing in an administrative dispute as a human right comprehensively deals with issues regarding decision-making in an administrative dispute. International and Slovenian legal acts envisage public legal procedures with direct oral proceedings. The right to an oral hearing is an integral part of the right to a fair trial, as guaranteed by Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia indirectly regulates the right to a main hearing in an administrative dispute, especially in Article 22 (Equal Protection of Rights), Article 23 (Right to Judicial Protection) and Article 24 (Public Nature of Court Proceedings). The right to a main hearing is specified in the Administrative Dispute Act and the Contentious Civil Procedure Act. Building on the findings of the European Court of Human Rights, the Constitutional and the Supreme Court of the Republic of Slovenia, the master's thesis advocates for the consistent execution of the main hearing, particularly in cases where facts are being disputed and when a party explicitly demands it. The Constitutional and the Supreme Court of the Republic of Slovenia agreed that the main hearing possesses the same nature and meaning in an administrative dispute as it does in any other judicial proceeding. The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Slovenia has declared the right to a main hearing in an administrative dispute as an independent human right, which is guaranteed by Article 22 of the Constitution. As the right is not absolute, the absence of the main hearing is only permissible in duly justified cases prescribed by law and when the Constitutional tests of legitimacy (paragraph 3 of Article 15 of the Constitution) and proportionality (Article 2 of the Constitution) are passed.

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

POVZETEK MEDNARODNI KAZENSKI PREGON IN ČLOVEKOVE PRAVICE TUJIH TERORISTIČNIH BORCEV Avtor: Rok Petročnik Mentorica: izr. prof. dr. Vasilka Sancin V magistrski nalogi sem raziskoval nastanek fenomena tujega terorističnega borca, njihov mednarodni kazenski pregon in kršitve njihovih temeljnih človekovih pravic v domačih kazenskih pregonih. Varnostni svet OZN je leta 2014 na podlagi VII. poglavja Ustanovne listine OZN sprejel Resolucijo 2178, ki podaja opis tujega terorističnega borca, vendar ne loči med oboroženimi spopadi in terorizmom. Resolucija 2178 opisuje tujega terorističnega borca kot posameznika, ki potuje v tujino z namenom izvedbe ali sodelovanja v terorističnem napadu, medtem ko je tuji borec posameznik, ki odpotuje v tujino z namenom pridružitve oboroženim spopadom. V raziskavi sem prišel do sklepa, da trenutno ne obstaja mednarodni kazenski pregon tujih terorističnih borcev, saj pregon izvajajo države same pred nacionalnimi sodišči. Varnostni svet OZN je pregon tujih terorističnih borcev preložil na države članice OZN, in sicer z vzpostavitvijo različnih odborov za nadzor izvajanja sankcij Varnostnega Sveta, kot so Sankcijski odbor 1267 in Skupina za analitično podporo in nadzor sankcij. V primerih Nada, Ahmed in Abdelrazik so nacionalna sodišča zaradi kršitev temeljnih človekovih pravic s sodbami razveljavila državne upravne akte, ki so vpeljevali sprejete protiteroristične resolucije Varnostnega sveta. Podobno je naredilo sodišče EU v primeru Kadi, kjer je bila razveljavljena uredba, ki je vpeljala sankcije Varnostnega sveta. Sodbe nacionalnih in sodišč v EU so bile glavni dejavnik za spremembo mednarodnopravnega okvirja terorizma OZN in za posledično večji poudarek na spoštovanju temeljnih pravic, ki jih zagotavlja Evropska konvencija o človekovih pravicah. ; ABSTRACT INTERNATIONAL PROSECUTION AND HUMAN RIGHTS OF FOREIGN TERRORIST FIGHTERS Author: Rok Petročnik Mentor: Vasilka Sancin, PhD, Professor In master's thesis i explored the emergence of the foreign terrorist fighter phenomenona, international prosecution of foreign terrorist fighters, and the violation of the fundamental rights of foreign terrorist fighters in domestic prosecutions. UN Security Council in 2014 adopted Resolution 2178 under Chapter VII of the UN Charter. However, while the Resolution outlines the description of a foreign terrorist fighter, it fails to distinguish between armed conflicts and terrorism. Resolution 2178 defines foreign terrorist fighters as individuals who travel to a state other than their states of residence or nationality for the purpose of the perpetration, planning, or preparation of, or participation in, terrorist acts or the providing or receiving of terrorist training, including in connection with armed conflict, while foreign fighter is an individual who travels abroad with intention to join armed conflict. The research led to the conclusion that there is currently no international prosecution of foreign terrorist fighters because states carry it out before national courts. UN Security Council has placed the burden of prosecuting foreign terrorist fighters on UN Member States by establishing different committees monitoring the implementation of the Security Council sanctions, such as the 1267 Committee and the Analytical Support and Sanctions Monitoring Team. In the cases of Nada, Ahmed and Abdelrazik, national courts due to violations of fundamental rights, repealed national administrative acts that introduced the adopted UN Security Council counter terrorism resolutions. The Court of Justice of the EU made a similar decision in the case of Kadi by repealing the regulation introducing the UN Security Council sanctions. Judgements of national and EU courts were the main factor in changing the UN terrorism framework in terms of international law, thus shifting the focus on the respect of fundamental rights as guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights.

Listina o temeljnih pravicah Evropske unije predstavlja osrednji dokument varstva temeljnih pravic v Evropski uniji, ki so se razvila skozi prakso Sodišča Evropske unije. Kot deklaracija je bila najprej slovesno razglašena 7. decembra 2000, pravna veljava in status primarnega prava Evropske unije pa ji je bil podeljen devet let kasneje z Lizbonsko pogodbo. Vsebina Listine o temeljnih pravicah Evropske unije temelji na skupnih ustavnih tradicijah in mednarodnih obveznosti držav članic, Evropski konvenciji o varstvu človekovih pravic, socialnih listinah Evropske unije in Sveta Evrope, sodni praksi Sodišča Evropske unije ter Evropskega sodišča za človekove pravice. Kljub temu pa je njena vsebina tudi inovativna in v nekaterih primerih širša. Tako je z Listino o temeljnih pravicah Evropske unije, zagotovljena pravica do azila, kar predstavlja redkost v mednarodnih dokumentih varstva temeljnih pravic. V praksi jo tako Sodišče Evropske unije kot nacionalna sodišča velikokrat uporabljajo na področju migracij in azila. Sodišče Evropske unije igra pomembno vlogo pri harmonizaciji Skupnega evropskega azilnega sistema in zagotavljanju minimalnih standardov varstva pravic prosilcev za mednarodno zaščito skozi interpretacijo skladnosti določb sekundarne zakonodaje Evropske unije na področju azila in nacionalne zakonodaje z Listino o temeljnih pravicah Evropske unije. ; "Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union" represents a core bill of rights document within the European union which developed through the case law of the European Court of Justice. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union was solemnly announced on 7 December 2000 as a Declaration, only becoming legally binding nine years later with the entry into force of the Lisbon treaty, which granted it the status of primary law of the European Union. The contents within the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union is based on the constitutional traditions and international obligations common to member states, the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights, Social Charters of the European union, and the Council of Europe, the case law of the European Court of Justice, and the European Court of Human Rights. However, it is also innovative and broader in some cases. Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union provides a right to be granted asylum, which represents a rarity in international instruments of fundamental rights. It is often used in practice by the European Court of Justice and national courts in the field of migration and asylum. The European Court of Justice plays an important role in harmonization of the Common European Asylum System and in setting of minimum standards for protection of the rights of applicants for international protection through its interpretation in compliance of secondary legislation of the European Union and national legislation with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

Avtorica v magistrskem delu obravnava vpliv Listine Evropske unije o temeljnih pravicah na upravni postopek v državah članicah. V začetku prikaže razvoj varstva temeljnih pravic v okviru Skupnosti, zatem podrobneje predstavi temeljne značilnosti Listine ter povzame ugotovitve o uporabi Listine v državah članicah, ki izhajajo iz poročil o temeljnih pravicah Agencije Evropske unije za temeljne pravice. Že v začetnih poglavjih na relevantnih mestih opozori na prednosti in slabosti Listine, ki bi utegnile vplivati na upravni postopek. V nadaljevanju se posveti kritični obravnavi vpliva, ki ga imata na nacionalni upravni postopek dve najbolj procesno naravnani pravici iz Listine, in sicer pravica do dobrega upravljanja (41. člen Listine) in pravica do učinkovitega pravnega sredstva in nepristranskega sodišča (47. člen Listine). Nato na primerih iz sodne prakse Sodišča Evropske unije in nacionalnih sodišč prikaže, kako Listina vpliva na ugotovitveni postopek, obveznosti upravnih organov pred izdajo odločbe, možnost sodne kontrole nad upravnimi akti ter na pravnomočno zaključene zadeve. ; The thesis examines the impact of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union on the administrative procedure in Member States. In the introductory chapters, the developments in the protection of fundamental rights within the European Communities are outlined and the main features of the Charter are presented in greater detail. The key findings on the application of the Charter in the Member States are drawn from the annual fundamental rights reports that are prepared by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. Throughout the entire thesis, strengths and weaknesses of the Charter that would have a significant impact on the administrative procedure are referenced where relevant. Further on, the Author critically examines the impact of the right to good administration (article 41 EU Charter) and the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (article 47 EU Charter), both of procedural character, on the national administrative procedure. Finally, referring to examples acquired from the recent case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union and national case law, the Author demonstrates how the Charter impacts the fact assessment procedure, the obligations of administrative bodies throughout the proceeding, the possibility of judicial review of administrative action and the impact on final administrative decisions.

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.