Suchergebnisse

Povzetek. Vloga posameznih družboslovnih disciplin
se v sodobnih družbah spreminja v odvisnosti od vrste
okoliščin in dogodkov, pa tudi od njihove sposobnosti
razvoja in odzivanja na zunanje izzive. Slovenska politologija je od svojih začetkov v začetku 60. let preteklega
stoletja šla skozi več obdobij razvoja in zlasti po osamosvojitvi Slovenije doživela izjemen institucionalni in
profesionalni razvoj, pri tem pa utrjevala svojo identiteto. Zadnje (četrto) obdobje je obdobje kriz, ki se je l. 2008
začelo z gospodarsko krizo in nadaljevalo z migrantsko
ter zdravstveno krizo, zadnja varnostna kriza, ki traja,
pa je spodkopala sistem varnosti v Evropi. Politologija je
zlasti v zadnjem času na različne načine skušala pozitivno prispevati k analizi teh kriznih pojavov in opozarjala na (ne)ustreznost strategij in ukrepov za omejevanje njihovih učinkov ter odpravljanje posledic. Pri tem
pa lahko ugotavljamo tudi njeno premajhno odzivnost
in nezadostno definiranost njenih dolgoročnih ciljev,
pri čemer bi se morala bolj zavedati tudi svojih potencialnih funkcij in se več ukvarjati z vprašanjem, kako
ustvarjati znanje za politiko.
Ključni pojmi: politologija, identiteta, profesionalni
razvoj, faze razvoja, definiranost ciljev

Razvoj EU je ustvaril posebno vrsto 'delegirane demokracije', v kateri imajo večjo moč izvršilna telesa, medtem ko imajo nacionalni parlamenti le možnost posrednega vplivanja in nadzora svojih vlad, ko le-te sodelujejo v procesih odločanja na ravni EU. Parlamenti držav članic EU so se v novem okolju znašli različno, saj nekateri dovolj dobro izkoriščajo možnosti sodelovanja s svojimi vladami, kar pa je odvisno od vrste okoliščin in različnih dejavnikov. Državni zbor se je kot nov parlament samostojne države na svojo novo vlogo dovolj dobro pripravil že med pripravami na vključitev, saj je kot edini parlament držav kandidatk potrjeval pogajalska stališča. Zelo dobra je tudi njegova formalna in organizacijska pripravljenost (institutional capacity), medtem ko mu primanjkuje praktičnega znanja in izkušenj (cultural capacity).

In the process of democratization, the national parliaments of Central and Eastern Europe first needed to adapt to the democratic norms and principles set by Western European countries and organizations. Before an individual state could enter the EU, the parliaments had to align the entirety of their national legislation with EU legal standards. Further, national parliaments had to incorporate the supranational decision-making models practiced in the EU. Each of the parliaments of the 2004 entrant countries has chosen different models of participation in the decision-making process at the EU. The Slovenian example shows that its National Assembly (Drzavni zbor), long an active participant in country's accession process, has chosen a model that secures it a relatively strong role in dealing with EU matters, similar to that of some Scandinavian parliaments. The National Assembly adopted an anticipatory examination of the EU draft legislation and put the main focus on the special Committee on EU Affairs. Statistical data shows that the Slovene parliament, during the last mandate (2004-2008) did not adequately use its full range of opportunities to become an active player in the process of formulating and passing legislation at the EU-level. The National Assembly further missed an opportunity to direct or influence the activities of government representatives at the EU-level. Thus, EU matters remained separate from the national context. On the basis of previous accession countries acclimation to the EU, it is possible to conclude that parliaments during their first mandates after the country's entry into the EU are not yet able to develop a parliamentary-EU dimension. These assumptions indicate a need to prepare some 'recipes' to mollify problems for future EU member states. Adapted from the source document.

In the process of democratization, the national parliaments of Central and Eastern Europe first needed to adapt to the democratic norms and principles set by Western European countries and organizations. Before an individual state could enter the EU, the parliaments had to align the entirety of their national legislation with EU legal standards. Further, national parliaments had to incorporate the supranational decision-making models practiced in the EU. Each of the parliaments of the 2004 entrant countries has chosen different models of participation in the decision-making process at the EU. The Slovenian example shows that its National Assembly (Drzavni zbor), long an active participant in country's accession process, has chosen a model that secures it a relatively strong role in dealing with EU matters, similar to that of some Scandinavian parliaments. The National Assembly adopted an anticipatory examination of the EU draft legislation and put the main focus on the special Committee on EU Affairs. Statistical data shows that the Slovene parliament, during the last mandate (2004-2008) did not adequately use its full range of opportunities to become an active player in the process of formulating and passing legislation at the EU-level. The National Assembly further missed an opportunity to direct or influence the activities of government representatives at the EU-level. Thus, EU matters remained separate from the national context. On the basis of previous accession countries acclimation to the EU, it is possible to conclude that parliaments during their first mandates after the country's entry into the EU are not yet able to develop a parliamentary-EU dimension. These assumptions indicate a need to prepare some 'recipes' to mollify problems for future EU member states. Adapted from the source document.