Because of their internal situations, Cyprus, Greece, Romania, Slovakia and Spain do not recognise Kosovo. Aware of its inability to create a common view, as in other cases, the European Council has ...noted that ‘Member States will decide, in accordance with national practice and international law, on their relations with Kosovo’ on a sui generis basis. Nevertheless, the EU has engaged in de facto recognition of Kosovo by treating it as an independent State. Their obligations rooted in a duty of sincere cooperation and mutual solidarity mean that the five Member States that do not recognise Kosovo may not obstruct the EU’s ‘engagement without recognition’ policy and, in this way, participate in de facto recognition of Kosovo. After some introductory remarks, the specific nature of recognition of States from the perspective of EU law will be explored. The section after that will deal with Member States’ obligations regarding recognition when the EU has adhered to a certain recognition policy. The fourth section will investigate the sui generis case of Kosovo in specific circumstances defined by EU law. The paper concludes with some final remarks.
SLAPP-ovi su tužbe kojima moćni pojedinci, lobiji, korporacije i državna tijela pokreću očito neosnovane ili zlonamjerne sudske postupke protiv stranaka, u pravilu novinara i boraca za ljudska prava, ...koji izražavaju kritiku ili prenose poruke o pitanjima od javnog interesa, sa svrhom njihova cenzuriranja, zastrašivanja ili ušutkavanja. Anti-SLAPP direktiva je hvalevrijedan korak, unatoč nejasnoći nekih instituta, kao i načelnoj činjenici da oni zapravo ne predstavljaju posebnu novost, barem kada je riječ o hrvatskom pravnom sustavu. Ono što, međutim, prijedlogu te Direktive svakako nedostaje jest istodobno inzistiranje na obavljanju novinarske profesije u skladu s najvišim načelima te struke. Ovo bi bila snažna poruka da Anti-SLAPP direktiva nije pristrana, već da je riječ o modernom europskom aktu u punom smislu riječi kojem je cilj jačanje medijskog pluralizma i slobode medija u Europskoj uniji uz poštovanje svih prava i sloboda zajamčenih EKLJP-om i Poveljom EU-a.
The Russian aggression on Ukraine has triggered a complex question: could Russia, as one of five permanent members of the UNSC, be expelled from the UN regardless of Article 6 of the UN Charter? This ...Article provides that a UN member state which has persistently violated the principles from the Charter may be expelled from the UN by the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the UNSC. Since this recommendation of the UNSC requires unanimity of all its permanent members, it seems that the international community has been faced with a seemingly unsolvable situation. Nevertheless, there are maneuvers based on the rules of customary international law embodied in the Vienna Convention of the Law of Treaties, that could be exercised. Those maneuvers would not be something unseen in the history of UN law; however extreme and severe consequences would arise this time.
Ruska agresija na Ukrajinu otvorila je i kompleksno pitanje mogućeg isključenja stalne članice Vijeća sigurnosti iz Ujedinjenih naroda s obzirom na članak 6. Povelje UN-a, sukladno kojem Opća skupština može na preporuku Vijeća sigurnosti isključiti iz Ujedinjenih naroda člana koji uporno krši načela sadržana u Povelji. S obzirom na to da ovakvu preporuku Vijeće sigurnosti može donijeti samo konsenzusom svih stalnih članica, navedeno se isključenje čini nemogućim. Međutim, ta mogućnost proizlazi iz relevantnih pravila međunarodnog običajnog prava inkorporiranog u Bečkoj konvenciji o pravu međunarodnih ugovora. Ovakvi zahvati nisu nepoznati u praksi Međunarodnog suda ni u razvoju prava Ujedinjenih naroda.
U svojem mišljenju u predmetu Congregación de Escuelas Pías Provincia Betania nezavisna odvjetnica Juliane Kokott zaključila je kako bi Kraljevina Španjolska morala poduzeti sve odgovarajuće korake ...za otklanjanje neusklađenosti Sporazuma o gospodarskim pitanjima sklopljenog između Kraljevine Španjolske i Svete Stolice s pravom Europske unije. Pritom, kao krajnju opciju, predlaže otkaz Sporazuma koji bi pokrenula Španjolska. Cilj ovog rada je istražiti pravnu provedivost ovog prijedloga kao i druge načine prestanka važenja toga sporazuma s aspekta međunarodnog prava, ali i s aspekta prava Europske unije. Štoviše, u radu će se pokazati zašto ta opcija ne bi bila prihvatljiva niti za Ugovore koje je Republika Hrvatska sklopila sa Svetom Stolicom. Ovakva neprovedivost proizlazi iz relevantnih odredaba Bečke konvencije o pravu međunarodnih ugovora kao i Ugovora o funkcioniranju Europske unije.
In her opinion on the case Congregación de Escuelas Pías Provincia Betania, independent lawyer Juliane Kokott has concluded that the Kingdom of Spain ought to take all necessary steps to eliminate existing incompatibility of the Treaty on Economic Issues between the Kingdom of Spain and the Holy See with the legislation of the European Union. In relation to that and as a final option, she proposes the termination of the Treaty that Spain should initiate. The aim of this article is to study the legal feasibility of this proposal, as well as of other ways in which the aforementioned treaty could be terminated, from the perspective of the international law and the legislation of the European Union. The article also will show why that option would not be acceptable in the case of the Treaty that the Republic of Croatia signed with the Holy See. This infeasibility stems from the relevant clauses of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treatises as well as from the Treaty on Functioning of the European Union.
Cilj je ovoga rada istražiti dvije inačice blokiranja postupka pristupanja neke države Uniji od države članice koja s tom državom ima otvorena pitanja. S jedne strane, takvo ponašanje može ...predstavljati zloupotrebu povlaštenoga položaja države članice i povredu načela lojalne suradnje. S druge, ono može predstavljati i zaštitu temeljnih vrijednosti Unije ako država kandidatkinja iste vrijednosti očito ne poštuje. Ocjenu u tom smislu trebao bi donijeti Sud EU-a. Stoga je cilj rada i analizirati i konkretni odnos Hrvatske i Srbije u smislu nesuradnje Srbije po pitanju rješavanja pitanja nestalih i smrtno stradalih u Domovinskom ratu te adekvatne reakcije Hrvatske na takvu suradnju.
This paper aims to explore blocking of a country’s accession to the EU by a member state which has unresolved bilateral issues with the same country. That kind of the member state’s behaviour could easily be understood as an abuse of its privileged position, as well as a violation of its duty of sincere cooperation. Conversely, it can also represent an act of protection of the Union’s fundamental values in the case in which a candidate country clearly does not respect those values. The final word in this sense should have the CJEU. Consequently, this paper will explore the relationship between Croatia as a member state and Serbia as a candidate country in terms of Serbia’s lack of cooperation regarding the resolution of the issue of missing and deceased persons during the Croatian War of Independence.
Sažetak: Graðanstvo Unije, formalno uvedeno Ugovorom iz Maastrichta, praksom Suda EU-a postalo je temeljni status državljana država članica koji omogućuje jednaki pravni tretman svim njegovim ...nositeljima koji se naðu u istoj situaciji bez obzira na državljanstvo. Cilj rada je istražiti kako je Sud EU-a kroz taj institut širio primjenu prava Unije, u kontekstu odnosa prema nacionalnim državljanstvima država članica, ali i gdje je postavio granice tom širenju u odnosu na nacionalna državljanstva. U tu svrhu, nakon uvodnih razmatranja, analizirat će se problematika stjecanja i gubitka graðanstva Unije u interpretaciji Suda EU-a. U trećem dijelu istražit će se pitanje emancipacije graðanstva Unije od nacionalnih državljanstava s obzirom na odredbe UEU-a i UFEU-a te s obzirom na praksu Suda EU-a. Na kraju autor zaključuje kako je Sud EU-a uistinu dao snažan poticaj ekspanziji instituta graðanstva Unije, ali i kako je i sam postavio granice toj ekspanziji i to upravo u njegovoj povezanosti s nacionalnim državljanstvima, što je i u skladu s relevantnim odredbama UEU-a i UFEU-a.
Ukidanje nepovredivosti ispovjedne tajne kod kaznenih djela spolnog zlostavljanja i iskorištavanja djeteta po svojoj se naravi ne razlikuje od ukidanja nepovredivosti ispovjedne tajne u bilo kojem ...drugom slučaju. U tom smislu, prijedlog ukidanja ispovjedne tajne sporan je s pravnog, sakramentalnog i utilitarnog aspekta. S pravnog aspekta iz razloga što je nepovredivost ispovjedne tajne utemeljena u međunarodnom ugovoru s kojim je usklađeno i hrvatsko unutarnje zakonodavstvo. Sa sakramentalnog, jer je riječ o izravnom Božjem zahvatu u kojem je Crkva posrednik. S utilitarnog jer se ukidanjem ispovjedne tajne počinitelji ne bi naveli na prijavljivanje, već bi se samo odvratili od ispovijedi.
Abolition of the inviolability of the seal of confession in case of criminal offences of sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children does not differ from abolition of the inviolability of the seal of confession in any other case. The proposal can be disputed from legal, sacramental as well as utilitarian point of view. The dispute from the legal point of view lies in the fact that inviolability of the seal of confession is incorporated in international and, consequently, Croatian internal law. From the sacramental point of view, the problem with abolition of seal of confession is that the sacrament itself is a reflection of direct God's intervention in which Church is a mediator. From the utilitarian aspect, the abolition of seal of confession is questionable in light of the nature of things: the only effect that this abolition would have would be deterring of a perpetrator from the sacrament itself. There would be no real effect in a quest for eliminating the crimes of sexual abuse and exploitation of children.
Cilj je ovoga rada istražiti je li suradnja institucija Unije u vezi s provođenjem i poboljšanjem učinkovitosti članka 7. UEU-a sukladna s načelom lojalne suradnje te može li Sud EU-a, štiteći ...načelno lojalne suradnje između institucija, posredno ojačati učinkovitost članka 7. UEU-a i zaštititi temeljne vrijednosti iz članka 2. UEU-a. U tu se svrhu u radu, nakon uvodnoga dijela, istražuje kako su institucije Unije pokušale poboljšati učinkovitost članka 7. UEU-a te analizira međusobna suradnja koju su pritom ostvarile. U trećem se dijelu ukazuje na praksu Suda EU-a o pitanju lojalne suradnje institucija Unije te se primjenjuju zaključci koji proizlaze iz nje povezani s institucionalnom suradnjom iz članka 7. UEU-a. Autor zaključuje kako ta suradnja ne odgovara zahtjevu lojalne suradnje iz članka 13. UEU-a, ali i kako bi Sud EU-a, osnažujući obvezu lojalne suradnje institucija Unije, posredno mogao poboljšati učinkovitost članka 7. UEU-a.
L’obiettivo di questo lavoro è di ricercare se la cooperazione delle istituzioni dell’Unione relativa all’applicazione ed al miglioramento dell’efficienza dell’articolo 7 del TUE sia in conformità con il principio di leale cooperazione e se la Corte di giustizia dell’Unione europea, tutelando il principio di leale cooperazione tra le istituzioni, può indirettamente rafforzare l’efficienza dell’articolo 7 del TUE e proteggere i valori fondamentali contenuti nell’articolo 2 del TUE. A tal fine nel lavoro, dopo l’introduzione, si analizza il modo in cui le istituzioni dell’Unione hanno provato a migliorare l’efficienza dell’articolo 7 del TUE e la cooperazione reciproca che è stata realizzata in tal modo tra loro. Nella terza parte si farà luce sulla giurisprudenza della Corte di giustizia dell’Unione europea riguardo alla questione della leale cooperazione delle istituzioni dell’Unione e si applicheranno le conclusioni provenienti da tale giurisprudenza alla cooperazione istituzionale dell’articolo 7 del TUE. Infine, l’autore conclude che questa cooperazione non corrisponde alla richiesta della leale cooperazione dell’articolo 13 del TUE, ma anche come la Corte di giustizia dell’Unione europea, rafforzando l’obbligo della leale cooperazione delle istituzioni dell’Unione, potrebbe indirettamente migliorare l’efficienza dell’articolo 7 del TUE.
Dieser Beitrag untersucht ob die Zusammenarbeit der EU-Institutionen in Hinsicht auf die Durchführung und Verbesserung von der Wirksamkeit des Art. 7 EUV in Einklang mit dem Grundsatz der loyalen Zusammenarbeit ist, und ob der EU-Gerichtshof, indem er diesen Grundsatz schützt, indirekt auch die Wirksamkeit des Art. 7 EUV bewirken und die Grundwerte aus Art. 2 EUV schützen kann. Dazu wird, nach der Einführung, die Weise auf die EU-Institutionen versucht haben, die Wirksamkeit des Art. 7 EUV zu verbessern analysiert mit Schwerpunkt auf der daraus ergangenen internationalen Zusammenarbeit. Im dritten Teil wird auf die maßgebende Rechtsprechung des EU-Gerichthofs hingewiesen, und die Schlüsse die daraus für die institutionelle Zusammenarbeit aus Art. 7 EUV zu ziehen sind, aufgezeigt. Der Autor schlussfolgert, dass diese Zusammenarbeit nicht der Forderung der loyalen Zusammenarbeit aus dem Art. 13 EUV entspricht, sowie dass der EU-Gerichtshof, indem er diese Forderung stärkt, auch die Wirksamkeit des Art. 7 EUV verbessern kann.
This paper aims to explore do the EU institutions practice mutual sincere cooperation concerning the implementation of article 7 of the TEU, improving its efficiency and the CJEU’s capability to improve the efficiency of the aforementioned article indirectly, through protection of the principle of sincere cooperation between institutions. For that purpose, following the introductory part of the paper, an analysis of approaches the EU institutions took in order to try to improve article 7’s efficiency and protect values determined in article 2 of the TEU is presented as well as the cooperation the EU institutions realized in the process. In the third part of the paper the author analyses the CJEU case law regarding sincere cooperation between EU institutions and applies conclusions that this case-law provides to exercising institutional cooperation as determined in article 7 of the TEU. In conclusion, this paper shows this cooperation does not satisfy the obligation of sincere cooperation as established in article 13 of the TEU, but that article 7’s efficiency can be indirectly improved by CJEU by upholding the obligation of sincere cooperation of EU institutions.
In the context of the discourse on constitutional identities, national constitutional courts enter into various forms of dialogue with the Court of Justice of the EU. After having engaged for an ...extended period of time in exclusively indirect dialogues that were more or less successful and were realised through their own practices, national constitutional courts started making use of the possibility offered to them pursuant to Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, i.e., the preliminary ruling procedure. The paper aims to prove that the dialogues which constitutional courts engage in with the Court of Justice of the EU are the most successful forms of their communication. For that purpose the paper compares these dialogues with indirect forms of communication between constitutional courts and the Court of Justice of the EU. It is in this context that the paper, following introductory considerations in the second part, considers the concept of constitutional identity from the viewpoint of the Court of Justice of the EU and the viewpoint of national constitutional courts. The third part of the paper analyses different forms of indirect dialogue between constitutional courts and the Court of Justice of the EU and draws conclusions about their effectiveness. The fourth part analyses particular procedures instituted before the Court of Justice of the EU by constitutional courts and points out the pros and cons of these procedures. Finally, the paper concludes that the procedures instituted by national constitutional courts pursuant to Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union are the most direct and the most efficient forms of their communication with this Court.
Kao odgovor na sve učestalije, ali i pogubnije terorističke napade diljem svijeta, a osobito nakon napada na New York 11. 9. 2001., međunarodna zajednica bila je primorana, prilagoditi se i pronaći ...odgovarajuće rješenje. Jedan od oblika toga rješenja, odnosno borbe protiv terorizma bilo je i onemogućiti financiranje terorizma provođenjem sankcija, odnosno mjera ograničavanja protiv osoba, odnosno entiteta povezanih s terorizmom, prvenstveno zamrzavanjem imovine. Navedene mjere u velikom su broju slučajeva rezultat implementacije rezolucija Vijeća sigurnosti Ujedinjenih naroda kojima se nameću sankcije određenim fizičkim, odnosno pravnim osobama. Ovaj sustav sankcija, međutim, karakterizirao je i velik broj nedostataka koji su se, uglavnom, svodili na nepoštovanje procesnih prava fizičkih, odnosno pravnih osoba prema kojima se sankcije primjenjuju. Ti nedostaci, između ostalog i pod utjecajem Suda Europske unije, s vremenom su se uklanjali, ili barem umanjivali, upravo u cilju udovoljavanja zahtjevima za što većim stupnjem zaštite prava navedenih osoba.
The United Nations Security Council’s system of sanctions directed against persons and entities associated with terrorism has evolved over the years in the direction of ever greater protection of these persons and entities’ procedural rights at the time of imposing sanctions on them. Namely, this system of sanctions was characterised by numerous shortcomings which for the most part amounted to a lack of respect for the procedural rights of the natural and legal persons on which sanctions are imposed. The protection of the rights of the persons and entities on which sanctions are imposed no doubt includes taking into account, upon their imposition, certain principles. However, these sanctions’ peculiarities and aim must equally be taken into account. The former include the sanctions’ preventive nature, the necessary restrictions of certain procedural rights and the far-reaching consequences of their imposition. The latter consists of preventing the financing of terrorist groups and their activities. By taking into account the peculiarities of these sanctions and eliminating their shortcomings as described, the UN Security Council’s system of sanctions responded to criticism concerning violations of the said rights. Thus, with time and under the influence of, inter alia, the Court of Justice of the European Union, these shortcomings came to be eliminated or were at least mitigated precisely in order to satisfy the requirements for a greater degree of protection of the rights of the said persons. It is therefore to be expected that this trend will continue.
PDF