Organised crime in Serbia

Autor prvo izlaže svoje shvatanje o tome kako je i kada nastao organizovani kriminal u Srbiji i kako se, relativno sporo, formirala društvena svest o izuzetno velikoj opasnosti od te vrste kriminala. On smatra da je organizovani kriminal u toj državi pojava novijeg datuma, da ga u bivšoj autoritarnoj i polupolicijskoj Jugoslaviji nije bilo kao danas, ni po obimu, niti prema pojavnim formama i da je za njegovu pojavu i ekspanziju odgovoran vladajući režim devedesetih godina prošloga veka, te da se svest o neophodnosti efi kasne borbe protiv toga kriminala stvarala teško i sporo i posle smene toga režima u 2000. godini. Kada je posle izvesnog vremena ta svest ipak formirana doneti su materijalnopravni, procesni i organizacioni propisi, koji su omogućili efi kasniju i adekvatniju reakciju države protiv organizovanih kriminalnih grupa. Autor na kraju konstatuje da su na tome planu postignuti izvesni početni rezultati, ali da se i u zakonodavnoj i u pravosudnoj praksi u ovoj oblasti mogu uočiti izvesna zabrinjavajuća lutanja, zablude i promašena rešenja, ali da to nije samo specifi čnost Srbije, već i mnogih drugih država u svetu.Firstly, the author presents his understanding of how organised crime in Serbia came about. Also, he discusses how relatively slowly social awareness has developed of the enormously great danger this type of crime presents. The author holds that organised crime in this country is a more recent occurrence and that it was not present as such in the former authoritarian and partly police state of Yugoslavia, neither in extent nor in form. The author further holds that the governing regime from the nineteen nineties is responsible for its occurrence and expansion. Also, he believes that awareness of the necessity of effectively combating this type of crime has developed slowly and with difficulty and only after the governing regime changed in 2000. When, after a certain period of time, that awareness had nevertheless developed, substantive, procedural and organisational regulations were formulated which enabled more efficient and adequate reactions from the state against organised criminal groups. The author finally concludes that, in this area, indisputable initial results have been achieved. However, in legislative and judicial practice in this region, definitely worrying digressions, misconceptions and erroneous solutions are obvious. However, this not only peculiar to Serbia, but to many other states in the world as well

Organised crime in Serbia

Autor prvo izlaže svoje shvatanje o tome kako je i kada nastao organizovani kriminal u Srbiji i kako se, relativno sporo, formirala društvena svest o izuzetno velikoj opasnosti od te vrste kriminala. On smatra da je organizovani kriminal u toj državi pojava novijeg datuma, da ga u bivšoj autoritarnoj i polupolicijskoj Jugoslaviji nije bilo kao danas, ni po obimu, niti prema pojavnim formama i da je za njegovu pojavu i ekspanziju odgovoran vladajući režim devedesetih godina prošloga veka, te da se svest o neophodnosti efi kasne borbe protiv toga kriminala stvarala teško i sporo i posle smene toga režima u 2000. godini. Kada je posle izvesnog vremena ta svest ipak formirana doneti su materijalnopravni, procesni i organizacioni propisi, koji su omogućili efi kasniju i adekvatniju reakciju države protiv organizovanih kriminalnih grupa. Autor na kraju konstatuje da su na tome planu postignuti izvesni početni rezultati, ali da se i u zakonodavnoj i u pravosudnoj praksi u ovoj oblasti mogu uočiti izvesna zabrinjavajuća lutanja, zablude i promašena rešenja, ali da to nije samo specifi čnost Srbije, već i mnogih drugih država u svetu.Firstly, the author presents his understanding of how organised crime in Serbia came about. Also, he discusses how relatively slowly social awareness has developed of the enormously great danger this type of crime presents. The author holds that organised crime in this country is a more recent occurrence and that it was not present as such in the former authoritarian and partly police state of Yugoslavia, neither in extent nor in form. The author further holds that the governing regime from the nineteen nineties is responsible for its occurrence and expansion. Also, he believes that awareness of the necessity of effectively combating this type of crime has developed slowly and with difficulty and only after the governing regime changed in 2000. When, after a certain period of time, that awareness had nevertheless developed, substantive, procedural and organisational regulations were formulated which enabled more efficient and adequate reactions from the state against organised criminal groups. The author finally concludes that, in this area, indisputable initial results have been achieved. However, in legislative and judicial practice in this region, definitely worrying digressions, misconceptions and erroneous solutions are obvious. However, this not only peculiar to Serbia, but to many other states in the world as well

The correlation between the complaint procedure before the commissioner for the protection of equality and other anti-discrimination proceedings

In the Republic of Serbia, the system of legal protection against discrimination includes various forms of protection within the normative framework of civil, criminal, misdemeanor and constitutional law, as well as the protection afforded by the Commissioner for the Protection of Equality as an autonomous and independent body specialized in combating discrimination. In order to ensure effective protection against discrimination, the Serbian legislation envisages the possibility of instituting a number of simultaneous or successive anti-discrimination proceedings pertaining to the same discrimination act. In this paper, the author examines the correlation between the proceedings before the Commissioner and other anti-discrimination proceedings concerning the same discrimination incident which are either underway or have already been concluded. The author analyses the domain of application of the legal rule prohibiting the Commissioner to act upon a complaint if another proceeding on the same matter is either pending or has already been adjudicated in a court of law. The analysis shows that this rule applies only to anti-discrimination litigation proceedings but not to criminal and misdemeanor proceedings or administrative proceedings. If a discrimination complaint has been filed on the grounds of a discriminatory norm contained in some legislative or statutory act which is subject to judicial review for the assessment of its constitutionality and legality, the complaint procedure before the Commissioner is provisionally stayed until the completion of procedure before the Constitutional Court. The constitutional complaint procedure takes precedence over the complaint procedure before the Commissioner