Normativne mogućnosti sudbenog dijaloga kao karakteristike transnacionalnog konstitucionalizma

Recentna literatura novog konstitucionalizma i s njim povezanog ustavnog prava na velika se vrata vratila metafori dijaloga. Dok u klasičnom ustavnom pravu dijalog crpi svoja tradicionalna značenja iz političke filozofije antike, u naše se vrijeme metafora dijaloga, ponajviše usidrena u području komparativnog ustavnog prava, razumije na više načina. Dijalog se danas razumije kao instrument transplantacije, neformalan način komunikacije između sudskih i političkih tijela, nova paradigma sudbenih odnosa između aktera koji ne pripadaju istom pravnom poretku, itd. U ovom tekstu autori ukazuju na prirodu i granice dijaloga koji se danas vodi u okvirima komparativnog ustavnog prava, te se kratko osvrću na pojavu metafore dijaloga u hrvatskim ustavnopravnim okvirima

The Lisbon Treaty and a new start to European Sports Law

Iako EU pravo do usvajanja Lisabonskog ugovora (LU) uopće nije spominjalo sport, ono se je preko odredaba o slobodi kretanja i pravu natjecanja ustrajno primjenjivalo gotovo 35 godina. Usvajanjem LU sport se eksplicitno spominje u čl. 165. TFEU (Ugovor o funkcioniranju Europske unije), čime je stvorena izvjesna nova zakonodavna nadležnost. Nove odredbe određuju da će djelovanje EU biti usmjereno na promicanje \u27\u27europskog sporta, vodeći pritom računa o specifičnoj prirodi sporta, njegovim strukturama koje se temelje na dobrovoljnom djelovanju te njegovoj društvenoj i obrazovnoj ulozi\u27\u27, odnosno na \u27\u27razvijanje europske dimenzije u sportu, promicanjem nepristranosti i otvorenosti na sportskim natjecanjima i suradnje među tijelima nadležnim za sport te zaštitom tjelesnog i moralnog integriteta sportaša i sportašica, osobito najmlađih sportaša i sportašica\u27\u27. U radu se analizira geneza i karakter EU pristupa sportu s posebnim osvrtom na relevantna stajališta Europskog suda (ECJ). Pritom se nastoji odgovoriti na pitanje u kolikoj mjeri tumačenje određenih fraza iz čl. 165. TFEU-a (\u27\u27posebna priroda sporta\u27\u27, \u27\u27nepristranost\u27\u27, \u27\u27otvorenost\u27\u27) daje poticaj \u27\u27sudačkoj konstrukciji\u27\u27 načela EU sportskog prava kao jedne od najvažnijih odrednica europske prepoznatljivosti u odnosu na globalne konkurente.Even though European Law up to the adoption of the Lisbon Treaty (LT) had not even mentioned sport, law on sport was constantly and at length applied for almost 35 years through the provisions on free movement and competition law. With the adoption of the LT, sport was explicitly mentioned in art. 165 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, whereby an undoubtedly new legislative competence was created. New provisions determined that EU activity be directed at encouraging ‘promoting European sport while taking into account the specific nature of sport, its structure which is founded on voluntary activity and sport’s social and educational role as well as at ‘developing the European dimension in sport, promoting impartiality and openness in sporting competitions and cooperation among bodies of authority in sport and the protection of the physical and moral integrity of young athletes.’ In this paper, the genesis and character of the EU approach to sport is analysed and particular attention is paid to the attitude of the ECJ towards sport. An attempt is made to answer the question of to what extent the interpretation of certain phrases from art. 165 of the TFEU (‘the specific nature of sport’ ‘impartiality’, openness’) provides further impetus to the ‘ judicial construction’ principle of EU sports law as one of the most significant determinants of the European level of recognisability in relation to its global competitors

Normative possibilities in judicial dialogue as a characteristic of trans-national constitutionalism

Recentna literatura novog konstitucionalizma i s njim povezanog ustavnog prava na velika se vrata vratila metafori dijaloga. Dok u klasičnom ustavnom pravu dijalog crpi svoja tradicionalna značenja iz političke filozofije antike, u naše se vrijeme metafora dijaloga, ponajviše usidrena u području komparativnog ustavnog prava, razumije na više načina. Dijalog se danas razumije kao instrument transplantacije, neformalan način komunikacije između sudskih i političkih tijela, nova paradigma sudbenih odnosa između aktera koji ne pripadaju istom pravnom poretku, itd. U ovom tekstu autori ukazuju na prirodu i granice dijaloga koji se danas vodi u okvirima komparativnog ustavnog prava, te se kratko osvrću na pojavu metafore dijaloga u hrvatskim ustavnopravnim okvirima.Recent literature on new constitutionalism and related constitutional legal dialogue has revealed a significant return to metaphorical dialogue. In classic constitutional law, dialogue had its traditional meaning founded on political classical philosophy. These days, metaphorical dialogue is mostly rooted in the area of comparative constitutional law and is understood in a variety of ways. Dialogue is today understood as an instrument of transplantation or as an informal way of communicating between judicial and political bodies. This constitutes a new paradigm of judicial relations among participants who do not belong to the same legal order and so on. In this article, the nature and limits of dialogue which is carried out today within the framework of constitutional law are pointed out and the appearance of metaphorical dialogue within the Croatian constitutional legal framework is briefly mentioned

On the current paradigms of public law as catalysts of the relations between constitutional and administrative law

U tekstu se prikazuju neke nove paradigme koje najizravnije ukazuju na organsku i vitalnu vezu ustavnog i upravnog prava unutar kompleksa javnog prava. Stajalište autora je da primjeri \u27\u27vladavine\u27\u27 (governance), \u27\u27administrativnog konstitucionalizma\u27\u27 (administrative constitutionalism), zatim \u27\u27libertarijanskog administrativnog prava\u27\u27 (libertarian administrative law)... demonstriraju dinamični proces artikulacije suvremenog javnog prava i njegove adaptacije političkom procesu suvremene države i njenim transgraničnim asocijacijama. Iako su navedene i druge paradigme još daleko od konačnih odgovora, evidentna je i neporeciva praksa da upravo one pokazuju permanentno nastojanje ustavnodemokratske države ka usavršavanju. U tom smislu navedene paradigme uvijek upućuju na postojanje cjelovitog državnopravnog procesa detekcije i rješavanja određenih pitanja. Zato ustavno-zakonodavna obrada temeljnih ustavnopolitičkih pitanja i problema, njihovo administrativno procesuiranje te sudbena detekcija i rješavanje stalno ukazuju na potrebu za unutrašnjim integritetom i koherencijom javnopravnog kompleksa države i prava.This text demonstrates some new paradigms which most directly point out the organic and vital connection of constitutional and administrative law in public law. It is the author\u27s viewpoint that the examples of \u27\u27 governance ‘‘, \u27\u27 administrative constitutionalism \u27\u27, and ‘‘ libertarian administrative law \u27\u27 demonstrate the dynamic process of adaptation and articulation of contemporary public law to the political process of the modern state and its transborder associations. Even though the stated and other paradigms are still far from final answers, it is evident and undeniable practice that precisely they show the permanent efforts of a constitutionally democratic state towards perfection. In this sense, paradigms always point to the existence of a holistic legal process of detection and resolution of certain issues. This is why constitutional-legislative analysis of fundamental constitutional political issues and problems, their administrative processing and judicial detection and resolution constantly demonstrate the need for internal integrity and coherence of the public legal complexity of state and law

Στaδιum and constitutional law: should we taking sports and sports law seriously?

Procesi modernizacije, ekstenzije i diversifikacije društvenih djelatnosti s kraja 20. i početka 21. stoljeća, te sve evidentnija veza između sporta, političke, ekonomske, kulturne i društvene stvarnosti, reflektirala se je i u ustavnom pravu suvremene države. U nastojanju da odgovore na pitanje kada se je to ustavno pravo pojavilo na neočekivanim mjestima (stadionima) i zbog čega bi se sport i sportska prava trebali shvatiti ozbiljno, autori skiciraju neke relevantne veze i probleme u odnosima između države, politike i sporta, ustavnog prava i subjektivnih prava pojedinca, odnosno konstitucionalizaciju sportskih tema na planu europskog i nacionalnog prava.The processes of modernisation, existence and diversification of social activity at the end of the 20th and beginning of the 21st century and the increasingly evident connection among sport, political, economic, cultural and social realities are also reflected in the constitutional law of a modern state. In an attempt to answer the question which was raised when constitutional law appeared in unexpected places (stadiums) and because of which sport and sport rights should be taken seriously, the authors outline some relevant connections and problems in the relationship among the state, politics and sport, constitutional law and the subjective law of individuals This is the constitutionalisation of sport topics in the area of European and national law

On the Relevance of the Constitutional Legacy of SPQR and Its Significance for Contemporary Constitutionalism

U tekstu se ističe značaj izučavanja povijesnog rimskog ustava, kao sastavnog dijela cjelovite analize izvora ideološkog aparata suvremene ustavnodemokratske države. Autori podsjećaju na metodološki naputak iz T. Mommsenovog Staatsrechta (1875., 2011.) prema kojem navedene studije nisu samo jedinstveni smjer prema razumijevanju SPQR konstitucionalizma i njegova legata, već i pristup koji omogućuje zaključak o rezultatima koji nisu temporalno i sadržajno ograničeni, niti su “toliko usko legalistični kako se najčešće misli”. Zahvaljujući izboru otvorenog i širokog pristupa moderne ustavnopravne analize kojoj je misao vodilja: ustav je kultura (P. Haberle), jača se kontinuitet i vitalnost novih spoznaja o starim temama – vlasti i slobodi, vlasništvu i vlasniku, bogatstvu i siromaštvu, klasnom i besklasnom društvu, kao i o drugim nepromjenjivim konstantama života ustavnog sustava suvremene države i društva.The text emphasizes the need to study the historical Roman constitution, as an integral part of the comprehensive analysis of the sources of the ideological apparatus of the contemporary constitutional democratic state. The authors remind us of the methodological instruction from T. Mommsen’s Staatsrecht that the said studies are not only a unique direction towards understanding SPQR constitutionalism and its legate, but also constitute an approach that enables conclusions regarding results that are not temporally and substantively limited, nor are they – “so much as narrowly legalistic as it is often thought”. Thanks to the choice of an open and broad approach of modern constitutional legal analysis, which is guided by the thought: the constitution is culture (P. Haberle), the continuity and vitality of new knowledge about the old topics of government and freedom, property and owner, wealth and poverty, class and classless society is strengthened as unchanging constants of the constitutional system of the contemporary state and society

Constitutionalism and administrative state - the requirements of constitutionalism in the era of the executive supremacy

Politika ograničena pravom odnosno podređivanje svake javne aktivnosti sudbenim i drugim kontrolama temeljno je obilježje i zahtjev konstitucionalizma i vladavine prava. Upravo je u skladu s načelom vladavine prava i legitimnim ustavnodemokratskim zahtjevima za njegovom supremacijom da država, i to ponajviše njena izvršna vlast i druge institucije sistema vladavine budu podređeni pravu i različitim kontrolama. U tekstu autori analiziraju komparativno iskustvo administrativne države koja je u gotovo stoljetnom razdoblju svog trajanja na različite načine iskušavala demokratska sredstva kontrole.Politics limited by law that subjects every public activity to court or other controls is the basic characteristic and demand of constitutionalism and the rule of law. It is in keeping with the rule of law principle and legitimate constitutional and democratic demands for its supremacy. The state, mostly its executive and other institutions of the system of rule should be subject to the law and various controls. In this text the authors analyse the comparative experience of an administrative state which in almost 100 years of its existence in various ways has put democratic means of control to the test