Pravni fakultet

Croatian membership in the EU is subject to the fulfilment of the legal and political obligations laid down in, among other places, the SAA, the Stability and Association Agreement. The implementation of the SAA depends on the definition of its position in the constitutional system of the Republic of Croatia, including the ability for its provisions to be directly applied in EU and in Croatian courts, the legal status of the bodies provided for in the SAA, and the legal position and legal standing of the decisions taken by these bodies. The implementation of constitutional changes is necessary for full membership of the EU, and some changes are also necessary even for implementation of the SAA. These are provisions that provide the legal basis for membership in the EU, including the definition of the manner of making use of state sovereignty, provisions that define in detail the legal status of international law and European primary and secondary law in the internal legal system of the EU, and provisions that adapt the constitutional organisation of the Republic of Croatia to the conditions of associate or full membership of the EU, optimise the functions of the institutions of state authority that will have to work in new conditions. In an evaluation of the fulfilment of the conditions for membership in the

Polazeći od Feyerabendova razlikovanja vođene i slobodne razmjene, autor iznosi tezu da je pristupanje postkomunističkih država Europskoj Uniji provedeno u obliku vođene razmjene, tj. u obliku komunikacije gdje svi sudionici dobrovoljno prihvaćaju značenje prava razvijeno kroz inter-institucionalni diskurs u Europskoj Uniji. Međutim, zbog naravi prava EU koje se ne primjenjuje na čisto unutrašnje prilike u državama članicama, potpuna vođena razmjena između EU i država kandidatkinja uopće nije moguća. Autor tvrdi da se jedinstvo europskoga ustavnog okvira i lojalnost prema njemu, u proširenoj Europskoj Uniji na najbolji način promiče putem diskurzivne interpretacije značenja ustavnih izbora, načela i pravila.

Sie dürfen das Werk bzw. den Inhalt vervielfältigen, verbreiten und öffentlich zugänglich machen sowie Abwandlungen und Bearbeitungen des Werkes bzw. Inhaltes anfertigen, solange Sie den Namen des Autors/Rechteinhabers in der von ihm festgelegten Weise nennen. This document is published under following Creative Commons-License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/de/deed.en-You may copy, distribute and render this document accessible, make adaptations of this work or its contents accessible to the public as long as you attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor. Mit der Verwendung dieses Dokuments erkennen Sie die Nutzungsbedingungen an. By using this particular document, you accept the above-stated conditions of use.

Auror u najluaćim enama izoosi mogući pravac razvoja cvropsk:ih institucija koji bi se remeJjio na lradicfpma postoje6h federativnib dr'lBva i građansKe predstavničke demokracije.:. l'rerposta..Mi da ć: Zajednial uspjeli integrirati političke procese na nadnacionalouj razini, le uz jaču nje konlrolnih i uvođenje zakonodavnih ingerencija Parlamenta mro.e se anticipirati njcgoYO prerastanjc u Dom naroda c.MJ... domnoga predstavničkog tijela, uz istovremenu inauguraciju Sa\;cta u Dom drlava, kako je uOSialom ranije btlo prcdložcoo. Tada ne bi bilo nikakve zapreke da Komisija preuzme funkcije !zvrlnog organa, postajuči potpuno odgovorna Purlamenru. Nje-tin s..'ld~aji nadnaciooalni karaklcr u tome maže samo pomoci. Takvim promjenama bio bi 2llok.ru1.cn proces federalizacije Evrope. asad, !Ck manji broj prijedloga koji 5U vodili u Lom pravcu doista je i ostvaren. Dr-J.avc-člani<le msad nisu polcazme spremnost da pobwte Gvro(l5ki parlament kao zalconodavno predswvničko tijelo u punom smislu riječi. 1 1 he Treaty establishing n Single Council UJ'Id o Singk Commission of tlU! European Communities (Orussclli, 8. travnja 1965). 2 17Je TreaJy amending certain Budgetary Provisions of the Treaties establishing tire /\'uropean Communities and of the Treaty establishing a Single Council and a Single Commission of the

Emerging constitutionalism and its inherent concept of "higher law" brought about a fundamental change of the institutional setting of many states in 19th and 20th century. It has significantly increased powers of the judicial branch and introduced a new concept of the separation of powers doctrine. Courts, formerly subservient to legislature, have commenced to exert new powers of judicial review imposing new checks on the legislative and the executive branch. The ratified international treaties make part of the Croatian legal order that national courts are bound to enforce, and the European Convention is granted constitutional protection before the Constitutional Court. This Court, having powers to strike down unconstitutional legislation has a chance, at least in theory, to impose significant checks on the legislative and executive branch. Moreover, the Constitutional court has clarified that ordinary courts have to treat the Convention as entrenched, "higher law" in a manner similar to the one accorded to constitutional provisions; in other words, the Convention is directly applicable in the Croatian legal order and enjoys a quasi-constitutional rank.

Izvornt mamtwm rati UDK ~2A (497.13) Ustav Republike Hrvalske i nadnacionalne organizacije: suverenilel, međunarodni odnosi i temeljna ljudska prava SIN IŠA RODIN Prumi falm/11'1 11 Zugrrhrt Raspr.Nlja sc o gJ;r.nim problemima koji su bilm 73 ncJCnu lJsta\'3 Republike Ilrvat.ske 17 1990. goiline u S\jetlu suvremenog C\•ropskog prnvnog 1 poliUekog pra,. hrdŽaJCL Prvo, ulo.a:luje se na l!injenicu da su drž;Jvc čla01re l '\nlftikc zaJCdmcc prenijele t.ho ~vog su,-crenitet.a na bjcdnicu, te sc tvrdi da JC cxinxlba kOJOfll :;e omogućava transfer državnog suvecenitcta na nadtfrT..J\111.! urgunu.acije trebala bili predviđena UStil\'Om Republike Ilrvatslcc 17 I<JCJO. l hulcnJc takve odredbe JC !Jj učno za oamjcr;r.<mo pristupanje Evmf\"ikOj 7ajcdruci. Drugo, pnkuuje se primjcnn mo• nisti&og pristupa, koji je pri~cn u vcćm c.lrl..m•d Clnwca EHo~ke Zajednice i podržava njegovo pnhvaćanJC u 1-lrv..JI!>koj. Kun<:~čno, u članku sc rospra,1ja o temelj• nim nn~lima r.~~t it c ljudskih prn\'U 1 upućuje na ncdostntnost njihove interne ma• terijalne 7a~litC. l•.likn~no SrCWlVO)'Il lll~litu temeljnih ljUliSkih rrava je ratinkHCiJU relevantnih mctlunaru<.lnlh iost1 umct1nto l njihova primjcm1 na temelju mnnl'\ltčkog prismpa, tc mtcrprctaciJa in Jammn pojedinca. l. Uvod Jugoslavija, a tako i Republika Hrvatska. dugi niz godina bila je izolirana ud evropskih integracijskih procesa potaknutih od država zapadne demokracije. JugosJa\ija nije prihvatila Marshalluv plan koji su Sjedinjene Dr/..ave ponudile 1947. godine, Jugul>lavija mje potpisala Konvenciju o Evropskoj ekonomskoj suradnji 1948. godine, te shodno tome ntjc oi postala član Organizacije t.a evropsku ekonomsku suradnju (Organi~al ion for European Economic Co-opcr:nion). 1 Tadašnjih trinac..,l milijardi dolara dodijeljene pomoći zaobišla je Jugoslaviju. Jugoslavija nije potpisala ni Stalllt Savjeta Evrope, niti je poslala njegovim punopravnim čl<tnum. Jugoslavija nije potpisnica Evr~pske konvencije o zaStili ljudskih prava i temeljnih sloboda, Jugoslavija nije ... U posljednje vrijeme poduzeti su prvi konkretni kurad prema uključivanju u evropske integracijske procese. Ipak, razdoblje od 44 godine samoizolacije tdko je odjednom nadoknaditi. Danas, kada je i sama egzistencija Jugoshtvijc 1 K:mrij~ je Jug~lavija postala pridrul.cni tian OrgsniZBCIJC: .aa elonu~ku ~urutlnJU , Cill.VOJ (OECD) l;oja se ral\'ila i OEEC. 2 Jugoslavija je potpisnica vebkug b1 oja m~un:~rodnih koo\"eelcija iz oblasti :za~titc ljudskih pl'll\"ll. One ~ meduhm ne primjenjuju. O tom.: vid1 detaljnije u Dc:gan. Vlatlunir Đuro. Otl•jrt11ik 7-12 (1989). str. 23, tf scq.

Evropska ~jednica, od svog nastanka do danas. susreće se s jednim te islim problemom-nacionalizmom podip1Utim na razinu državnog interesa. Taj problem ooemogučio J(! uspostavljanje političkog. ugrollo djelotvornosT pravnog. te umanjio djelotvornost ekonomskog sustava Z.ajednia-. U odsumosti vlastitog političkog sustava, regulacijski proces u Zajednici gotovo potpuno ovisi o nacionalnim mteresima dri.ava Banica. Sto~ se i svako pro~irenje Zajednice novim driavama ol'iruje i kao borba Ul potenojalne nove saveznike. Stoga pred Hrvatskom noje dv11 međusobno povezana zadaika: postići konsenzus država članica potreban Ul potpisivanje Ugovora o pridruživanju i osigurati lGadovoljavan)e ndih nacionalnih tntc.resa od strane velikih ddava članica , bez naruJavan.Ja njihove interesne ravno reže. Potpisivanje pariškog ugovora o os:niv-dJlju Evropske zajednice za ugljen i čelik 1951. godine u Parizu označilo je fonnalni početak jednog od naJOzbiljnijih poviJe.~nih pokušaja da se otklone dva Evropi inherentna p,robfema: nacionalizam podtgnut na razinu državnog interesa koji je prouzrocio dva svjetska i više regionalnih ratova, te neefikasnost gospodarstva koje nije bilo spremno za tržišnu utakmicu s glavnim svjetskim konkurentom-Sjedinjenim Državama. Proces evropske integracije može se pratiti na političkom. pravnom i ekonomskom planu. četvrti aspekt integracije-evropska obrambena zajednica nije se uspio formaliL.irati, a čak ni masoihtski ugovor ne ide dalje od pukog nagovještaja mogućnosti zajedničke obrane. I dok na institucionalnom planu Zajednica, unatoč svim reformama, nije uspjela raL.viLi zaseban politički sustav, njezin pravni sustav znatno je evoluirao, te se danas općenito smatra da čini zaseban pravni poredak, različit od pravnog poretka međunarodnog prava. Stoga sc danas govori o neuspjehu Zajednice na političkom i uspjehu na normativnom polju. U ovom izlaganju želio bih obrazložiti tvrdnju da, u odsutnosti vlastitoga političkog sustava, regulatorni proces u Zajednici gotovo potpuno ovisi o nacionalnim interesima država članica, a pravni sustav, unatoč svojoj razvijenosti i konzistentnosti uvjetovan *Siniša Rodin, znanstveni asistent na Pravnom fakultetu u Zagrebu na predmetu Ustavno pravo

Glavna je teza ovoga članka da hrvatsko pravno uređenje visokog obrazovanja ne zadovoljava kriterije unutarnjeg tržišta Europske unije. U prvom dijelu autor izlaže osnovu za razlikovanje obrazovanja kao tržišne usluge od obrazovanja kao javnog dobra te pojašnjava kako pravo Europske unije utječe na regulatornu autonomiju država članica u području visokog obrazovanja. U drugom dijelu autor analizira identificirane prepreke za ostvarivanje tržišnih sloboda koje stvaraju nacionalni pravni okviri visokog obrazovanja. Treći dio razmatra hrvatski pravni okvir i ocjenjuje ga prema mjerilima EU-a. Autor zaključuje da su nedostaci hrvatskog pravnog uređenja visokog obrazovanja dijelom uzrokovani neznanjem policy-makera, a dijelom strukturalnom slabošću pregovaračkog procesa, koji se vodi na segmentiran način i fokusiran je na formalnu usklađenost propisa.

At first glance, the CJEU does not appear to make much use of history in its daily work. History is debated neither in the courtroom or chambers, and even less so in the cabinets or corridors. When searched in Eur-lex, word 'history' yields 245 hits altogether in judgments of the CJEU (Court and Tribunal combined), mostly in the context of common language such as 'history of safe food use', 'long-standing psychological history', 'history of illness', etc. Even the usual suspect 'legislative history' appears in no more than 70 judgments, approximately six per year since 2017. Looking beyond the text, history has a broader meaning. Cambridge Online Dictionary defines history as '(the study of or a record of) past events considered together, especially events of a particular period, country, or subject'. While the Court certainly does not study history as such, its case law, collected and accessible, provides for a record of past events that come to be considered together from time to time when the Court decides on cases. In this broader sense, when relying on its case law (jurisprudence constante, as it is often called), the Court does consider the record of past events. The history under its consideration is a history of facts and law as interpreted and applied by the Court. I will first suggest that law, just like history, requires a concept of linear time, which is generally taken for granted. I will proceed by explaining how temporal dimension matters for legal interpretation and propose that, while the concept of law itself requires temporal linearity, legal interpretation can be time-independent. History is a way in which we construct reality. It is often represented as an arrow of time which irreversibly flows from earlier to later. This is dictated by entropy, and from there on, by causality. Entropy, that is, the second law of thermodynamics, teaches us that all possible natural processes are irreversible. Similarly, causality generates an appearance of one phenomenon necessarily flowing from another, creating what Robert R. Merton called a functional necessity. 2

Croatian membership in the EU is subject to the fulfilment of the legal and political obligations laid down in, among other places, the SAA, the Stability and Association Agreement. The implementation of the SAA depends on the definition of its position in the constitutional system of the Republic of Croatia, including the ability for its provisions to be directly applied in EU and in Croatian courts, the legal status of the bodies provided for in the SAA, and the legal position and legal standing of the decisions taken by these bodies. The implementation of constitutional changes is necessary for full membership of the EU, and some changes are also necessary even for implementation of the SAA. These are provisions that provide the legal basis for membership in the EU, including the definition of the manner of making use of state sovereignty, provisions that define in detail the legal status of international law and European primary and secondary law in the internal legal system of ...

Based on Paul Feyerabend's distinction between guided and free exchange, the author argues that the accession of the post-communist states to the European Union took the form of the former kind, i.e. the form of communication where all participants in the process voluntarily embrace the meaning of law developed through inter-institutional discourse within the European Union. However, due to the nature of European law which does not apply to the purely internal situations in the Member States, a completely guided exchange between the EU and candidate countries is not possible. The author holds that the unity of, and loyalty towards, the European constitutional framework in an enlarged European Union is best served by the discoursive construction of the meaning of constitutional choices, principles and rules. As stated in Article 1 of the Treaty of Nice, the Treaty "... marks a new stage in the process of creating an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe, in which decisions are taken as openly as possible and as closely as possible to the citizen". 1 Weiler qualified this visionary commitment when he observed that "No matter how close the Union, it is to remain a union among distinct peoples, distinct political identities, distinct political communities". 2 Indeed, as in any non-unitary structure based on pluralism, those who interpret law are by necessity confronted with disagreement over competing definitions of basic constitutional concepts, such as what is good, equal or just. 3 The peoples and polities of Europe, being different from each other, contribute to the construction of the common meaning of European law, the legal order, and ultimately the Constitution. Their individual understandings are communicated among qualified audiences across Europe and are attributed meaning. Law, including a constitution, lives through interpretation-the assignment of meaning to words written on paper. To have a say means to have power. 4 Yet, the starting positions of the actors from the old and new Member States of the EU contributing to the constitutional discourse are . Professor of Law, Department of European Public Law, University of Zagreb, Faculty of Law 1 The Preamble to one of the early versions of the Draft Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe specified: "The peoples of Europe, in creating an ever closer union among them, are resolved to share a peaceful future based on common values." Provisional consolidated version of the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, Brussels, 25 June 2004 (OR. fr) CIG 86/04. The final version was changed and reads: "Convinced that, thus 'United in diversity', Europe offers them the best chance of pursuing, with due regard for the rights of each individual and in awareness of their responsibilities towards future generations and the Earth, the great venture which makes of it a special area of human hope", OJ C 310 of December 16, 2004.