Search

Purpose: This paper aims to give an empirical overview of the ‘privatization’ of security (or, in a more narrow sense, policing) services within the former countries of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia namely, Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia, Kosovo, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Macedonia and Montenegro. Observations are put in light of the extant literature on private policing worldwide. Design/Methods/Approach: The paper draws on a literature review of academic publications, NGO-reports and other relevant written sources. Findings: Although it is not possible to offer a full picture of the current developments in the region, we argue that the rise of private security markets shows significant variety throughout former Yugoslavian countries, as does the level of state regulation. Moreover, contrary to the views of doomsayers critical of the provision of commercial security, academics and observers alike are optimistic about private security personnel becoming a legitimate and stabilizing presence in post-conflict zones such as the Balkans. Research implications: The persistence of divergence in private policing trajectories within the former Yugoslavia underscores the need for more detailed cross-national studies that take account of differences, as well as similarities, in how commercial security industries are governed and regulated by state institutions. Practical implications: Public as well as private policy-makers in the field of security serve as appropriate anchor points to facilitate, direct and regulate private policing activities across the former Yugoslav republics. Originality/Value: The growing body of knowledge on private policing is heavily suffused by predominantly North American, Canadian, British and Australian studies. Nonetheless, research from countries outside the English speaking world has much to contribute to an understanding of private security industries. An examination of the Balkan countries that emerged from the breakup of Yugoslavia is particularly interesting when viewed as a post-conflict legacy.

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to reveal the competence of security guards, mainly through the eyes of security managers and users of security services, in the area of security personnel’s competence in carrying out security tasks. In this paper, we wish to ascertain how the guards’ competencies are assessed by security managers and security service users, and if their assessments differ. We also analyse whether there are differences between the competencies self-assessed by private security guards and how they are assessed by their managers and service users. Methods: For the purposes of the literature review, we analysed domestic and foreign sources and domestic legislation, and conducted a quantitative survey on competencies with all three groups (users of security services, security managers, security guards). For the data collection, we employed a questionnaire to evaluate competencies using a five-point scale. Findings: The findings suggest security guards’ interpersonal competencies are evaluated better by the users of security services than by security guards themselves. Both security guards and security managers assessed themselves similarly in terms of their own interpersonal competencies. To realise the full potential of the non-government institutional, as well as non-institutional, provision of security, the mentality of the management structures of both the users and providers of security services must change, while also better educating the security personnel, ensuring a suitable salary for their work, and demanding the correct performance of their tasks and duties. Originality/Value: The paper provides a useful starting point in the field of private security for the development of competence models, which should be based on employee competencies and security services users’ needs. Namen prispevka: Namen prispevka je prikazati razvoj zasebnega varovanja v Republiki Sloveniji predvsem skozi oči varnostnih menedžerjev in uporabnikov varnostnih storitev na področju kompetenc varnostnega osebja, ki izvaja varnostne naloge. V prispevku želimo ugotoviti, kako varnostni menedžerji in uporabniki varnostnih storitev ocenjujejo kompetence zaposlenih, ali med njimi prihaja do razkoraka. Prav tako bomo analizirali, ali prihaja do razlik med samooceno kompetenc varnostnikov ter oceno teh kompetenc s strani njihovih vodij in uporabnikov njihovih storitev. Metode: Za namene pregleda literature smo analizirali domače in tuje vire ter zakonodajo, v delu kompetenc pa smo opravili anketiranje vseh treh skupin (uporabnikov varnostnih storitev, varnostnih menedžerjev, varnostnikov). Za zbiranje podatkov smo uporabili vprašalnik, kjer smo kompetence ocenjevali s pomočjo petstopenjske lestvice. Ugotovitve: Ugotovitve kažejo, da medosebne kompetence varnostnega osebja više ocenjujejo naročniki/uporabniki varnostnih storitev kot varnostniki (varnostno osebje). Za razvoj vseh potencialov nedržavnega institucionalnega zagotavljanja varnosti je treba spremeniti naravnanost tako ponudnikov varnostnih storitev kakor tudi uporabnikov varnostnih storitev, hkrati pa izboljšati usposabljanje, predvsem neformalno, varnostnega osebja, ki bo za primerno plačo kvalitetno izvajalo svoje naloge in dolžnosti. Izvirnost/pomembnost prispevka: Prispevek predstavlja kratek pregled razvoja zasebnega varovanja v Republiki Sloveniji ter predstavlja enega od izhodišč za razvoj kompetenčnih modelov na področju zasebnega varovanja, ki mora temeljiti na sposobnostih zaposlenih, ki jih pričakujejo in potrebujejo uporabniki varnostnih storitev.

Purpose: The purpose of the article is to conduct a comparative study of private security regulation in Hungary and Slovenia using Button-Stiernstedt’s evaluation model based on legislation and societal foundations and to find out where the two countries are in comparison with other EU member states. Design/Methods/Approach: First, the main characteristics of private security in Hungary and Slovenia are analysed and presented through a literature and legislation review. Second, Button-Stiernstedt’s evaluation model using legislation and societal criteria is studied and explained. Third, this evaluation model is used to evaluate private security in both countries and, fourth, Hungarian and Slovenian private security regulations are ranked on a regulatory system scale of 27 EU member states.Findings: In this re-evaluation, Slovenian private security regulation received 94 points which makes it equal to Belgium that holds first place among 27 EU countries. Hungary received 74 points, ranking it seventh with the same number of points as Ireland. Although Hungary seems to score relatively highly in the survey, this does not mean the situation in practice is positive. Button-Stiernstedt’s private security regulation evaluation model is mostly useful for international comparisons. However, we suggest that in the future some criteria be used more flexibly than the authors proposed in 2016. Research Limitations: Limitations of the researcharise from the fact that the presented evaluation model of private security regulation is not yet fully developed and that not all data on private security in both countries were available. Practical Implications: The findings are useful for both further harmonising private security regulation within the EU and improving the presented evaluation model to make international comparisons more precise. VARSTVOSLOVJE,Journal of CriminalJustice and Security,year 20no. 2pp. 143‒162 144Originality/Value: Hungarian private security regulation is evaluated for the first time using Button-Stiernstedt’s evaluation model. Namen prispevka: Namen članka je s primerjalno študijo ureditve zasebnega varovanja na Madžarskem in v Sloveniji z uporabo Button-Stiernstedtovega modela evalvacije, ki temelji na zakonodaji in societalnih dejavnikih, ugotoviti, kje se državi nahajata v primerjavi z drugimi članicami EU.Metode:Na osnovi pregleda literature in zakonodaje so bile analizirane in predstavljene glavne značilnosti zasebnega varovanja na Madžarskem in v Sloveniji, zatem pa je bil pojasnjen Button-Stiernstedtov evalvacijski model, ki temelji na zakonodaji in societalnih dejavnikih. Evalvacijski model je bil uporabljen za vrednotenje ureditve zasebnega varovanja v obeh državah. Ureditvi sta bili nato umeščeni na lestvico regulatornih sistemov 27 držav članic EU.Ugotovitve: Slovenska ureditev zasebnega varovanja je v tej ponovni oceni prejela 94 točk, kar jo postavlja ob bok Belgiji na prvem mestu med 27 državami EU. Madžarska je prejela 74 točk in bi se uvrstila na sedmo mesto, z enakim številom točk kot Irska. Čeprav se zdi, da se je Madžarska v raziskavi uvrstila razmeroma visoko, to ne pomeni, da razmere v praksi odražajo to pozitivno podobo. Button-Stiernstedtov model evalvacije ureditve zasebnega varovanja je večinoma uporaben za mednarodne primerjave, vendar predlagamo, da se v prihodnosti nekateri kriteriji uporabijo bolj fleksibilno, kot pa sta avtorja predlagala leta 2016.Omejitve raziskave:Omejitve raziskave izhajajo iz dejstva, da predstavljeni model evalvacije ureditve zasebnega varovanja še ni povsem dodelan in da niso bili na voljo vsi podatki o zasebnem varovanju v obravnavanih državah.Praktična uporabnost: Ugotovitve so koristne tako z vidika nadaljnje harmonizacije regulacije zasebnega varovanja v EU kot z vidika izboljšanja predstavljenega modela evalvacije, ki omogoča natančnejše mednarodne primerjave.Izvirnost/pomembnost prispevka: Madžarska ureditev zasebnega varovanja je bila prvič ovrednotena z Button-Stiernstedtovim modelom evalvacije. Private Security Regulation in Hungary and Slovenia

Purpose: This paper examines the development of delegation of public authorities to the Chamber for the Development of Slovenian Private Security. Based on an evaluation of past and present experiences, the authors set guidelines for future legal regulation and administrative practice. Design/Methods/Approach: The research presented here is based on an analysis of legal regulation and theory of public authorities, of the case law of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Slovenia, and of the administrative inspection reports on implementation of public authorities of former Chamber of the Republic Slovenia for Private Security. Findings: Public authorities are institutes of Slovenian constitutional and administrative law. An analysis of sector-specific laws shows that a variety of administrative tasks is delegated to subjects of public and private law (e.g., public enterprises, chambers and individuals). In practice, the delegation of public authorities poses several major problems: ex ante, justifications of delegation are very vague and not supported by analyses, while ex post evaluations of delegation are non-existent and supervision of the implementation of public authorities is insufficient. In practice, supervision is mainly the result of malpractice as identified by random checks or the media, and not the result of systematic activity. The public authorities of professional chambers present a special problem. Public authorities of the former Chamber of the Republic Slovenia for Private Security pertaining to the licensing and professional supervision of members of the chamber have been withdrawn based on findings by administrative inspections. Research Limitations / Implications: The research is limited to Slovenia, but the findings are relevant for other “young democracies” in the region and of potential interest to Western European democracies. Originality/Value: The analysis addresses key problems in delegating and implementing public authorities, evaluates the results of experiences, and offers possible solutions. Namen prispevka: Članek analizira razvoj podeljevanja javnih pooblastil Zbornici za razvoj slovenskega zasebnega varovanja. Na podlagi ocene preteklih in sedanjih izkušenj avtorja predlagata smernice za bodočo pravno ureditev in upravno prakso. Metode: Članek temelji na analizi predpisov, pravne teorije, sodne prakse ustavnega sodišča in poročil upravne inšpekcije. Ugotovitve: Javno pooblastilo je v slovenskem pravnem redu institut ustavnega in upravnega prava. Analiza področne zakonodaje kaže, da se z javnim pooblastilom prenašajo zelo različne upravne naloge na pravne subjekte javnega in zasebnega prava (npr. javna podjetja, zbornice in posameznike). Podeljevanje javnih pooblastil ima v praksi številne pomanjkljivosti: ex ante gledano so obrazložitve razlogov za podelitev javnih pooblastil zelo splošne in ne temeljijo na analizah, ex post gledano pa se ne izvaja evalvacija podeljenih javnih pooblastil, nadzor nad njihovim izvajanjem pa je pomanjkljiv. Nadzor je v praksi večinoma rezultat nepravilnosti, ugotovljenih na podlagi naključnih nadzorov ali objavljenih preko medijev, ne pa sistematične aktivnosti. Javna pooblastila zbornic z obveznim članstvom predstavljajo poseben problem. Javna pooblastila nekdanje Zbornice Republike Slovenije za zasebno varovanje, ki so se nanašala na podeljevanje licenc in strokovni nadzor, so bila odvzeta zaradi nepravilnosti, ugotovljenih v okviru nadzora upravne inšpekcije. Omejitve/uporabnost raziskave Raziskava je omejena na Slovenijo, rezultati pa so relevantni tudi za druge države iz skupine t. i. mladih demokracij s tega območja, potencialno pa tudi za države Zahodne Evrope. Izvirnost/pomembnost prispevka: Analiza se nanaša na ključne probleme podeljevanja in izvajanja javnih pooblastil, ocenjuje njihovo prakso in ponuja možne rešitve.