Search

Vse sodobne demokracije temeljijo na načelu ljudske suverenosti. Znotraj demokratične države se ljudska suverenost lahko izvršuje posredno ali neposredno. Parlament tako predstavlja posredno obliko demokracije, saj tudi po slovenski Ustavi Državni zbor kot predstavniško telo, v skladu z načelom delitve oblasti, kot najpomembnejšo opravlja zakonodajno dejavnost. Postopek za sprejetje zakona ureja Poslovnik državnega zbora. Tako določen zakonodajni postopek je zbir natančno urejenih pravil, ki določajo pogoje in merila za postopanje posameznih udeležencev in njihovih dejanj. Kot izjemo rednega zakonodajnega postopka Poslovnik državnega zbora ureja nujni zakonodajni postopek, za katerega veljajo nekatera drugačna pravila. Predlaga ga lahko le Vlada, če meni, da je sprejem zakona nujen zaradi interesov varnosti ali obrambe države ali zaradi odprave posledic naravnih nesreč ali zato, da se preprečijo težko popravljive posledice za delovanje države. O postopku odloči kolegij, njegova odločitev se lahko preveri na seji Državnega zbora. Splošna razprava v okviru prve faze se ne opravi, druga in tretja obravnava se opravita na isti seji, roki za posamezna pravila ne veljajo, amandmaje je možno vlagati tudi ustno. Nujni zakonodajni postopek je v osnovi namenjen za sprejem nujnih, neodložljivih zakonov, ki so posledica nepričakovanih okoliščin. Zato naj bi se uporabljal le izjemoma, vendar pa je slovenski parlament v povprečju osmih mandatov po nujnem postopku sprejel več kot tretjino zakonov. Do spremembe Poslovnika državnega zbora leta 2002 se je postopek imenoval hitri postopek za sprejem zakona in se je uporabljal že od leta 1922 dalje. Tekom zgodovine so se zaostrovali pogoji, določeni kot pogoj za njegov sprejem, od leta 2002 pa ga lahko predlaga le še Vlada. Nujni postopek je poznan predvsem v državah Vzhodne Evrope, tudi v državah bivše Jugoslavije, v Zahodni Evropi in tudi širše pa manj, temveč so formalni postopki za hitrejši sprejem zakona urejeni že v ustavah, zakonih, poslovnikih parlamentov ali drugih aktih. Veliko več pa je neformalnih možnosti za pospešitev zakonodajnega postopka, ki so opisani v ustrezni literaturi. Načini, na katere so države pospešile zakonodajni postopek, so razvidni predvsem iz zakonodajne aktivnosti, ki so jo posamezne države izvajale ob nastopu pandemije nalezljive bolezni COVID-19. Zaradi nujnosti sprejemanja potrebnih ukrepov so povsod vlade v veliki meri prevzemale zakonodajno aktivnost parlamentov, ker pa so tako posegale v človekove pravice, so bili ukrepi deležni tudi ustavnosodne presoje. Ker zakonodajni postopek izvira iz Združenega kraljestva Velike Britanije in Severne Irske, je njegov koncept prevzela večina držav, ki ga ureja. Slovenija je nekaj posebnosti prevzela tudi iz nemške ureditve, zato sta ta dva modela v doktorski disertaciji posebej obdelana tako, da so razvidne razlike s slovensko ureditvijo. Po Ustavi sta Poslovnik državnega zbora in zakonodajni postopek ustavna instituta, ki bi zato morala imeti posebno težo, vendar iz predstavitve njunih ureditev in prakse izhaja, da se oba lahko zlorabljata ali nepravilno izvajata. Več tujih ureditev, pa tudi slovenska, za nekatere zakone zakonodajnega referenduma ne dopuščajo. Po Ustavi je med drugim zakonodajni referendum nedopusten o zakonih o nujnih ukrepih za zagotovitev obrambe države, varnosti ali odprave posledic naravnih nesreč, to pa so elementi, podobni pogojem za obravnavo zakona po nujnem postopku. Njihove elemente je opredelilo Ustavno sodišče v posameznih odločbah, saj je presojo opravljalo na podlagi izrecne določbe Zakona o referendumu in ljudski iniciativi (v nadaljevanju: ZRLI), ki tudi za sprejetje teh zakonov določa poseben postopek. Državni zbor namreč lahko po sprejetju zakona, ki ga določa drugi odstavek 90. člena Ustave, sprejme sklep o nedopustnosti referenduma. Ustavno sodišče lahko po v ZRLI določenem postopku presoja ustavno skladnost tako sprejetega zakona v roku 30 dni. Če ugotovi, da je bil zakon sprejet po neustavnem postopku, lahko razveljavi tudi njegove posamezne določbe. V svoji ustavnosodni judikaturi je Ustavno sodišče vzpostavilo tudi doktrini zlorabe zakonodajnega referenduma in zakonodajne pristojnosti, zato so zlorabe, tudi nujnega postopka, posebej obdelane. Posebna pozornost je namenjena problematiki pretirane zadržanosti Ustavnega sodišča pri presoji nujnega zakonodajnega postopka, saj so z njim lahko prizadeti načelo demokratičnosti, načelo pravne države, načelo delitve oblasti, pa tudi dostojanstvo in pravica do enake obravnave članov opozicije. V doktorski disertaciji je podana celovita analiza nujnega zakonodajnega postopka, podana so opozorila na nepravilno izvajanje in dani napotki za bolj ustrezno in ustavno skladno ravnanje Državnega zbora, Vlade in Ustavnega sodišča. All modern democracies are based on the principle of popular sovereignty. Within a democratic state, popular sovereignty can be exercised indirectly or directly. Parliament thus represents an indirect form of democracy, since even according to the Slovenian Constitution, the National Assembly as a representative body, in accordance with the principle of separation of powers, performs the most important legislative activity. The procedure for the adoption of the law is governed by the Rules of Procedure of the National Assembly. The legislative procedure defined in this way is a collection of precisely regulated rules that determine the conditions and criteria for the behavior of individual participants and their actions. As an exception to the regular legislative procedure, the Rules of Procedure of the National Assembly regulate the emergency legislative procedure, which is subject to certain different rules. It can only be proposed by the Government if it considers that the adoption of the law is necessary due to the interests of the security or defense of the country or to eliminate the consequences of natural disasters or to prevent difficult-to-repair consequences for the functioning of the state. The collegium decides on the procedure, its decision can be verified at a session of the National Assembly. There is no general discussion within the first phase, the second and third discussions are held at the same meeting, deadlines for individual rules do not apply, amendments can also be submitted orally. The emergency legislative procedure is basically intended for the adoption of urgent laws that are the result of unexpected circumstances. Therefore, it should only be used exceptionally, but in an average of eight mandates, the Slovenian parliament adopted more than a third of the laws by emergency procedure. Until the amendment of the Rules of Procedure of the National Assembly in 2002, the procedure was called the fast procedure for the adoption of a law, and it had been used since 1922. Over the course of history, the conditions set as a condition for its acceptance have been tightened, and since 2002 only the Government can propose it. The emergency procedure is known mainly in the countries of Eastern Europe, including the countries of the former Yugoslavia, in Western Europe and beyond, in a lesser extent. Formal procedures for faster adoption of the law are regulated in constitutions, laws, rules of procedure of parliaments or other acts. There are many more informal options for speeding up the legislative process, which are described in the relevant literature. The ways in which countries accelerated the legislative process can be seen primarily from the legislative activity that individual countries carried out at the onset of the pandemic of the infectious disease COVID-19. Because of the necessity of taking the necessary measures, governments everywhere took over the legislative activity of parliaments to a large extent, but because they thus interfered with human rights, the measures were also subject to constitutional review. As the legislative procedure originated in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, its concept has been adopted by most of the countries that regulate it. Slovenia also adopted some peculiarities from the German system, which is why these two models are specially processed in the doctoral dissertation in such a way that the differences with the Slovenian system are visible. According to the Constitution, the Rules of Procedure of the National Assembly and the legislative procedure are constitutional institutions, which should therefore have special weight, but from the presentation of their regulations and practice, it follows that both can be misused or improperly implemented. Several foreign regulations, as well as the Slovenian one, do not allow a legislative referendum for some laws. According to the Constitution, among other things, a legislative referendum is inadmissible on laws that are adopted to ensure the defense of the country, security or elimination of the consequences of natural disasters, and these are elements that are similar to the conditions for consideration of the law by emergency procedure. Their elements were defined by the Constitutional Court in individual decisions, as the assessment was carried out on the basis of an express provision of the Act on Referendum and People's Initiative, which establishes a special procedure even after the adoption of these laws. Namely, after the adoption of the law stipulated in the second paragraph of Article 90 of the Constitution, the National Assembly can adopt a Decision on the inadmissibility of the referendum. The Constitutional Court, according to the procedure specified in this law, assesses the constitutionality of the law thus adopted within 30 days. If it finds that the law was adopted according to an unconstitutional procedure, it can also annul its individual provisions. In its constitutional jurisprudence, the Constitutional Court also established the doctrine of abuse of legislative referendum and legislative powers, therefore abuses of emergency procedures are also dealt. Special attention is devoted to the issue of excessive reluctance of the Constitutional Court in assessing an urgent legislative procedure, as it may affect the principle of democracy, the rule of law, the principle of separation of powers, as well as the dignity and right to equal treatment of members of the opposition. In the doctoral dissertation, a comprehensive analysis of the urgent legislative procedure is given, warnings are given about improper implementation and instructions are given for more appropriate and constitutionally compliant behavior of the National Assembly, the Government and the Constitutional Court.

Pričujoče delo obravnava vprašanje, ali je Ustavno sodišče vezano na svoje odločitve. V prvem poglavju predstavim dve pojmovanji vloge preteklih sodnih odločitev v razlogovanju sodišč. V skladu s prvim pogledom je sodišče na preteklo odločitev vezano tako, da lahko od nje odstopi le, če so za to podani razlogi posebne vrste ali teže, ne pa vselej, kadar meni, da je odločitev napačna. Drugo pojmovanje pa sodišču nudi več manevrskega prostora: svoje pravno stališče lahko spremeni, če za to ponudi razumno utemeljitev. Preostanek dela je posvečen ovrednotenju treh argumentov v prid tezi, da prvi pogled najbolje opisuje držo, ki bi jo Ustavno sodišče pravno gledano moralo zavzeti do svojih odločitev. V drugem poglavju obravnavam možnost utemeljitve takšne obveznosti z zavezujočo naravo ustavnosodnih odločitev. Tretje poglavje se osredotoča na utemeljitev, ki se naslanja na 22. člen Ustave (enako varstvo pravic). Četrto poglavje obravnava hipotetičen poskus obrambe vezanosti Ustavnega sodišča na lastne odločitve, ki se ne opira na kodificiran pravni vir, kot je Ustava, temveč na dolgotrajno prakso Ustavnega sodišča. The aim of this thesis is to explore the question of whether the Slovenian Constitutional Court is legally bound by its own decisions. In the first chapter, I distinguish two alternative conceptions of how past judicial decisions may be relevant to the decision-making of a later court. On the first account, the court is bound by a previous decision in the sense of only being permitted to depart from it when reasons of special kind or weight obtain, not whenever it deems that decision wrong. On the second view, the court has more latitude: it may always change its mind on a legal issue as long as it provides a reasonable justification for doing so. In the remainder of the thesis, I evaluate three arguments in favour of the claim that the first view most faithfully describes the attitude which the Constitutional Court legally ought to adopt towards its own decisions. The second chapter examines the possibility of grounding such an obligation in the binding nature of the decisions of the Constitutional Court. The third chapter focuses on the justification based on the Article 22 of the Constitution (equal protection of rights). The fourth chapter considers a hypothetical attempt to justify the obligation of the Constitutional Court to follow its own decisions by relying on the long-standing practices of the Court rather than on a codified legal source such as the Constitution.

Ustavna presoja se je kot eden izmed temeljev moderne države začela razvijati ravno v različnih evropskih državah. Vendar pa se položaj, ki ga uživajo ustavna sodišča (ter njim sorodni organi) znotraj samih držav članic Evropske Unije, razlikuje. Namen magistrske naloge je preko razdelitve držav v štiri temeljne skupine prikazati tako skupne značilnosti kot tudi razlike med posameznimi ureditvami. Pri tem naloga izhaja iz pojma položaja kot le tega opredeljuje ustava posamezne države članice – tako iz formalne umestitve instituta v njenem besedilu, kot tudi iz izrecne dikcije, ki jo vsebujejo njene določbe. V prvem delu magistrskega dela so predstavljene temeljne značilnosti različnih oblik sodobnih modelov presoje ustavnosti, vključno z delitvijo le teh na različne sisteme ustavne presoje, ter definicijami osnovnih pojmov, relevantnih za razumevanje predstavitev konkretnih ureditev. Drugi del zajema podrobnejše predstavitve osnovnih značilnosti položajev, ki jih ustavna sodišča (oziroma njim sorodni organi) zasedajo v izbranih državah članicah Evropske Unije. Zaradi preglednosti so slednje na podlagi pripadnosti posameznim sistemom ustavne presoje razdeljene v štiri skupine: zunajsodni, sodni sistem z ustavnim sodiščem, sodni sistem rednih sodišč ter mešani sistem. Constitutional review is generally regarded as one of the fundaments of the rule of law. Its beginnings can be traced back to several European countries. Nonetheless, the position individual Constitutional Courts (and similar institutions) enjoy all throughout Europe differs from country to country. The aim of this dissertation is therefore to point out both the common characteristics and the distinctions between different systems. In this dissertation, “the position” is understood through the way individual Constitutions define it – both through its positioning in the constitutional provisions, and through the explicit definition, if such a definition is provided in a specific Constitution. The first part of the dissertation deals with the principal characteristics of different models of constitutional review. This includes the classification of the models into the four core groups, and the definitions of fundamental legal terminology, necessary for understanding the following presentations of concrete examples of constitutional arrangements. In the second part, the focus is on the fundamental characteristics of the positions, occupied by the Constitutional Courts in the chosen Member States of the European Union. For a more comprehensive and coherent display these countries are divided into four groups, based on the four basic models of constitutional review.

In a response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Slovenian Government adopted numerous measures that were substantively similar to those, adopted in other states. The scope and intensity of those measures significantly affected the principle of the separation of powers and the protection of human rights. In this context, the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Slovenia adopted Decision U-I-79/21, which marked the contours for the review of legality and constitutionality of the Governmental measures in subsequent cases. The key message of the Decision was the demand for the strict observance of the principle of legality when adopting measures to prevent the spread of COVID-19, which interfere with human rights. This article explains the context of the Decision and presents key arguments from the Decision and the concurring and dissenting opinions as well as the response of the expert community. Kot odziv na pandemijo covida-19 je Vlada RS sprejemala številne omejitvene ukrepe, ki so bili po vsebini podobni ukrepom, sprejetim v drugih državah. Obseg in intenzivnost teh ukrepov sta pomembno vplivala na ustavno načelo delitve oblasti ter varstvo človekovih pravic. V tem kontekstu je Ustavno sodišče RS izdalo odločbo U-I-79/21, ki je tudi v nadaljevanju močno zaznamovala presojo ustavne skladnosti sprejetih vladnih ukrepov. Ključno sporočilo te odločbe je zahteva po strogem spoštovanju načela zakonitosti ob sprejemanju ukrepov za preprečevanje širjenja covida-19, ki omejujejo človekove pravice. Prispevek predstavi kontekst izdaje odločitve, ključne argumente iz odločbe in ločenih mnenj ter odziv strokovne javnosti na odločitev.

Človekove pravice in temeljne svoboščine imajo pomembno vlogo v demokratičnih ureditvah. V Sloveniji so človekove pravice in svoboščine urejene v Ustavi na podlagi katere se pravice zagotavljajo in uresničujejo. Ustavo dopolnjujejo zakoni, podzakonski predpisi in drugi pravni akti, poleg nacionalne ureditve pa so za varstvo pravic pomembni mednarodni pravni akti in akti EU. Za učinkovito uresničevanje človekovih pravic je treba zagotoviti ustrezne mehanizme formalnega in neformalnega sistema varstva človekovih pravic. V nalogi je tako poudarek na opredelitvi neformalnega sistema varstva – Varuh človekovih pravic. Obravnavana tema magistrske naloge je bila obdelana z različnimi raziskovalnimi pristopi in znanstvenimi metodami. Uporabljena je bila metoda deskripcije in kompilacije, kombinacija induktivne in deduktivne metode, komparativna metoda in kvantitativna (sintetična statistična) metoda. Prispevek k upravni znanosti predstavlja analiza kršitev človekovih pravic v upravnih zadevah preko varuha v povezavi z odločitvami Ustavnega sodišča in ESČP, ki prikazuje stanje kršitev po posameznih upravnih področjih za daljše časovno obdobje in učinkovitost institucije varuha v sistemu varstva človekovih pravic, ugotovljene na podlagi analize realizacije letnih poročil varuha in primerjalne analize pravne ureditve varstva človekovih pravic v upravnih zadevah preko varuha za izbrano državo – Švedska. Ugotavlja se, da je najpogosteje kršeno načelo pravne in socialne države ter načelo enakosti pred zakonom in da se ugotovljene kršitve odpravljajo preko sprememb zakonskih in podzakonskih aktov. Varuh ima vzpostavljen primerljiv neformalni sistem varstva človekovih pravic, s pisanjem mnenj in priporočil državnim in upravnim organom pa učinkovito opravlja svojo vlogo v sistemu varstva. Učinkovitejše v sistemu varstva je Ustavno sodišče, ki z zavezujočimi odločitvami prisili organ, da odpravi ugotovljeno kršitev oziroma neustavnost. Podane informacije, ugotovitve in dejstva bodo pripomogli k izboljšanju informiranosti tako stroke kot državnih in upravnih organov, ki v upravnem postopku odločajo o pravicah in svoboščinah vsakega posameznika. Naloga bo poleg tega informirala zakonodajne, izvršilne in sodne organe, ki skrbijo za pripravo in sprejem pravnih podlag ter njihovo uresničevanje v praksi. Human rights and fundamental freedoms have an important role in democratic arrangements. In Slovenia, human rights and freedoms are established in the Constitution, according to which they are granted and enforced. The Constitution is complemented by laws, regulations and other legal acts. Besides national legislation, also international and EU legal instruments are important for the protection of rights. To effectively exercise human rights, appropriate mechanisms of a formal and informal system for the protection of human rights must be provided. This master’s thesis focuses on the definition of an informal protection system – the Human Rights Ombudsman. This master's thesis includes different research approaches and scientific methods, such as compilation, descriptive research, a combination of inductive and deductive methods, as well as the comparative method and quantitative synthesis. A contribution to administrative science is made by analysing the breach of human rights in administrative matters through the Ombudsman according to the decisions of the Constitutional Court and the ECHR, which shows the state of violations in individual administrative areas over a longer time period and the effectiveness of the Ombudsman institution in the system for the protection of human rights. The effectiveness is determined by an analysis of the Ombudsman's annual reports and by a comparative analysis of the regulation for the protection of human rights in administrative matters through the Ombudsman for the selected country – Sweden. It is established that the principle of the rule of law and of the welfare state as well as the principle of equality before the law are the most often violated, and that these violations are removed by making changes to regulations and legislations. The Ombudsman implements a comparable informal system for the protection of human rights, and it performs its role effectively in the protection system by giving opinions and recommendations to public and administrative authorities. The Constitutional Court is more effective in the protection system, forcing the authorities to eliminate the violation or unconstitutionality with binding decisions. The provided information, findings and facts will help to improve the knowledge of both the profession as well as the public and administrative authorities that decide on the rights and freedoms of every individual in the administrative procedure. In addition, this thesis will inform the legislative, executing, and judicial authorities that prepare and adopt legal bases and implement them in practice.

Demokracija je oblika oblasti, ki jo danes večina ljudi dojema kot najbližjo idealni ureditvi države, saj temelji na svobodi, enakosti in varnosti – ciljih, za katere bi si morala prizadevati sodobna družba. V uvodu, ki je hkrati prvo poglavje magistrske naloge, podajam opredelitve demokracije in ustavne demokracije na način, kot jih trenutno razumem sama. V drugem poglavju se ukvarjam z načeli in pogoji ustavne demokracije ter z ustavno demokracijo v Republiki Sloveniji. V tretjem poglavju poskušam poudariti pomen ustave. Najbolj me zanima, ali ustava kot najpomembnejši pravni in politični akt svobodo v demokratični ureditvi omejuje ali jo zagotavlja. Čeprav je demokracija nepredstavljiva brez svobode kot svojega temeljnega elementa, ta svoboda ne sme in ne more biti neomejena. Si lahko predstavljamo družbo, v kateri svoboda nima meje, v kateri ni vrhovnega zakona, na katerega bi se lahko vsak posameznik skliceval, ko njegove pravice ogroža država ali drug posameznik? Prvo ključno vprašanje, s katerim se v tem kontekstu ukvarjam, je del četrtega poglavja z naslovom »Človekove pravice in svoboščine – srž ustavne demokracije?«. V petem poglavju namenim pozornost Ustavnemu sodišču. Bistvo ustavne demokracije je Ustavno sodišče opredelilo v odločbi št. U-I-111/04 z dne 8. 7. 2004, ki jo predstavim na koncu magistrske naloge. V sklepu predstavim moj osebni pogled na politični sistem, kakšna je ustavna demokracija ter potrdim oziroma zavrnem postavljene hipoteze Democracy is a form of government that is perceived by most people today as the closest to the ideal form of a state, since it is based on freedom, equality and security – the goals that every modern society should aim for. The introduction of the master's thesis, which is also its first chapter, defines democracy and constitutional democracy from our point of view. The second chapter focuses on the principles and conditions of the constitutional democracy and briefly presents the constitutional democracy in the Republic of Slovenia. The third chapter tries to underline the significance of the Constitution. We were mostly interested if the Constitution as the most important legal and political act in a democratic systemrestricts or guarantees ourfreedom. Although democracy is unperceivable without freedom as its fundamental element, it must not and cannot be unlimited. Is it possible to imagine a society in which freedom is unlimited and where there is no supreme law one can refer to in case their rights are undermined by the state or another individual? The first key question that is raised in this context is part of the forth chapter, titled Human Rights and Liberties – Core of Constitutional Democracy? The fifth chapter deals with the Constitutional Court. The essence of the constitutional democracy was defined by the Constitutional Court in the U-I111/04 decree on July 8th, 2004, which is presented at the very end of our master's thesis. The conclusion encompasses our personal view of the political system, such as the constitutional democracy, and either confirms or refutes our set hypotheses.

Institut načina izvršitve se je prek sodne prakse Ustavnega sodišča razvil v fleksibilen instrument varstva človekovih pravic, ki prebija tradicionalno pojmovanje položaja tega organa znotraj sistema delitve oblasti. Odločbe z določenim načinom izvršitve občasno a vztrajno odpirajo temeljna vprašanja o pomenu ustavne demokracije, delovanju sistema zavor in ravnovesij in dometu obvezujoče narave odločb Ustavnega sodišča. Magistrsko delo se v prvem delu ukvarja z načelom delitve oblasti v Republiki Sloveniji in v tem kontekstu obravnava položaj slovenskega Ustavnega sodišča. V drugem delu se osredotoča na vprašanje pravne narave instituta načina izvršitve, pri čemer posebno pozornost namenja razlikam med pravnimi učinki načina izvršitve in pravnimi učinki zakona. Dodatno sta v tem poglavju naslovljeni vprašanji učinkov načina izvršitve v tekočih sodnih postopkih in (ne)obstoja pravnih sredstev zoper način izvršitve. Različni načini izvršitve, ki jih Ustavno sodišče v svojih odločbah sprejema, povzročajo tudi različne pravne učinke v konkretnih primerih. Zato se magistrsko delo v zadnjem delu osredotoči na vprašanje in opis pojavnih oblik tega instituta, čemur sledi opredelitev pravnih učinkov vsake posamezne oblike. The Constitutional Court of Republic of Slovenia may in its decision specify who is to execute it and also determine the method of said execution. Such a power is vested to it in Article 40 of the Constitutional Court Act. In theory and in practice this instrument has been named as the “method of execution” of a Constitutional Court’s decision. Use of this instrument may present an intervention into the competence of the legislative branch. Through the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court this “instrument” has evolved into a flexible judicial tool that serves the protection of human rights. However, in a modern state, where separation of powers is a key principle, this instrument pierces through the traditional notion of the position of a Constitutional Court. Decisions which have been assigned a specific method of execution occasionally but persistently raise fundamental questions regarding the importance of constitutional democracy, the functioning of the system of checks and balances and the binding nature of the decisions of the Constitutional Court. The first part of the master's thesis deals with the principle of separation of powers in the Republic of Slovenia and in this context discusses the position of the Slovenian Constitutional Court. The second part focuses on the question of the legal nature of the above described instrument, paying particular attention to the differences between its legal effects and the effects of a standard legal provision. In addition, this chapter addresses the effects of an assigned method of execution in ongoing legal proceedings and the possible (non)existence of remedies against the assigned method of execution. Due to the fact, that assigned methods of execution differ greatly between the Constitutional Court’s decisions, so do the legal effects of these methods. Therefore, the thesis in its last part focuses on the question and description of the different forms of this instrument, followed by the description of the legal effects of each individual form.

Pravica do varstva osebnih podatkov predstavlja eno izmed temeljnih človekovih pravic, zato je njeno zagotavljanje pomembno z vidika demokratičnosti družbe. V diplomskem delu je predstavljena slovenska in evropska zakonodaja, ki urejata področje varstva osebnih podatkov. Nadalje je predstavljeno in primerjano delo Informacijskega pooblaščenca in Evropskega nadzornika za varstvo podatkov na podlagi letnih poročil za obdobje od 2016 do 2018. V diplomskem delu so predstavljene in primerjane izbrane odločitve Ustavnega sodišča RS in Sodišča Evropske unije. Na podlagi pregleda zakonodaje, letnih poročil nadzornih organov ter sodne prakse je predstavljena pravna ureditev na področju varstva osebnih podatkov, predstavljena je opredelitev Ustavnega sodišča in Sodišča EU do pojma varovan osebni podatek ter predstavljeno delo nadzornih organov v Sloveniji in na ravni Evropske Unije za obdobje od 2016 do 2018. The right to the protection of personal data is one of the fundamental human rights and therefore its protection is important in the light of the democratic nature of society. This thesis presents the Slovenian and European legislation regulating the protection of personal data. The work of the Information Commissioner and the European Data Protection Supervisor based on the annual reports for the period 2016 to 2018 is further presented and compared. This diploma thesis presents and compares the selected decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Slovenia and the Court of Justice of the European Union. Based on the review of the legislation, the annual reports of the supervisory authorities and the jurisprudence, the legislation in the field of personal data protection is presented, the definition of the Constitutional Court and the Court of Justice regarding the concept of protected personal data is presented, and the work of the supervisory authorities in Slovenia and at EU level is presented.

Magistrsko delo skozi podrobno analizo odločb Ustavnega sodišča Republike Slovenije in Evropskega sodišča za človekove pravice obravnava vprašanje, ali je pravico do pokojnine mogoče varovati tudi v okviru varstva lastnine. Obe sodišči sta ugotovili, da pravica do pokojnine lahko uživa lastninsko varstvo. Pravica do pokojnine je premoženjska pravica, ki jo varuje 1. člen Protokola št. 1. Slovensko ustavno sodišče je s priznanjem dvojnega varstva pravice do pokojnine tako preko pravice do socialne varnosti kot preko pravice do zasebne lastnine razširilo krog upravičencev, saj Ustava pravico do pokojnine zagotavlja le državljanom, medtem ko ustavna pravica do zasebne lastnine ni omejena na državljanstvo. V obseg lastninskopravnega varstva spada tudi pravica do izbire pokojnine ter pričakovana pravica. Varstvo pokojnine preko ustavne pravice do zasebne lastnine pa je tudi močan argument za dopustnost ponovne odmere pokojnine. Izhajajoč iz sodne prakse in ob upoštevanju mednarodnih zavez mora nosilec zavarovanja na podlagi argumenta zasebne lastnine pri odmeri pokojnine upoštevati vse osnove, od katerih so se plačevali prispevki, in pokojnine izplačevati zavarovancem v katerokoli državo. Kljub široki razlagi lastninskopravnega varstva pravice do pokojnine pa je potrebno upoštevati tudi socialno vlogo pokojnine in načelo solidarnosti, ki je vodilno načelo sistema socialne varnosti, ter najti sorazmerno ravnovesje med lastninskopravnim varstvom in upoštevanjem načela solidarnosti ter socialnega vidika pravice do pokojnine. Through a detailed analysis of the Slovenian Constitutional Court judgments and judgments of the European Court of Human Rights Master's thesis deals with the question whether property protection can be awarded to the pension rights. Both courts held that pension rights can enjoy the protection of property. The right to pension is a pecuniary right and enjoys the protection under Article 1 of Protocol No 1. With the recognition of dual protection of pension rights the Slovenian Constitutional Court has broaden the scope of beneficiaries namely, the Slovenian Constitution guarantees the right to pension only to the citizens, whereas the constitutional right to private property is guaranteed regardless of the nationality. Prospected right to pension enjoys protection of property too. Property protection represents a strong argument for the admissibility of the reassessment of pension. Having regard to judicial decisions and international commitments, the pension scheme provider must take into account all the basics when calculating the amount of pension payable furthermore, the pension can be exported to any one of the states. Despite broad interpretation of property protection of pension rights, the social role of pension and the rule of solidarity (as the leading principle of social security sistem) should be taken into account and furthermore, proportionate balance between the respect of the principle of solidarity, social aspects of pension rights and property protection should be found.

Sodišče ima med predlagatelji zahteve za presojo ustavnosti in/ali zakonitosti predpisov posebno mesto. Njegova dolžnost in upravičenje za vložitev zahteve za presojo ustavnosti zakona je določena že v Ustavi Republike Slovenije. V uvodnih poglavjih magistrskega diplomskega dela je predstavljen pomen presoje ustavnosti in zakonitosti predpisov. Kratko so obravnavani predlagatelji zahteve za presojo ustavnosti in zakonitosti predpisov z delitvijo na predlagatelje abstraktne in konkretne presoje ustavnosti in zakonitosti predpisov. Ustrezno je med predlagatelje umeščen položaj sodišča. V nadaljevanju magistrsko diplomsko delo obravnava sodišče kot predlagatelja zahteve za presojo ustavnosti zakona. Predstavljeni so temelji sojenja v Republiki Sloveniji, zakaj je sodišče upravičeno le do zahteve za presojo ustavnosti zakona, zahteva, naj sodišče zakon razlaga ustavnoskladno, in postopek vložitve zahteve sodišča za presojo ustavnosti zakona. Glavni del magistrskega diplomskega dela je posvečen procesnim predpostavkam, ki jih mora sodišče izpolniti ob vložitvi zahteve za presojo ustavnosti zakona. Sodišče mora vložiti popolno vlogo, Ustavno sodišče pa mora biti pristojno za presojanje akta. Sodišče mora izkazati, da je prekinilo postopek v konkretnem primeru, v katerem mora pri odločanju uporabiti zakon ali del zakona, za katerega meni, da je protiustaven, ne more pa ga ustavnoskladno razložiti. Iz predstavljenih odločitev Ustavnega sodišča je razvidno, kako je Ustavno sodišče razlagalo te procesne predpostavke. The court has a special status among the applicants for the constitutionality and/or legitimacy review of laws. Its obligation and entitlement to apply for the constitutionality review of laws is established in the Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia. In the introductory chapters of the master's thesis the significance of the constitutionality and legitimacy review of laws is presented. The applicants are discussed apropos the division of the reviews into abstract and concrete. The court’s applicant status is classified accordingly. Afterwards we discuss the court as the applicant for the constitutionality review of laws. The foundations of trying in the Republic of Slovenia are presented, as well as the reasons why the court is entitled only to the constitutionality review of laws. Further on, the demand for the court to interpret laws in accordance with the constitution is discussed, and the procedure for a court to file the constitutionality review of a law is explained. The main part of the thesis focuses on the procedural requirements which need to be met by the court when filing for the constitutionality review of a law. The court must submit a complete application, and the Constitutional Court must have the jurisdiction to assess the act. The court must demonstrate a concrete example of having suspended the proceedings due to the need to apply a law or a part of it which is in its opinion unconstitutional and cannot be explained in compliance with the constitution. From the decisions of the Constitutional Court described in the thesis, it is apparent how the Constitutional Court has explained the procedural requirements.

Javna uprava so organi in organizacije izvršilne oblasti, ki sodelujejo pri oblikovanju politik in neposredno izvršujejo sprejete politične odločitve. Ključni funkciji javne uprave sta izdajanje podzakonskih predpisov in posamičnih upravnih aktov, ki pomembno vplivajo na način življenja ljudi. Pri tem ima zelo pomembno vlogo Ustavno sodišče, ki skozi ustavnosodno presojo zagotavlja ustavnost in zakonitost predpisov ter spoštovanje človekovih pravic in temeljnih svoboščin kot najvišji organ v državi. Prvo varuje skozi presojo ustavnosti in zakonitosti predpisov, drugo pa skozi ustavno pritožbo, kar imenujemo tudi kot sodna kontrola Ustavnega sodišča nad upravnopravnimi akti. To je najpomembnejša pristojnost Ustavnega sodišča, ki ima poleg le-te še veliko drugih pristojnosti, kar njegovo delo še dodatno obremenjuje, zato so se pojavili resni pomisleki glede smiselnosti ustavnosodne presoje upravnopravnih aktov pred Ustavnim sodiščem. V magistrskem delu je največkrat uporabljena teoretično-deskriptivna metoda in interpretacije že napisane literature, preko katerih se povzemajo in medsebojno primerjajo mnenja različnih avtorjev. Obravnavana tema prispeva k osvežitvi problematike v smeri razmišljanja, kako razbremeniti Ustavno sodišče. Nanaša se na zadnje obdobje in prikazuje, v kakšnem položaju se je znašlo Ustavno sodišče zaradi preširokih pristojnosti. Študija obsega mednarodno primerjavo s Hrvaško in Francijo, ki imata nekoliko drugačno prakso pri presoji ustavnosti predpisov, kar pa bi lahko bilo v modificirani obliki uporabno tudi za Slovenijo. Ključne ugotovitve kažejo, da število nerešenih zadev na Ustavnem sodišču v zadnji letih narašča, kar njegovo delo še dodatno otežuje. Zaradi preširokih pristojnosti je potrebna njegova razbremenitev, ki bi se lahko uvedla na podlagi hrvaške in francoske prakse v modificirani obliki. Public administration is a system of executive power with its services, which cooperate in shaping of politics and directly execute the approved political decisions. The key functions of the public administration are passing the regulatory provisions and individual service decrees, which importantly influence people's lives. The Constitutional Court has a very important role for that because it ensures constitutionality and legality of regulations, respecting of human rights and fundamental privileges as the state's highest authority with constitutional and legal judgement. The first is guarded with constitutional and legal regulations judgement, the second with constitutional appeal, which we name also as judicial control of the Constitutional Court over the civil service and legal regulations. This is the most important jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court, which also has a lot of other responsibilities that additionally incriminate its work, therefore there have appeared some serious hesitations about rationality of administrative regulations constitutional review in front of the Constitutional court because of its increasing burden. The theoretic-descriptive method and interpretation of the literature have been mostly used in the master's thesis. Opinions of different authors have been summarized and compared. The researched topic contributes and refreshes the issues of how to relieve the Constitutional Court. It researches the last period and it presents the position of the Constitutional Court because of the too wide jurisdiction. The study involves the international comparison between Croatia and France, which have different practice for the topic. However, the practice could also be applied for Slovenia. The key findings show that the number of unsolved cases at the Constitutional Court has been increasing in the last years, which makes its work even harder. Because of too wide jurisdiction, its relief is needed, which can be done based on Croatian and French practice in the modified version.

Načelo sorazmernosti je eno temeljnih načel slovenskega pravnega reda. Uvedlo ga je Ustavno sodišče po zgledu tujih ureditev (še posebno nemške), na kar se je najprej tudi naslonilo pri utemeljevanju njegovega izvora. Sčasoma je načelo izpeljalo iz načela pravne države (2. člen Ustave RS). Presoja ustavnosti je v Sloveniji sestavljena iz dveh delov: test legitimnosti in test sorazmernosti. Prvi pogoj za dopustnost posega v ustavne pravice je, da ta zasleduje ustavno upravičen cilj. Ukrep mora biti primeren, nujen in sorazmeren v ožjem smislu. Čeprav načelo teži k primernemu ravnovesju med dvema pravicama ali interesoma, nekateri tuji avtorji nasprotujejo njegovi uporabi. Grajajo predvsem relativizacijo človekovih pravic. Kljub temu lahko ugotovimo, da je načelo sorazmernosti najustreznejša metoda za tehtanje med pravnimi dobrinami. Proportionality is one of the general principles of Slovenian law. It was introduced by the Constitutional Court following the example of foreign legal orders (especially Germany). Over time, the principle was derived from the rule of law (Article 2 of the Constitution). The Court employs a four-tier test. First of all, in order for the challenged provision to pass the test, the interference must pursue a constitutionally admissible aim. Following that, the test comprises a review of three aspects of the interference: appropriateness, necessity and proportionality in the narrower sense. Only if the interference passes all three aspects of the test is it constitutionally admissible. Although the principle seeks to strike a proper balance between different rights or interests, some foreign authors object to its use. The strength and protection of human rights is particularly at stake. Nevertheless, we can conclude that the principle of proportionality is the most appropriate method of balancing.

Za varstvo ustavnosti in zakonitosti ter človekovih pravic in temeljnih svoboščin skrbi Ustavno sodišče, ki je najvišji sodni organ. Ustavno sodišče ima v Sloveniji široke pristojnosti, ena izmed temeljnih je prav presoja ustavnosti in zakonitosti zakonov, podzakonskih predpisov in splošnih aktov izdanih za izvrševanje javnih pooblastil. Postopek ustavnosodne presoje predpisov se vedno konča z eno izmed odločitev Ustavnega sodišča oziroma z uporabo ene izmed t. i. tehnik odločanja, ki se razlikujejo glede učinkovanja. Predvsem od pravnih učinkov odločitev Ustavnega sodišča je odvisna učinkovitost ustavnosodne presoje predpisov. Za funkcionalen pravni sistem in pravno varnost je zato bistveno, da so pravni učinki takšnih odločb predvidljivi in v naprej določeni. V magistrskem delu sem se posvetila predvsem pravnim učinkom odločitev Ustavnega sodišča in tehnikam odločanja pri posamezni vrsti pravnega akta tako pri splošnih kot pri posamičnih pravnih aktih. Pravne učinke ustavnosodnih odločitev sem primerjala z ureditvijo pravnih učinkov v Zvezni republiki Nemčiji, ki ima podoben ustavnosodni sistem kot Slovenija. S primerjavo sem želela prikazati podobnosti in razlike med našo in nemško ureditvijo tehnik odločanja in z njimi povezanih pravnih učinkov. Na podlagi ugotovljenih prednosti in slabosti sem skušala dognati nekatere rešitve oziroma primere praks, ki bi bile primerne in uporabne tudi za našo ureditev. Magistrsko delo poskuša sproti opozarjati na pomanjkljivosti normativne ureditve pravnih učinkov in na dileme, ki se lahko pojavijo v praksi, ter prikazuje rešitve za odpravo teh pomanjkljivosti in dilem. The Constitutional Court is the highest body of judicial power for the protection of constitutionality, legality, human rights and fundamental freedoms. In Slovenia, it has wide-ranging powers. One of its principal powers concerns reviewing the constitutionality and legality of laws as well as implementing regulations and general acts, issued for the exercise of public powers. The process of the constitutional review shall always be concluded either by one of the decisions of the Constitutional Court, or by using one of the so-called decision-making techniques, which differ with regard to their effects. The effectiveness of the Constitutional review of regulations depends primarily on legal effects of decisions of the Constitutional Court. Predictable and predetermined legal effects of such decisions are thus crucial for a functional legal system and legal certainty. The present Master's Thesis focuses mainly on legal effects of Constitutional Court decisions and decision-making techniques in each type of legal act, both general and individual. The legal effects of constitutional decisions were compared to the regulation of legal effects in the Federal Republic of Germany that has a constitutional system similar to the one in Slovenia. The comparison was intended to show similarities and differences between the Slovene and German regulation of the decision-making techniques and related legal effects. The advantages and disadvantages identified helped demonstrate a number of solutions or examples of practices that would also be suitable and useful for the Slovene regulation. The Master's Thesis raises awareness on the shortcomings of the regulatory framework of legal effects and on dilemmas that may arise in practice, as well as demonstrates solutions for the elimination of the above mentioned shortcomings and dilemmas.

Diplomska naloga se osredotoča na človekovo dostojanstvo v slovenski ustavi. Bistvo obravnavane teme je v tem, da človekovo dostojanstvo v ustavi pravzaprav ni eksplicitno pojasnjeno, pač pa se odraža v določbah o človekovih pravicah in temeljnih svoboščinah. Na podlagi tega so predstavljeni posamezni členi človekovih pravic in svoboščin, ki se bistveno navezujejo na človekovo dostojanstvo. V okviru analize odločb Ustavnega sodišča je bilo ugotovljeno, da je med 199. odločbami, ki se vsaj z eno besedo navezujejo na človekovo dostojanstvo, takšnih, ki se v svojem bistvu temu področju nekoliko bolj posvečajo, 24. Med temi se v primeru 5-ih odločb termin pojavi večkrat, zaradi česar so bile podrobneje preučene. Ugotovljeno je bilo, da se v večjem delu ukvarjajo s človekovim dostojanstvom, ki se nanaša na različna področja. V primeru vseh zajetih odločb je bilo ugotovljeno, da se jih večina nanaša na področje spornih določb v zakonu, temu sledijo pritožbe na sklepe Vrhovnih, Višjih ali Okrožnih sodišč, preostale pa na referendume. Ena izmed odločb se nanaša na ugotovljeno kršitev človekove pravice. The thesis focuses on human dignity in the Slovenian Constitution. An essential part of the theme is the fact that human dignity in the constitution actually is not explicitly stated but is reflected in the human rights and fundamental freedoms. In thesis they are presented and explained individual articles of human rights and fundamental freedoms, which are linked to human dignity. In the analysis of the decisions of the Constitutional Court, it was found among 199 decisions in which is at least one word, human dignity, 24 of them they more field on this area. Among these at five judgments we occur that word repeat often so we examined them in detail. It was found that decisions in the most part of them include human dignity that refers on different area. In the case covered all the decisions, it was found that most of them relating to the contested provisions in the law, then they are appeal to the decision of the different courts and the rest of the referendums. One of the decisions relates to human rights violations.

V diplomski nalogi avtor proučuje problematiko izbrisa, razpada Jugoslavije in posledično nastanek Republike Slovenije. Slovenske oblasti so le nekaj mesecev po osamosvojitvi iz registra stalnih prebivalcev Republike Slovenije samovoljno, brez pravne podlage izbrisale 25.671 oseb. Žrtve izbrisa so bili državljani bivših republik SFRJ, ki niso zaprosili za državljanstvo Republike Slovenije po 40. členu Zakona o državljanstvu Republike Slovenije ali jim je bila izdana negativna odločba. Za te osebe so tako začele veljati določbe Zakona o tujcih. Praktično čez noč so ti ljudje postali tujci na ozemlju države, v kateri so živeli in delali velik del svojega življenja. Nekateri so bili v Sloveniji celo rojeni. Izbrisani so kaj kmalu postali predmet politične manipulacije. Vladajoče elite so problem izbrisanih s skrajno primitivno metodo komuniciranja izkoriščale za doseganje lastnih političnih ciljev. Sistematično kršenje človekovih pravic in temeljnih svoboščin jih niti malo ni zanimalo. Prvo resno opozorilo sta zakonodajna in izvršilna veja oblasti prejeli leta 1999, ko je Ustavno sodišče odločilo, da je Zakon o tujcih v neskladju z Ustavo Republike Slovenije. Ugotovilo je, da je bil izbris nezakonito dejanje državnih oblasti. Ustavno sodišče je v tej odločbi zakonodajalcu naložilo obveznost, da popravi nastale krivice. To je vsaj navidezno skušalo storiti, a ukrep ni šel v pričakovano smer. Zato je Ustavno sodišče leta 2003 sprejelo v odločanje Zakon o urejanju statusa državljanov drugih držav naslednic nekdanje SFRJ v Republiki Sloveniji, ki ga je razglasilo za protiustavnega, saj državljanom drugih republik nekdanje SFRJ, ki so bili 26. februarja 1992 izbrisani iz registra stalnega prebivalstva, od navedenega dne ni priznala stalnega prebivanja. Od takrat naprej smo bili priča še intenzivnejšim diskreditacijam izbrisanih, politična elita pa je postala za reševanje njihovega problema praktično nema. Vse do leta 2010, ko je Ministrstvo za notranje zadeve pod vodstvom takratne ministrice začelo s postopki za implementacijo odločbe Ustavnega sodišča iz leta 2003. Sistematsko kršenje človekovih pravic ni moglo dolgo ostati skrito pred očmi mednarodne javnosti. Opozorila o kršenju pravic izbrisanim so prihajala praktično iz vseh uglednih mednarodnih institucij, ki se ukvarjajo z zaščito človekovih pravic. Čedalje bolj so bili glasni očitki, da je Republika Slovenija izbrisanim kršila mnoge človekove pravice, ki so priznane tudi s pravnimi akti mednarodnega prava. V ta namen tudi avtor daje velik poudarek mednarodnopravnemu varstvu človekovih pravic. Največji preboj, ki je tlakoval pot sistemski ureditvi problematike izbrisanih, zagotovo predstavlja sodba Velikega senata Evropskega sodišča za človekove pravice v zadevi Kurić in drugi proti Sloveniji. Pritožnikom je s to sodbo bila priznana pravica do odškodnine zaradi izbrisa, ki je pred domačimi sodišči izbrisani verjetno ne bi nikoli dočakali. Poleg odškodnin je Evropsko sodišče za človekove pravice v sodbi od Republike Slovenije zahtevalo vzpostavitev sistemske rešitve problema izbrisanih z vzpostavitvijo odškodninske sheme. Problem izbrisanih še vse do današnjih dni ni v celoti rešen. Mnogo izbrisanih še danes čaka na pravično odpravo krivic. Odgovornost Vlade Republike Slovenije, da izpere trdovraten madež naše osamosvojitve in državnosti, je ogromna. Treba bo storiti vse, da si Republika Slovenija s pravično rešitvijo vsaj malo povrne izgubljen ugled in kredibilnost v mednarodni skupnosti. In this thesis, the author studies the problem of the "erasure", the dissolution of Yugoslavia and, as a consequence, the formation of the Republic of Slovenia. Only a few months after Slovenia gained independence, the Slovenian authorities had arbitrarily and without legal ground erased 25,671 persons from the Permanent Population Register of Republic of Slovenia. The victims of the "erasure" were citizens of former Republics of SFRY who did not apply for citizenship of the Republic of Slovenia under the Article 40 of the Citizenship of the Republic of Slovenia Act or whose application for citizenship was refused. The provisions of the Aliens Act became applicable for these people. Practically over night, these people became aliens within the territory of a country in which they had lived and worked for a great part of their lives. Some of them were even born in Slovenia. The "erased" soon became subject to political manipulation. For their own political goals, the ruling elites took advantage of the problem of the "erased" with an extremely primitive method of communication. The systematic violation of human rights and fundamental freedoms was the least of their concerns. The legislative and executive branches received the first serious warning in 1999 when the Constitutional Court decided that the Aliens Act was inconsistent with the Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia. The court established that the "erasure" was a wrongful act of state authority. In this Decision, the Constitutional Court obliged the legislature to correct this injustice. It appeared that they had tried to correct it however, this measure did not work as well as expected. Therefore, in 2003, the Constitutional Court decided on the Act Regulating the Legal Status of Citizens of Former Yugoslavia Living in the Republic of Slovenia, and declared this Act as unconstitutional, as it did not recognize the citizens of other Republics of the former SFRY who were removed from the register of permanent residents on 26 February 1992, permanent residence from the mentioned date. Since then, we had witnessed even more intensive discrediting of the "erased", and the political elite had become practically numb in finding a solution for this problem. Up until 2010, when the Ministry of Interior, under the authority of the then minister, began the processes of implementation of the Decision of the Constitutional Court from 2003. The systematic violation of human rights could not stay hidden from the eyes of international public for too long. Warnings about violation of the rights of the "erased" had started coming from practically all the respected international institutions dealing with defending human rights. The accusations that the Republic of Slovenia violated many human rights of the "erased", the rights which are recognized by the legal acts of the international law, became increasingly loud. To this end, the author of this thesis places heavy emphasis on the meaning of the international legal protection of human rights. The greatest breakthrough, which paved the way for regulatory framework of problems of the "erased", was definitely the ruling of the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights on the Kurić and Others v. Slovenia case. The complainants were given the right to compensation due to the "erasure" the "erased" would have probably never gotten this right before national courts. Beside these compensations, the European Court of Human Rights also demanded that the Republic of Slovenia creates a systematic solution of the problem of the "erased" by establishing a compensation scheme. To this day, the problem of the "erased" has not been fully resolved. A great number of the "erased" is still waiting for a rightful abolition of this injustice. The Government of the Republic of Slovenia has an immense responsibility to remove this stubborn stain on our independence and statehood. It will take every effort for the Republic of Slovenia to restore the lost reputation and credibility in the international community.

Med leti so evropska ustavna sodišča vselej kazala posebno zavezanost k učinkovitemu varstvu temeljnih pravic v Evropi, vključno v razmerju do prava Skupnosti. Evropsko sodišče pravice je s pomočjo sodne prakse vzpostavilo impresivno paleto pravic, ki so sedaj postopoma prevzete s strani zakonodajnih organov EU. Sprejem Listine temeljnih pravic in Ustavne pogodbe je sedaj treba upoštevati v tem reflektivnem procesu. Tudi ob neobstoju pravno zavezujoče Listine temeljnih pravic imamo, vsaj kar zadeva temeljne pravice, že sedaj tri različne tipe pravnih virov, ki sobivajo v Evropi. Ob tem imamo tudi tri različne tipe jurisdikcije pri uporabljanju teh treh različnih virov prava. Začetek veljavnosti Listine temeljnih pravic bi bila zato dodatna, četudi nadvse pomembna komponenta že obstoječih izvorov prava EU. Nobena jurisdikcija v Evropi danes ni razbremenjena dolžnosti uresničevanja ali varovanja temeljnih pravic. Obstoječi pravni sistemi ne le sobivajo, temveč tudi prekrivajo drug drugega, kar postavlja vsaj dva velika izziva za prihodnost: enega, kar zadeva učinkovitost varstva človekovih pravic, drugega – ki je povezan s prvim -, pa kar zadeva potrebe po ohranitvi pravne gotovosti. Listina temeljnih pravic torej predstavlja dodano vrednost EU, ki na temelju EKČP formalno vpeljuje lasten sistem pravic kot minimalnih standardov v okviru prava EU. Potreba po pristopu EU k EKČP je bila sedaj sprejeta kot nujnost. During the years, the European constitutional courts have always exhibited a particular commitment to an effective protection of fundamental rights in Europe, including in the relation with Community law. The European Court of Justice has, through its case-law, established an impressive array of rights, which have now been gradually accepted by the legislative bodies of the EU. The adoption of the Charter of fundamental rights and of the Constitutional Treaty must now be considered in this reflective process. Even without a legally binding Charter of fundamental rights, we have in Europe right now co-existing, three different types of legal sources concerning fundamental rights. With that we also have three different types of jurisdictions for the use of these different types of legal sources. Entry into force of the Charter of fundamental rights would constitute an additional but a highly important component of the already existing sources of EU law. No jurisdiction in Europe today is relieved of the duty to implement or protect fundamental rights. Existing legal systems not only co-exist, but also overlap each other which creates at least two pressing challenges for the future: one concerning the effectiveness of human rights protection, the other – connected with the first – concerning the need to maintain legal certainty. The Charter of fundamental rights thus represents added value for the EU which on the basis of the ECHR formally introduces its own system of rights as minimal standards in the frame of EU law. The need for EU to accede to the ECHR has now been accepted as a necessity.

V celinskih pravnih sistemih je ustaljeno pravilo, po katerem odločitve sodišč niso formalni pravni vir. Ne glede na to pa z ustavno pravico do enakosti pred zakonom iz 14. člena URS (ta zahteva, da so enaki primeri odločeni enako) sodna praksa pridobi vlogo pomembnega pravnega vira tudi v novoveških pravnih sistemih, podobno kot določa doktrina stare decisis. Slovensko ustavno sodišče je razsojanju ustavnih pritožb že podalo pomembne odločitve, potrjujoče to načelo, s katerim so zavezana redna sodišča. Ustavna pravica do enakosti pred zakonom je kršena, če je o nekem vprašanju sodna praksa ustaljena in v pritožnikovem primeru sodišče od nje odstopi, ne da bi za to izrecno navedlo utemeljene razloge. Takšen odstop od ustaljene sodne prakse lahko označimo kot samovoljno, zato bo ustavna pritožba zoper takšno sodno odločbo uspešna. A traditional rule in continental legal systems is that courts’ decisions are not a formal legal source. However, through a constitutional right to equality before the law, which also demands that like cases should be decided alike, a case law gains a position of an important legal source also in modern continental legal systems, similarly to a stare decisis doctrine. The Constitutional Court of Slovenia has, when adjudicating in the field of constitutional complaints, already delivered important decisions confirming this principle that binds ordinary judiciary. The constitutional right to equality before the law is violated if there is a well established case law on certain point and if in applicant’s case a court has departed from it without explicit and thorough grounds why it departed from an established precedent. Such a departure from an established case law can be denoted as being arbitrary and the applicant’s constitutional complaint against such a judicial decision will be successful.

Človekove pravice so, kljub temu, da predstavljajo z Ustavo varovano področje, v različnih davčnih postopkih, v praksi pogosto kršene. Zato je za posameznika zelo pomembno, da se zaveda svojih možnosti, kadar sam postane žrtev takšne kršitve. Na voljo ima različna pravna sredstva, nenazadnje pa mu varstvo pred kršitvami človekovih pravic predstavljata tudi institut ustavne pritožbe in institut pobude za začetek postopka za oceno ustavnosti oziroma zakonitosti predpisa ali splošnega akta, izdanega za izvrševanje javnih pooblastil. O utemeljenosti slednjih v konkretnih zadevah presoja Ustavno sodišče, kot najvišji organ sodne oblasti za varstvo ustavnosti in zakonitosti ter varstvo človekovih pravic, čigar odločitve so zavezujoče. Pri tem pa je zaskrbljujoč podatek, da je kršitve človekovih pravic v davčnem postopku pred Ustavnim sodiščem zelo težko dokazati, kar izhaja tudi iz vsebine te naloge. The Area of Human rights is protected by the Constitution. Nevertheless, they are often violated in tax procedures. It is important for an individual to be aware of the possibilities, when he himself is a victim of such violations. There are different remedies available, including constitutional complaint and initiative to start the procedure of the constitutionality or legality review of regulations. In these cases the Constitutional Court, as the highest judicial body for the protection of constitutionality and legality and protection of human rights decides, whether the case is justified. Human rights violations in a tax procedure are difficult to prove in front of Constitutional Court, which also follows from this thesis.

Avtorica se ukvarja s problematiko t.i. izbrisanih, ki označuje osebe, katere je slovenska oblast zaradi arbitrarne razlage osamosvojitvene zakonodaje 26. februarja 1992 brez obvestila in zakonske podlage ter iz lastnega nagiba izbrisala iz registra stalnega prebivalstva ter jih prenesla v evidenco tujcev. S tem jim ni le samovoljno odvzela njihovega pravnega statusa, temveč jim je onemogočila dostop do cele vrste ekonomskih in socialnih pravic vezanih na ta status. Ker je takšen ukrep za razliko od ostalih tujcev s pravico do stalnega prebivanja na območju Republike Slovenije prizadel le tiste, ki so prihajali iz drugih držav naslednic nekdanje SFRJ, je veliki senat Evropskega sodišča za človekove pravice leta 2012 razsodil, da so bile te osebe obravnavane diskriminacijsko, obenem pa sta jim bili kršeni tudi pravica do zasebnega in družinskega življenja ter pravica do učinkovitega pravnega sredstva. Te pravice zagotavlja Evropska konvencija o človekovih pravica vsem osebam na področju držav pogodbenic. Primer izbrisanih se obravnava iz vidika razmerja med politiko in pravom, natančneje pravom človekovih pravic. Pravo in politika sta samostojni področji, vendar vseeno medsebojno eksistenčno povezani, saj daje politika pravu materijo za urejanje, pravo pa ima nalogo ohranjati politiko znotraj določenih meja. V demokratični pravni državi mora biti med njima vzpostavljeno ravnotežje. To ravnotežje je porušeno, ko začnejo organi oblasti delovati na podlagi nedopustnih političnih interesov, in ko prekoračijo svoje z ustavo in zakonom določene pristojnosti. To lahko pripelje do kršitev temeljev ustavne ureditve, od načela pravne države in vseh njegovih izpeljav ter v končni fazi do kršitev človekovih pravic in svoboščin posameznikov. Konkreten primer je jasen indikator tega, kako obsežne posledica lahko ima delovanje politike izven okvirov prava, in kako pravne rešitve določenega problema izgubljajo svojo vrednost zaradi njihovega nespoštovanja in odsotnosti podpore v politični sferi. The author examines the problem of so called Erased, which is a term used to mark the large group of individuals, who were erased from Register of permanent residence on 26. 2. 1992 by Slovene authorities as a result of arbitrary interpretation of independence legislation. This ex proprio motu act of erasure and transfer to the Register of foreigners was done without legal basis and official notice to those affected by it. The Erased were not just arbitrary taken away their legal status of permanent residents, but they also lost access to many economic and social rights, which are essentially connected to this status. Since this act affected only those, who had citizenship of other republics of former Yugoslavia, in comparison to other foreigners that kept the right to permanent residence in Slovenia, in 2012 the European Court of Human Rights ruled, that they were violated the right to be treated without discrimination and also the right to respect for private and family life and right to an effective remedy. Those fundamental human rights are assured by European Convention on Human Rights to everyone within the jurisdiction of The High Contracting Parties. The case is examined from an aspect of relation between policy and law, particularly law of human rights. Law and policy are independent areas, but yet existentially connected, since policy gives law matter to edit, and law has a task to keep policy inside of legal boundaries. In democratic states, which are built on a rule of law, law and policy have to be in balance. This balance is demolished, when authorities start acting on a base of inadmissible political interests, and when they cross the borders of their constitutionally and legally determined competences. This can lead to the violation of basic constitutional order, such as rule of law and its derivations, and ultimately to the violation of human rights and freedoms of individuals. The concrete case of the Erased is a clear indicator of how extensive the consequences of policy acting outside of legal framework can be, and how sometimes legal solutions of specific problem are losing their value because of disrespect and absence of support in political sphere.

Za zmedo v dojemanju razlagalnih odločb je po avtorjevem mnenju neposredno krivo ustaljeno poimenovanje, obenem pa tudi tisti argument a fortiori, s katerim se je »razlagalna odločba« v začetku utemeljevala – in se hkrati postavljala v nasprotje z »razveljavitveno odločbo«. Specifika razlagalnih odločb je razlaganje in značilnost razveljavitvenih je razveljavljenje, a to si nujno ne kontrira; to ni diferentia specifica. Obravnavano področje je potrebno določenih teoretičnih pojasnil. Izvorni razlog za ustaljeno poimenovanje in argumentiranje avtor pripiše »samoumevnemu, a nepopolnemu dojemanju zakona« – v njegovem stvarnem ali oblikovnem pomenu zakonskega besedila –, ki pripelje do zaključka: besedilo lahko razveljavim ali razlagam. Avtor »zakon« opredeljuje celoviteje; razčleni ga na tri plasti: na dejansko plast, na stvarno plast in na pomensko plast zakona – plast pravnih pravil. Razlagalne odločbe operirajo na polju pomena (in ne besedila); izpostavljajo plast pravnih pravil (v nasprotju s pravnimi določili). To pa še ničesar ne pove o tem, ali razveljavljajo … ali pa pravo celo ustvarjajo. Nujno je zato tudi novo poimenovanje, ki bi izrecno kazalo na pravno naravo, na učinke posameznih tipov razlagalnih odločb. Tipološke ureditve razlagalnih odločb se avtor loteva v drugem delu. Na podlagi vzorčnih jezikovnih obrazcev izreka pa nato ponuja novo nomenklaturo. Predlaga dvojno poimenovanje, s katerim opozarja na razliko med plastjo zakona, na kateri ustavno sodišče deluje, in posledicami, ki jih ima lahko taka ali drugačna jezikovna formulacija izreka za pravni red. Razveljavitvenim razlagalnim odločbam radikalno priznava celo izrecno ustavno podlago. Kot najprimernejšega izpostavlja vzorčni jezikovni obrazec izreka, ki se glasi: »(Izpodbijani zakon ali prav no določilo) ni v neskladju z Ustavo, če se ne razlaga tako, da (sledi ustavi nasprotujoča razlaga).« Ustvarjalnim razlagalnim odločbam ne pripiše neustavnosti, zatrdi pa, da vzpostavljajo neprimeren dialog ustavnega sodišča z zakonodajno in sodno vejo oblasti; razmerje, ki predvsem škoduje samemu ustavnemu sodišču. Pri ugotovitvenih razlagalnih odločbah, ki so najpogostejše in prav tako po vsem ustavne, pa primernost spet ni odvisna od njihove razlagalne narave, ampak od jezikovne oblike izreka, s katerim udejanjajo tak ali drugačen odnos … in učinek na pravni red. Interpretation of statutes is common to legislator, ordinary courts, and a constitutional court, therefore arising conflicts in this field do not surprise. Authoritative interpretation of statutes in interpretive decisions of the Constitutional Cou rt (C.C.) constitutes the object of this work given the fact it builds special relations of power between the C.C. and the legislative or the judicial branch. The author focuses on those arguments that provokes popular judgements on the constitutionality of the interpretive technique. The following questions popup: Whether C.C.’s interpreting action remains inside the margins of its constitutional jurisdiction or does it fall out? – Do these interpretive decisions interfere with legislative action of the Parliament or decision-making process of the ordinary courts? – Is it constitutional and is it appropriate? The author claims theoretical foundations of interpretive decisions in the very nature of the constitutional decision-making and the practical ones in demands of legal order of which he surprisingly underlines fair-play in the constitutional game where the legislature and the courts take part as well. On the basis of some theoretical elucidations that permit the author to redefine term “statute” giving him a triple sense (legislative action, legal text, and legal norms as signification of legal dispositions) – he states: “To mark a decision as interpretative does not tell a thing about its appropriateness either its constitutionality. It only says that the decision exposes the signifying level of a statute (and not the textual one); that the level exposed is the level of legal norms (and not the one of legal dispositions).” He therefore proposes doubled terminology that would expose the difference between a level of a statute where decision acts and consequences that one or another linguistic formula in the operating part of the decision has for legal order. After typological systemization of existing interpretive decisions this new nomenclature takes place. Radically, invalidating-interpretive decisions are even confirmed to have explicit constitutional basis. Linguistic pattern of a tenor that would be the most appropriate states: “(Reviewed statute or legal disposition) is not in conflict with the Constitution, when not applied in a way such as (follows the interpretation in conflict with the Constitution).” Constructing-interpretive decisions are not labelled by unconstitutionality, however the author affirms their nuisance for C.C.’s relationship with legislature and the courts; their inappropriate character harms in the first place the authority of the C.C. itself. Again, the appropriateness of declaring-interpretive decisions (most commonly used in practice) does not depend on their interpretative nature but on the operating parts’ linguistic formulation which builds one or another kind of relations … and effects on legal order.

Namen tega prispevka je opozoriti na pravno-tehnične šibkosti argumentacije slovenskega ustavnega sodišča pri t. i. doktrini zlorabe referenduma. Očitno je ustavno sodišče v preveliki vnemi uresničiti svojo odločbo prekoračilo ustavne okvire sistema delitve oblasti in tako spodkopalo razmerja med ustavnimi akterji v sistemu zavor in ravnovesij. »Policy« analiza namreč pokaže, da se je tehtnica pri tem nagnila preveč v smer vsakokratne parlamentarne večine, ki sedaj lahko laže odstrani ovire na poti do uresničitve svojih političnih interesov. Slednje lahko na dolgi rok, in nekatera znamenja kažejo na to že sedaj, privede do ustavnega monizma, ki je nasprotje ustavnega pluralizma, v katerem raznoliki politični in drugi interesi tekmujejo med seboj po pravilih političnega diskurza, utemeljenega na priznavanju enakih diskusijskih možnosti in na pripravljenosti za sklepanje kompromisov, utemeljenih na načelih solidarnosti in ustavne strpnosti. Vloga instituta referenduma kot pravice veta, oz. zavore za ustvarjanje ravnovesja, je izjemnega pomena, zato ustavno sodišče odločanja o njegovem omejevanju ne bi smelo puščati v rokah političnega diskurza in tekmujočih političnih sil, ampak bi moralo zanj poskrbeti samo v skladu s pravili pravnega diskurza, ki jih narekuje obstoječi slovenski ustavni red. The author in his article points to the shortcomings and inconsistencies in the legal reasoning that the Slovenian Constitutional Court employed in the introduction of the so called doctrine of the abuse of referendum. The Constitutional Court has in a desire to see its judgements enforced apparently overreacted and transgressed the constitutional boundaries of the principle of separation of powers, which consequently undermined the equilibrium among the constitutional actors within the system of checks and balances. The policy analysis, which the author predominantly relies on in his article, demonstrates that the Constitutional Court has thus moved the scale too much in favour of the parliamentary majority which is now capable to remove the obstacles of in the way to fulfil its political goals even more easily. However, the author warns that the distortion of the aforementioned equilibrium can, in the long term, shift Slovenian conception of constitutional democracy to the ambit of constitutional monism. The latter works at a disadvantage of the constitutional pluralism, which is characterized by the competition of various and diverse political and other interests following the rules of political discourse based on the recognition of equal discussion opportunities and on the readiness for making compromises founded on the principles of solidarity and constitutional tolerance. The author emphasizes the importance of the referendum being the right to veto or the check for the safeguarding of the equilibrium and concludes that Constitutional Court should not have authorized the competing political forces in the parliament to decide whether referendum should be allowed or not in a particular case. This task should be reserved for the Constitutional Court itself to decide according to the rules of the legal discourse as they are laid down within Slovenian constitutional order.

Predsednica Ustavnega sodišča Srbije in predsednica srbskega Društva za ustavno pravo, prof. dr. Bosa Nenadić v svojem članku prikazje ustavni položaj, pristojosti in vlogo Ustavnega sodišča Republike Srbije, ki se uvršča med ustavna sodišča z najširšimi pristojnostmi. To sodišče ima dolgoletne izkušnje pri uresničevanju ustavnosodne kontrole ustavnosti, medtem ko je na področju varstva človekovih pravic na podlagi ustavnih pritožb še bolj na začetku poti. Avtorica kritično prikazuje in analizira tudi specifičen mešani model volitev in imenovanja ustavnih sodnikov, ki vodi do nehomogene sestave sodišča. Avtorica na zgoščen način prikazuje veljavno ureditev v Ustavi in ustavnosodno razlago njenih določb. Članek objavljamo v srbskem izvirniku. The author showcases the constitutional position, competences, and role of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Serbia, which ranks among the constitutional courts with the broadest array of jurisdiction. This court has extensive experience in implementation of control of constitutionality while having a long way to go in the field of protection of human rights based on constitutional complaints. The author critically presents and analyzes also the particular mixed model of election and appointment of Constitutional Court judges, resulting in non-homogeneous composition of the court. The author showcases in a concise manner the current regime in Constitution and the constitutional interpretation of its provisions. The text is published in the Serbian language.

Avtor obravnava sedem po njegovi oceni najpomembnejših odločitev Ustavnega sodišča Slovenije, sprejetih med letoma 1977 in 2009. Temeljni kriterij za izbor odločitev je njihov prispevek k vzpostavljanju zahtevnejših standardov varstva človekovih in manjšinskih pravic ter omejevanju in sankcionairanju protiustavnih posegov države vanje. Po avtorjevi oceni je najpomembnejša odločba o izbrisanih, ki je sicer razkrila obotavljanja pri uresničevanju odločitev Ustavnega sodišča, vendar bo na koncu zmagalo prepričanje, da ima glede razlage Ustave in varstva človekovih pravic ustavno sodišče zadnjo besedo. The author discusses seven, in his opinion, most important decisions of the Slovenian Constitutional Court. They were taken between 1977 and 2009. The main criteria for the selection of the decisions is their contribution to establishing more stringent standards of the protection of human and minority rights and limitation and sanctioning of unconstitutional interventions of the state. According to the author, the most important decision is the one regarding the erased, which has in fact revealed the delays in implementation of the decisions of the Constitutional Court, but in the end the belief that the Constitutional Court has the final say regarding the interpretation of constitution shall prevail. The text is published in Slovenian.

S sprejetjem Ustave Republike Slovenije leta 1991 je bil v slovensko pravno ureditev uveden institut obtožbe najvišjih državnih funkcionarjev izvršne oblasti zaradi kršitve ustave in zakonov. Institut ustavne obtožbe (impeachmenta) je predviden za predsednika Republike Slovenije, predsednika vlade in ministre ter je namenjen ugotavljanju njihove odgovornosti za določena protipravna dejanja. Predmet raziskovanja v tej diplomskem delu je pravna ureditev ustavne obtožbe predsednika republike s posebnim poudarkom na analizi ugotavljanja njegove odgovornosti ter ustreznosti ustavne ureditve odgovornosti in ustavne obtožbe predsednika republike. Cilj raziskovanja v tej nalogi je potrditi izhodiščni tezi: • da je veljavna ustavna ureditev odgovornosti in ustavne obtožbe predsednika republike pred ustavnim sodiščem pomanjkljiva ter • da je veljavna zakonska ureditev postopka obtožbe in ugotavljanja odgovornosti predsednika republike pomanjkljiva. Na podlagi analize ustavnih določb, ki se nanašajo na odgovornost predsednika republike in drugih zakonskih določil (predvsem Zakona o ustavnem sodišču, Zakona o parlamentarni preiskavi, Poslovnika državnega zbora, Poslovnika ustavnega sodišča, Poslovnika o parlamentarni preiskavi in drugih), ugotavljam, da je sedanja ureditev odgovornosti predsednika republike pomanjkljiva, saj pušča precej odprtih vprašanj, ki bi v primeru morebitne sprožitve ugotavljanja odgovornosti predsednika republike pomenila veliko oviro pri izpeljavi samega postopka odgovornosti oziroma njegove ustavne obtožbe. Pomanjkljiva ustavna, zakonska (in poslovniška) ureditev bi v postopku ustavne obtožbe predsednika republike sprožila vrsto vprašanj, katerih reševanje bi bilo v času izvedbe postopka močno politično obarvano in argumenti pravne stroke, v pogojih razgretih političnih strasti, bi bili premalo upoštevani. Zato je nujno postopek ugotavljanja odgovornosti predsednika republike urediti v času stabilnih političnih razmer in izključno z argumenti pravne stroke. V nalogi je podan predlog za ustreznejšo ustavno in zakonsko ureditev odgovornosti predsednika republike s procesnega in materialnega vidika, ki je primerljiva z rešitvami v sodobnih demokratičnih družbah in je hkrati najprimernejša za sedanjo stopnjo razvoja demokracije v Republiki Sloveniji. V nalogi je predstavljen institut šefa države in opravljen primerjalni prikaz ureditve položaja šefa države v štirih temeljnih skupinah državnih ureditev oziroma organizacij državne oblasti. Za pravilno razumevanje današnjega položaja šefa države v Republiki Sloveniji je opravljen zgodovinski pregled razvoja te funkcije od leta 1941 do sprejema Ustave Republike Slovenije leta 1991. V nadaljevanju naloge je izvršena primerjava med funkcijo, položajem in pristojnostmi šefa države v Republiki Sloveniji z ustavno primerljivimi ureditvami nekaterih drugih držav (gre za države z uvedeno parlamentarno ustavno ureditvijo). V nadaljevanju so predstavljeni in kritično presojani položaj, funkcija, pristojnosti, predstavljanje, obveščanje, nezdružljivost funkcije, razmerje do drugih državnih organov, vloga, pravice in nadomeščanje šefa države v Republiki Sloveniji. Sledijo pregled, analiza in kritična presoja odgovornosti šefa države, primerjalni prikaz ureditve odgovornosti šefa države v štirih temeljnih skupinah državnih ureditev, institut sopodpisa, politične in materialne odgovornosti, institut imunitete ter institut impeachmenta. Osrednje poglavje naloge predstavlja pregled sedanje ustavne in zakonske ureditve položaja in odgovornosti predsednika republike, postopek ustavne obtožbe predsednika republike, z zelo občutljivim predhodnim delom postopka, ki ga predstavlja morebitna uvedba parlamentarne preiskave, ter predstavitev in utemeljitev ugotovljenih pomanjkljivosti in predlogov za ustreznejšo ustavno in zakonsko ureditev odgovornosti predsednika republike ter postopek ugotavljanja njegove odgovornosti pred ustavnim sodiščem. V tem diplomskem delu sta potrjeni uvod By the Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia of 1991, the institute of impeachment of the highest ranking executive state officials due to violation of the constitution and laws has been introduced. The institute of impeachment applies to the President of the Republic of Slovenia, the Prime Minister and ministers. Its purpose is to ascertain their possible accountability for certain illegal actions. The subject matter of this thesis is the investigation of the function of the President of the Republic with a special focus on the analysis of the process of ascertainment of his accountability and the adequacy of the constitutional regulation in respect of this accountability and the impeachment of the President of the Republic. The aim of the investigation is to confirm the starting theses: • that the present constitutional regulation of accountability and of impeachment of the President of the Republic at the Constitutional Court is inadequate and • that the statutory regulation of the procedure of impeachment and ascertaining of the accountability of the President of the Republic is inadequate. Based on the analysis of the constitutional provisions relating to the accountability of the President of the Republic and other legal provisions (primarily the Constitutional Court Act, Parliamentary Investigation Act, Rules of Procedure of the National Assembly, Rules of Procedure of the Constitutional Court, Rules of Procedure for Parliamentary Investigation and others), it is found that the present regulation as regards the accountability of the President of the Republic is inadequate since it leaves many unanswered questions which, in case of possible institution of a procedure to ascertain the accountability of the President of the Republic, would represent a considerable obstacle in completing such a procedure and/or impeachment of the President. The thesis presents a proposal for a more adequate constitutional and statutory regulation of the accountability of the President of the Republic from the procedural and substantive viewpoint that is similar to solutions in modern democratic societies and at the same time most suitable for the present level of development of democracy in the Republic of Slovenia. The thesis outlines the institute of the head of state and presents a comparative analysis of the regulation of the position of the head of state in four basic types of the system of government and/or organization of the state power. For a proper understanding of the present position of the head of state in the Republic of Slovenia, a historical overview of the development of this function since 1941 till the adoption of the Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia in 1991 is carried out. Following is a comparison of the function, position and competences of the head of state in the Republic of Slovenia with the constitutionally comparable regulation thereof in some other states (with parliamentary system of government). Further on, the position, function, competences, representation, information, incompatibility of the function, relation to other state bodies, role, rights and deputizing of the head of state in the Republic of Slovenia are presented and critically assessed. Following are an overview, analysis and a critical evaluation of the accountability of the head of state, a comparative presentation of the regulation related to the accountability of the head of state in four basic types of the system of government, the institute of co-signing, of political accountability and civil liability, the institute of immunity and the institute of impeachment. The central part of the thesis comprises an overview of the present constitutional and statutory regulation related to the position and accountability of the President of the Republic, the procedure of impeachment of the President of the Republic including the possible institution of the parliamentary investigation being a very delicate preliminary stage of this procedure, and presentation and evaluation of the found deficiencies and of the proposals for