Search

V diplomskem delu je obravnavano delovanje Inšpektorata Republike Slovenije za notranje zadeve kot inšpekcijskega in prekrškovnega organa. Predstavljene so pravne podlage za izvajanje inšpekcijskega nadzora. Področje inšpekcijskega nadzora je pomembno, saj se z rednimi nadzori zagotovita kakovostno delovanje in varnost na posameznem področju. Diplomsko delo obravnava težave, s katerimi se srečujejo inšpektorji pri izvajanju nadzorov, področja, na katerih se zgodi največ prekrškov, vprašanji, ali inšpektorji pri svojem delu sodelujejo z drugimi organi in če se v okviru svojega dela udeležujejo usposabljanj in izobraževanj. V teoretičnem delu je bila uporabljena metoda študije različne slovenske in tuje literature in virov. Za analizo zakonov z inšpekcijskega in prekrškovnega področja sta bili uporabljeni normativna analiza in deskriptivna metoda. Raziskava je bila izvedena z analizo letnih poročil IRSNZ in metodo intervjuja, osredotočena pa je bila na področje zasebnega varovanja. V okviru raziskave je bilo ugotovljeno, da se inšpektorji pri izvajanju nadzora na področju zasebnega varovanja največkrat soočajo z delom na črno, zaradi česar se je v zadnjem času povečalo število izdanih prekrškovnih odločb. Inšpektorji IRSNZ se v sklopu dela redno udeležujejo usposabljanj in izobraževanj, pri svojem delu pa sodelujejo tudi s Policijo in drugimi inšpektorati. Prispevek diplomskega dela se kaže v tem, da bo javnost seznanjena z načinom izvajanja inšpekcijskega nadzora s strani IRSNZ. V ospredju je izvajanje nadzora v praksi, pri čemer so izpostavljene ovire, s katerimi se pri svojem delu soočajo inšpektorji. The content of diploma paper deals with the work of the Inspectorate of the Republic of Slovenia for Internal Affairs (IRSNZ) as an inspection and minor offence authority. Legal bases for conducting inspection are presented. The field of inspection is important since regular inspections ensure quality operation and safety in a particular field. The diploma paper deals with problems encountered by inspectors when carrying out supervision, since in this are areas most of the offenses occur, with the question whether inspectors cooperate with other authorities in their work and further on if they participate in training and education in field of their work. In the theoretical part the method of studying various Slovene and foreign literature and sources has been used. For the analysis of law on inspection and minor offences normative analysis and descriptive method have been used. The survey has been carried out by analyzing the annual reports of the IRSNZ and method of interviewing, with focus on the scope of private security. The survey concluded that inspectors mostly face undeclared work when performing supervision in the area of private security, which results in increased number of minor offense decisions issued. In the course of their work the IRSNZ inspectors regularly take part in training and education, and they cooperate with the police force and other inspectorates in their work as well. The contribution of diploma paper is to increase the public awareness on the manner of conducting inspection by the IRSNZ. The focus is on exercising supervision in practice, as well as the obstacles that inspectors face in their work.

Izdaja odločbe o vrnitvi tujcu na območju Slovenije je nov posebni upravni postopek, ki še ni bil posebej preučen. Pravna podlaga za izdajo odločbe o vrnitvi je Zakon o tujcih, ki je bil sprejet v letu 2011 in je prevzel določbe Direktive o vračanju. Slednja je bila sprejeta s ciljem narediti učinkovito vračanje na območju celotne EU, hkrati pa zagotoviti poenotenje pravic tujcev v postopkih vračanja, predvsem zagotoviti tujcem pravico do učinkovitega pravnega sredstva in sodno presojo odločitve upravnih organov. V magistrskem delu sem z metodo analize in metodo deskripcije preučil trenutno pravno podlago, tako procesne kot tudi materialne predpise, ki posegajo v izdajo odločbe o vrnitvi. Samo izdajo odločbe sem še posebej primerjal s postopkom izdaje odločbe o vrnitvi v Republiki Hrvaški. Podrobno sem preučil način dela slovenske Policije pri izdaji predmetne odločbe ter z induktivno – deduktivnimi metodami predstavil faze izdaje le te. Za empirično raziskavo v magistrskem delu sem z metodo analize obdelal in z uporabo komparativne metode med seboj primerjal izdane odločbe policije in odločbe drugostopenjskega organa ter sodbe v sodnih postopkih. Ugotovitev magistrskega dela je, da postopek izdaje odločbe še zdaleč ni enostaven upravni postopek, ki v zadnjih letih zaradi zagotavljanja pravic do združitev družine in presojanja načela nevračanja ni niti več učinkovit. V zaključku magistrskega dela sem predlagal več izboljšav tako normativnih predpisov kot tudi prakse izdajanja odločb o vrnitvi. The issuance of a return decision to a foreigner in Slovenia is a new special administrative procedure, which has not yet been specifically studied. The legal ground for the issuance of the return decision represents the Foreigners Act, which has been adopted in 2011 and has taken over the provisions of the Return Directive. The later was adopted with the aim of enabling successful returns throughout the EU, while ensuring the unification of rights of foreigners in return procedures, particularly to grant foreigners the right to an effective remedy and judicial review of the decision of the administrative bodies. In the Master's thesis, I used the descriptive and analytic method to study the existing legal ground, procedural as well as material provisions, which interfere with the issuance of a return decision. I particularly compared the issuance of the decision in Slovenia with the same procedure in the Republic of Croatia. I thoroughly studied the work methods of the Slovenian Police in the issuance of the discussed decision and used inductivedeductive methods to present the phases of its issuance. In the empirical research in the Master’s thesis, I used the analytic and comparative method to compare the decisions, issued by the Police, with the decisions, issued by second instance bodies, and judgments in court proceedings. The main finding of the Master’s thesis is that the procedure of issuing a decision is far from being a simple administrative procedure, which is for the past few years due to ensuring the right to family reunification and the assessment of the principle of nonrefoulement even no longer effective. In the conclusion of the thesis, I suggested more improvements in the case of normative provisions as well as the practice of issuing return decisions.

Splošni upravni postopek je en sam, medtem ko poznamo nekaj sto posebnih upravnih postopkov. V Sloveniji so upravni postopki opredeljeni z Zakonom o splošnem upravnem postopku in s posebnimi specialnimi procesnimi pravili področne zakonodaje, ki urejajo posamezna strokovna vprašanja, kadar pravila splošnega zakona ne zadoščajo in zahtevajo uporabo področnega zakona skupaj z ZUP. Večina zakonskih predpisov zahteva uporabo predpisanih temeljnih načel. Ta namreč predstavljajo smernice odločanja v upravnih zadevah ter varstvo človekovih pravic in temeljnih svoboščin. Njihova uporaba vključno z uporabo pravnih sredstev in potrebnim nadzorom vzpostavlja red in disciplino v medsebojnih odnosih med ljudmi in oblastjo. Skratka je s skupno uporabo splošnega zakona o upravnem postopku in specialnimi procesnimi pravili področne zakonodaje omejeno samovoljno odločanje uprave in s tem delo upravnih organov. Tako imajo pri izvajanju upravnih postopkov pomembno vlogo temeljna načela upravnega postopka po ZUP. Načela predstavljajo postopkovne smernice upravnega postopka, njihova kršitev pa predstavlja absolutno bistveno postopkovno napako, ki privede do ustrezne sankcije ali celo do ničnosti odločbe. V mojem diplomskemu delu predstavljam, kaj je splošni upravni postopek in kaj so posebni upravni postopki, medsebojno povezanost in uporabo temeljnih načel upravnega postopka, zlasti varstvo javnega interesa in pravic strank ter ekonomičnost. In the administration of the Republic of Slovenia there is one general administrative procedure and several special administrative procedures. Administrative procedures are governed by the Slovenian General Administrative Procedure Act (Slovenian acronym: ZUP) and several other special procedural regulations of the sectoral legislation regulating individual specific issues, when the rules of the general law are insufficient and require the application of the sectoral law together with the General Administrative Procedure Act. Most of the legal provisions require the application of the fundamental principles which represent guidelines for decision making in administrative matters as well as protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms. Their use and the use of legal means together with the necessary supervision helps establishing order and discipline in the interaction between individuals and the authority. Joint usage of the General Administrative Procedure Act and sectoral special procedures ensures arbitrary decision making of the Administration and administrative authorities is limited. Therefore, the fundamental principles of the administrative procedure in accordance with ZUP play the key role in protecting the rights of the parties involved. The fundamental principles represent procedural guidelines for the administrative procedures their violation represents an absolute procedural error which imposes appropriate sanctions or can moreover even lead to the annulment of the decision. My thesis presents the general administrative procedure and the special administrative procedures, their interconnection and the application of the basic principles of administrative proceedings. Amongst basic principles I present in particular the protection of the public interest, the individual’s rights and the economy.

Upravni in pravdni postopek sta dva bistveno različna postopka. Upravni poteka v okviru javne uprave in ga izvajajo »organi«, s katerimi so mišljeni organi državne uprave in drugi državni organi, organi samoupravnih lokalnih skupnosti, pa tudi pristojni nosilci javnih pooblastil. Bistvo upravnega postopka je odločanje o pravici, obveznosti ali pravni koristi posameznika v konkretni upravni zadevi. Po drugi strani civilni pravdni postopek poteka znotraj sodne veje oblasti, v njegovem okviru pa redna sodišča razrešujejo civilne spore, to je odločajo o spornih pravnih razmerjih oziroma o spornih civilnih pravicah. Temeljne značilnosti obeh postopkov, pa tudi upravnega spora, sem povzel v II. poglavju naloge. V obeh postopkih je (poleg organa oziroma sodišča) nujni subjekt stranka, v upravnem postopku najmanj ena (aktivna ali pasivna), v pravdnem pa vsaj dve (aktivna in pasivna). Poleg strank(e) se lahko tako enega kot drugega postopka udeležujejo tudi stranski udeleženci. Stranski udeleženec upravnega postopka pridobi položaj stranke, ne pa tudi lastnosti stranke. V pravdnem postopku pa je intervencija lahko dveh vrst, navadna ali enostavna in sosporniška. Pri sosporniški intervenciji intervenient dobi položaj enotnega sospornika (in s tem položaj stranke), stranski intervenient pa z vstopom v postopek postane pomočnik stranke, za katere uspeh v pravdi je pravno zainteresiran – ne pridobi pa položaja stranke. Prav razmerjem na relaciji stranka – stranski udeleženec/intervenient – sosporniški intervenient – enotni sospornik – nujni sospornik je posvečena vsebina te diplomske naloge, s tem, da je osrednja pozornost namenjena stranski udeležbi v obeh postopkih. V III. poglavju naloge (podpoglavja 1. – 6.) sem stransko udeležbo v obeh postopkih proučil predvsem z naslednjih vidikov: • Opredelitev stranske udeležbe. • Namen stranske udeležbe. • Procesne in materialne predpostavke stranske udeležbe. • Vstop stranskega udeleženca v postopek. • Pravni položaj stranskega udeleženca v postopku ter njegovo pravno razmerje s stranko, kateri se je v postopku pridružil, oziroma za katere uspeh v pravdi je pravno zainteresan. • Specifične značilnosti posameznega postopka. Na področju upravnega postopka sem bolj podrobno prikazal tudi pravna sredstva stranskega udeleženca ter stroške stranske udeležbe. Na podlagi ugotovljenih značilnosti stranske udeležbe v obeh postopkih sem nato v 7. podpoglavju analiziral podobnosti in razlike stranske udeležbe v obeh postopkih ter opravil krajšo primerjavo med stransko udeležbo v slovenskem in nemškem upravnem in pravdnem postopku. V IV. poglavju sem povzel ugotovitve predhodnih poglavij naloge ter se osredotočil na razloge ugotovljenih podobnosti in razlik stranske udeležbe, pri čemer sem izhajal predvsem iz ciljev, ki jih zasledujeta Zakon o splošnem upravnem postopku in Zakon o pravdnem postopku, iz temeljnih načel obeh postopkov, pa tudi iz načel Ustave, povezanih z obravnavanima postopkoma. Dotaknil pa sem se tudi vprašanj, ki v zvezi s stransko udeležbo ostajajo odprta v strokovni javnosti. Menim, da sem cilje naloge, navedene v »Opredelitvi problema«, dosegel, saj so se v okviru njene vsebine dovolj jasno pokazali odgovori na vprašanja, ki sem si jih zastavil kot problem naloge. An administrative and a civil procedure are two substantially different procedures. An administrative procedure takes place within public administration and is carried out by »administrative authorities« which apply to state administration bodies and other state bodies, authorities of self-government local communities, as well as to competent institutions which are bearers of public authorities. The very essence of an administrative procedure is the determination of the right, obligations or legal entitlement of a natural or legal person in a specific administrative procedure. On the other hand a civil procedure is carried out within the framework of judicial power and within this procedure ordinary courts of law settle civil disputes, that is, they settle either legal relations in dispute or disputed civil rights. I have summarised the basic characteristics of both procedures and of the administrative dispute in section II. of my thesis. In both procedures a party is a necessary entity, besides an authority or a court. In an administrative procedure there is at least one party (an active or passive), in a civil procedure there are at least two parties (an active and passive). In addition to a party/parties intervenors can take part in any of the two procedures. An intervenor of an administrative procedure obtains a status of a party but not a characteristic of a party. In a civil procedure there can be two kinds of interventions, a simple intervention and a joinder intervention. The position of an indispensible party, which obtains the status of a proper party, is characteristic of a joinder intervention, and an intervenor at entering a procedure becomes an assistant of a party and is de jure interested in the success of a law suit but the intervenor does not obtain the status of a party. The content of my thesis is dedicated to the very relations between a party – an intervenor – an additional party – an indispensible party - a necessary party by focusing on intervention in both procedures. In subsections from 1 to 6 of the section III. of my thesis I have examined the intervention in both procedures particularly from the following points of view: • Definition of an intervention. • Purpose of an intervention. • Process and material assumptions of an intervention. • Entering of an intervenor into a procedure. • Legal status of an intervenor in a procedure and their legal relationship with a party which the intervenor joined in the procedure and who is de jure interested in the success of a law suit. • Specific characteristics of an individual procedure. In respect of an administrative procedure I have presented also legal means of an intervenor and the costs of an intervention more in detail. On the basis of identified characteristics of an intervention in both procedures I have then analysed similarities and differences of an intervention in either procedure and I have made a short comparison between an intervention in Slovenian and in German legislative regulations in the subsection 7. In section IV. I have summarised observations of preceding sections of my thesis and I have focused on the reasons for observed similarities and differences of an intervention. I have based my observations particularly on objectives that are regulated by the General Administrative Procedure Act and by the Civil Procedure Act, on basic principles of both procedures, and also on the principles in the Constitution that are connected with the relevant procedures. I have also touched on the questions in connection with an intervention that stay unsolved in expert public. I mean that the objectives of my thesis quoted in the subsection »Definition of the problem« have been achieved, for the answers to the questions that I had raised as a problem in my thesis have shown up sufficiently clear within its contents.

Upravni postopek, urejen v določilih Zakona o kmetijstvu, je samo ena od podvrst upravnega postopka. Za razliko od splošne ureditve v Zakonu o splošnem upravnem postopku, se smatra, da gre za posebno ureditev upravnega postopka. Da pa se lahko določen postopek uredi drugače od splošne ureditve, morajo biti izpolnjeni določeni pogoji. Predvsem mora biti to nujno oziroma je toliko izjem, da se tega ne da urediti drugače. Potem se mora upoštevati tudi pogoj, da se uredi samo posamezne procesne institute, pri tem pa se upoštevajo temeljna načela splošnega postopka, ki se jih ne sme izključiti. Namen posebne ureditve je predvsem urediti tiste pravne institute, ki se zelo razlikujejo od splošnih. Poleg tega bi neurejenost teh pravnih institutov prinesla pravno negotovost. Zakon o kmetijstvu drugače ureja tiste procesne institute, brez katerih bi bil ta poseben postopek nepraktičen in neizvedljiv. Razlog zakonodajalca pri tej ureditvi je predvsem v implementiranju evropske zakonodaje, ki mora biti izvedena v skladu z pogoji EU in upoštevanjem nekaterih drugih specifik področja. Te značilnosti so predvsem organizacijske narave, saj gre v veliki meri za pomanjkanje kadrov, preveliko število vlog, finančni vidik … To se odraža na ureditvi institutov, saj gre pri večini za podaljšanje rokov za opravljanje posameznih procesnih dejanj, omogočanje uporabe določenih skrajšanih postopkov s pomočjo informacijske tehnologije, za dodajanje novih ali odvzemanje določenih pogojev. Zakonodajalcu je uspelo s pomočjo posebne ureditve uravnotežiti razmerje med zahtevami in pričakovanji strank (predvsem po pravni varnosti) z zahtevami, ki se pojavljajo na področju organizacije in implementacije evropske zakonodaje. Administrative procedure arranged in a Agriculture law is just one of the subspecies of administrative procedure. The difference between procedure in arranged in a Agriculture law and the procedure arranged in Law of general administrative procedure is in species of procedure. Unlike the procedure arranged in Law of general administrative procedure, the procedure arranged in a Agriculture law is not special but special. When we arranging a special kind of procedure, we must follow some certain conditions. Firs of all, the arranging od special kind of procedure must be necessary or there must be so many exceptions, that there is no other way. We must keep in mind, that only individual process institutions are arranged specialy and when we are arranging that, we must consider the basic principles of general procedure, which we can't exclude. The reason of arrangin the special administrative procedure is to arrange those legal institutions, that are very distinguish from general ones. Beside that, the unarranging of these institutions would brought a certain leagal uncertainty. Law of agriculture is regulating those process institutions, which are necessary and without those the procedure would be inpractical and unworkable. The legislators main reason for arranging this procedure is mainly in implementing the Eurepoean legislation, which must be arranged with conciderations of terms od EU and some other specification of field. Special arrange of administrative procedure also can mean, that we regulate process norms on a base of EUs material legislations. The features are organizational natures, above all of lack of employees, financial point, number of roles … This is being reflected in regulation of institutes, because there is extension of time periods for performance od individual process actions, enabling of use of certain shotened procedures with help of technology, adding new or taking some of certain conditions. A legislator managed to balance relationship between demends and expectations of involved parties (above all legal certainty) with demans, which are appearing in organisation and implementation of EU legislation.

Upravni postopkovni sistem v Sloveniji sestavljajo pravila splošnega upravnega postopka, ki so določena v Zakonu o splošnem upravnem postopku (v nadaljevanju ZUP) ter pravila posebnih upravnih postopkov, ki jih določajo nekateri zakoni na različnih upravnih področjih (npr. na davčnem področju Zakon o davčnem postopku). Če je predpisan posebni upravni postopek, organ ravna po določbah zakona, ki urejajo ta postopek, glede vprašanj, ki z njim niso urejena, pa dopolnilno uporablja pravila ZUP. V navedeni diplomski nalogi je poudarek na posebnem upravnem postopku oz. davčnem postopku, ki je urejen predvsem z Zakonom o davčnem postopku (v nadaljevanju ZDavP). V nalogi je podrobno obravnavan institut vabila, ki ga sicer ZDavP ne ureja, zato se dopolnilno uporabijo pravila ZUP. Institut vabila je eden od načinov občevanja med organi in strankami, kjer upravni organ (v tem primeru davčni organ) povabi stranko ali kakšnega drugega udeleženca v postopku, ki ga potrebuje za razjasnitev dejanskega stanja in ugotavljanja določenih dejstev. V primeru, ko se povabljeni ne odzove in svojega izostanka ne opraviči, upravni organ, ko so za to izpolnjeni zakonski pogoji, izda sklep o prisilni privedbi in zaprosi Policijo, ki je edini organ v Sloveniji, ki izvaja in ima pooblastila v zakonu, da privede določeno osebo pred upravni (davčni) organ. V diplomski nalogi sem ugotavljal, na katerih področjih izvajanja nalog davčne službe prihaja do prisilnih privedb oziroma kaj vse mora izpolniti upravni (davčni) organ, da lahko zaprosi policijo in katere so tiste meje sorazmernosti, da človekove pravice niso prekomerno prizadete. V teh okvirjih sem izdelal tudi raziskavo na Davčnem uradu Maribor, kjer sem pridobil podatke o prisilnih privedbah davčnih zavezancev v letu 2011 ter tako svoje hipoteze potrdil oziroma dokazal. The Slovenian administrative procedural system consists of the general administrative procedure as defined by the General Administrative Procedure Act (hereinafter: APA) and rules on special administrative procedures defined by acts related to different administrative areas (e.g. tax issues are regulated by the Tax Procedure Act). If a special administrative procedure is prescribed, the relevant authority must act in accordance with such procedure, while areas not covered by such procedure are regulated by the APA. The emphasis of the present paper is on the special administrative procedures, i.e. tax procedures regulated mainly by the Tax Procedure Act (hereinafter: TPA). Detailed review is given to the institution of summons, not specifically regulated by the TPA therefore, regulations stipulated in the APA are applied. The institution of summons is one of the options available for communication between administrative bodies and other parties, whereby a body (in this case a tax office) summons an individual or another party in the proceeding to attend in order to clarify issues of the actual situation and facts. In the event of the summoned party failing to appear and failing to excuse their absence, the administrative body may, provided that other legal requirements have been met, render a decision for forced production and request the police as the only body in Slovenia vested with powers by law, to produce a certain individual before the tax body. This paper is focused on establishing which areas of tax office domain entail forced production and which conditions must be fulfilled for the tax body to request a forced production by the police, and which are those border lines of the principle of proportionality to elude disproportional impairment of human rights. Within such a framework, a survey was conducted at Maribor Tax Office data was obtained on forced production of subjects liable to pay tax in 2011 which validated and proved the hypothesis.