Search

Entre juristas es muy usual aseverar que «las decisiones judiciales con enunciados fácticos falsos constituyen errores». En este texto se escudriñan los fundamentos de aseveraciones semejantes. El análisis parte de la asunción (justificada en otro trabajo) de que la verdad de las premisas fácticas no es condición necesaria, ni de la aplicación correcta de las normas jurídicas, ni de la justificación de las decisiones judiciales. Sin embargo, la afirmación según la cual las sentencias con enunciados fácticos falsos son erróneas podría tener sentido incluso aceptando la asunción antedicha. Este texto se dirige, por ello, a elucidar y analizar diferentes sentidos en que aseveraciones como las señaladas podrían tener asidero. Se mostrará que, por intuitiva que la aserción parezca, ella tiene que ser muy matizada, si no rechazada sin más. It is a common assertion among lawyers that "judicial decisions containing false statements about facts constitute errors". This paper examines the basis for such claims. The analysis starts from the assumption (substantiated in another paper) that the truth of factual premises is not a necessary condition for either the correct application of legal norms or the justification of judicial decisions. However, the claim that judgments with false factual statements are erroneous could make sense even if one accepts the above assumption. This paper therefore aims to elucidate and analyse the various senses in which claims such as the above might be plausible. It will be shown that the claim, however intuitive it may seem, must be highly nuanced if it is not to be rejected out of hand. Sodne odločbe z neresničnimi dejanskimi premisami. Med pomanjkljivostmi, napakami in pretiravanji. Pravniki pogosto trdijo: »Sodne odločbe, ki vsebujejo neresnične dejanske premise, so napačne.« Ta prispevek ponuja kritično obravnavo podlage za takšne trditve. Avtor izhaja iz predpostavke (utemeljene v drugem prispevku), da resničnost dejanskih premis ni nujen pogoj niti za pravilno uporabo pravnih norm niti za utemeljitev sodnih odločb. Tudi ob tej predpostavki bi bila trditev, da so sodbe z neresničnimi dejanskimi premisami napačne, lahko smiselna. Avtor tega prispevka zato razčleni in pojasni različne pomene zgornje trditve. Izkaže se, da jo moramo precej omiliti, če že ne kar zavrniti.

Diplomsko delo obravnava problematiko spomina in spominjanja v romanih Jurija Trifonova Starec (Старик, 1978) ter Danila Kiša Vrt, pepel (Bašta, pepeo, 1965). Osredotoča se na obravnavo in opredelitev spomina kot pomembnega deleža pri oblikovanju oziroma konstruiranju (lastne) preteklosti. Spomin ima funkcijo pričevalca (lastne) zgodovine, njene verifikacije (ki jo sočasno potrdijo tudi vložki dokumentarnega gradiva) ter konstituiranja identitete obeh protagonistov. Kjer moč spomina (hoteno ali nehoteno) zataji, se vmeša zapolnjevanje vrzeli iz (spominske) preteklosti z relativiziranjem resnice (Starec) ali z močjo domišljije (Vrt, pepel), oba aspekta pa sta tako močna in vseobsegajoča, da se zabrišejo sledi med resničnostjo (spomina) in fikcijo (le-tega). Spomin in spominjanje Letunova in Andija sta pomembna zaradi svoje vloge pri ustvarjanju zgodovinske preteklosti in resnice ter zaradi ustvarjanja identitete obeh protagonistov, udeleženih v mogočnem in neusmiljenem zgodovinskem času. The bachelor thesis addresses the question of memory and remembrance in the novels The Old man (Yuri Trifonov) and Garden, Ashes (Danilo Kiš). It focuses on the analysis and defining of memory as an important factor in forming or constituting ones' own past. Memory has the function of bearing witness to (ones’ own) history and its verification (which is simultaneously reinforced by documentary material) and also the establishment of the identity of both protagonists. Where the power of memory fails (voluntary or involuntary), the missing pieces are filled by the relativisation of truth (The Old man) or with the power of imagination (Garden, Ashes) both aspects are so powerful and overwhelming, that the boundaries between truth and fiction of memory are blurred. Memory and remembrance of Letunov and Andi are important for their role in the creation of the historical past and truth. Furthermore, they play the role of establishing the identity of the two protagonists, involved in the might and ruthlessness of historical time.

Lažne novice so relativno nov izraz, ki je začel postajati popularen med predsedniško kampanjo Donalda Trumpa leta 2016. Pri uporabi različnih akterjev - medijev, politike, stroke in javnosti – je prevzel številne in vsebinsko nasprotne pomene ter postal plavajoči označevalec v diskurzivnem boju. Njegov pomen med drugim obsega dezinformacije v digitalni dobi, etiketo za obračunavanja s tradicionalnimi mediji in modno besedno zvezo za označevanje nečesa obče neresničnega. Cilj magistrskega dela je problematiko pomenskih razsežnosti lažnih novic na omejenem vzorcu prenesti v slovensko okolje, pri čemer sem skušal z analizo diskurza ugotoviti, kako se pomenske razsežnosti pojma lažne novice kažejo v novinarskih besedilih slovenskih medijev, ter z analizo polstrukturiranih intervjujev razbrati, kako se pomenske razsežnosti kažejo v razumevanju novinarjev. Ugotavljam, da lažne novice v analiziranih prispevkih prevzemajo različne pomene – od spletnih dezinformacij do laži in neresničnih izjav. Avtorji se zavedajo večpomenskosti, vendar je v tekstih ne problematizirajo, niti ne podajajo lastnih definicij. Tako so bralci prepuščeni iskanju lastne defincije, pri čemer so podvrženi diskurzivnemu boju. Intervjuvani novinarji niso enotni glede pomena izraza, ki ga razumejo od namernega zavajanja s strani političnih akterjev do nenamerne napake pri novinarskem poročanju. Zaradi pomenskih nejasnosti predlagam nadaljnje raziskovanje fenomena s fokusom na pomenske razsežnosti pri razumevanju občinstva. The term fake news is relatively fresh. It became popular during Donald Trump's presidential campaign in 2016. The term has undertook many different and substantially opposite meanings, because many different actors, such as the media, politics, academics and public have been using it. It has therefore become a floating signifier in the discursive struggle. Its meaning encompasses disinformation in digital era, a label for discrediting traditional media and a buzzword to denote something generally untrue, etc. The aim of this master's thesis is to transfer the phenomenon of semantic dimensions of fake news into the Slovenian environment by analysing a sample of journalistic articles with discursive analysis, and by conducting semi-structured interviews with their authors to grasp the understanding of the term's meaning by the journalists. I found out that the term fake news undertakes many different meanings in the analysed articles - from online disinformation to lies and incorrect statements. While journalists do recognize ambiguity of the term, they neither address it nor present their own definitions in the articles. The readers are therefore forced to create their own definitions, while being subjected to a before-mentioned discursive struggle. What is more, the interviewed journalists are not unanimous in their definitions of the term. Their understanding of it ranges from deliberate misleading statements by political actors, to unintentional errors in journalistic reporting. Due to semantic ambiguities, I suggest further exploration of the phenomenon, perhaps with a focus on semantic dimensions of the term's understanding by the audience.

Magistrska naloga obravnava pojav post-resnice in z njo povezano novo pojavno obliko politike post-resnice. Slednjo obravnava na primeru kampanje Brexit, izstopu Velike Britanije iz Evropske unije. Post-resnica je posledica kompleksne kombinacije različnih dejavnikov, v splošnem pa gre za spremembe na ekonomskem, kulturnem in medijskem področju, skupaj z tehnološkim napredkom. Post-resnica označuje okoliščine oziroma delovanje posameznikov, v katerem so faktična dejstva zanemarjena, v ospredju pa so čustva in osebna prepričanja. S tem povezan je vznik politike post-resnice, katero zaznamuje ravnodušnost do dejstev, pač pa nagovarja čustva in utrjuje predhodna prepričanja volivcev, njihove predsodke in stereotipe. Politika post-resnice primarno nagovarja razočarane in marginalizirane volivce. Marginalizacijo je opredeljena v najširšem smislu, v katerem se vsak posameznik lahko počuti marginaliziranega. Politika post-resnice je univerzalen, pojavlja se na obeh političnih polih, in globalen pojav. Zaradi svoje nefaktične narave in podpihovanja čustev, predstavlja neposredno grožnjo liberalnim družbenim vrednotam in liberalni demokraciji. Magistrsko delo oblikuje in predlaga koncept politike post-resnice, s pomočjo katerega obravnava brexit kampanjo. The thesis deals with the phenomenon of post-truth and the related new form of post-truth politics. The reflection of the latter is conducted through the case of the Brexit campaign, the UK's referendum on exit from the European Union. Post-truth is the result of complex combination of different processes, in general it is about changes in the economic, cultural and media fields, along with technological advances. Post-truth denotes an environment associated with the actions of individuals in which factual facts are neglected and emotions and personal beliefs are at the forefront. Related to this is the emergence of a post-truth politics, which is characterized by indifference to the facts, but rather addresses emotions and reinforces the previous beliefs of voters, their prejudices and stereotypes. Post-truth politics primarily addresses frustrated and marginalized voters. Marginalization is defined in the broadest sense, as each individual can find oneself feeling being marginalized. The politics of post-truth is universal, appearing on both political poles and a global phenomenon. Because of its non-factual nature and appeals to emotion, it poses a direct threat to liberal values and liberal democracy. The thesis formulates and proposes concepts of truth policies, through which Brexit campaign is addressed.

This paper focuses on the rationalist theory of evidence and identifies a set of two basic theses and their underlying philosophical assumptions shared by the Anglo-American and the Latin versions of rationalism: the thesis of the pursuit of truth as the preferential aim of legal evidence; the thesis of evidentiary justification as a special case of general epistemic justification; the assumption of the notion of truth as correspondence; the assumption of ontological and epistemological differentiation of rationalism from both skepticism and naive cognitivism. The author sustains that these theses and assumptions are imprecise in important aspects and that this is what allows the adoption of the rationalist conception to function as the common frame for current debates in legal theory of evidence, a frame that closes some discussions (namely, those concerning the notion of truth) and opens others (those regarding the degree of specificity of legal evidentiary justification and the appropriate way to allocate the risk of error). Dokazna teorija: ali smo sedaj res vsi »racionalisti«? Članek obravnava jedro racionalistične teorije dokazov. Ob tem prepozna sklop osnovnih trditev in filozofskih predpostavk, ki so skupne tako anglo-ameriškim kot romanskim različicam racionalizma: to so trditev o zasledovanju resnice kot preferenčnemu cilju pravnega dokazovanja, trditev o dokaznem utemeljevanju kot posebni vrsti splošnega spoznavnostnega utemeljevanja, predpostavka o korespondenčnem pojmovanju resnice in ontološko ter spoznavoslovno razlikovanje racionalizma od skepticizma in naivnega kognitivizma. Avtorica zatrjuje, da so omenjene trditve in predpostavke v pomembnih ozirih nejasne, prav zaradi teh nejanosti pa da lahko v sodobnih razpravah o teoriji pravnih dokazov posvojitev racionalistišnega pojmovanja deluje kot skupni okvir, ki ene razprave zapira (posebej tisto o pojmovanju resnice), medtem ko druge odpira (takšni sta razprava o stopnji posebnosti dokaznega utemeljevanja v pravu in razprava o primernost razporeditve tveganja napak).

Računovodsko predračunavanje je eden izmed najmočnejših inštrumentov menedžmenta pri nadziranju poslovanja podjetja, vendar ga zaposleni, ki predračune pripravljajo, lahko izigravajo. To seveda povečuje možnost namernih napak in omejuje učinkovitost uporabe predračunov za nadzor. Vendar raziskave na tem področju kažejo, da je izigravanje pri pripravi predračunov omejeno z dovzetnostjo zaposlenih za socialne norme. Poznavanje takšnega pojava bi lahko pomagalo menedžerjem pri nadzoru procesa predračunavanja. Sedanji pristopi nadzora so namreč pogosto togi in velikokrat omejujejo uporabnost predračunov, s tem pa tudi zmanjšujejo uspešnost poslovanja podjetja. Nov pristop s pomočjo merjenja in poznavanja psihološkega profila zaposlenih bi menedžerjem omogočil lažje določanje potrebnih kontrol, kar bi lahko povečalo uspešnost podjetja. Diplomsko delo v veliki meri temelji na raziskavi, objavljeni v reviji Management accounting reserch, z naslovom Why don't people lie? Negative affect intensity and preferences for honesty. V raziskavi avtorji Bay, A., Douthit, J., in Fulmer, B., ta pojav poimenujejo dovzetnost za resnico. Budgets are strong instruments in the management control system but they are prone to gaming behavior. This, in turn, creates slack and limits the effectiveness of budgets. Research suggests, however, that subordinates have preferences for adhering to a social norm of honesty that limits slack in their budgetary reporting. Understanding such a phenomenon could help managers with better control over the budgetary process. Present control systems are often too strict, which limits the usability of budgets. This, in turn, limits the success of the company. A new approach with knowledge of the psychological profile of employes would enable managers to determine the level of control over budgetary reporting. This dissertation is based on a research paper published in the journal Management accounting research, with the title »Why don't people lie? Negative affect intensity and preferences for honesty«.

Po apostolski konstituciji Veritatis gaudium papeža Frančiška je temeljno poslanstvo teologije prenos veselja resnice. To idejo bomo v razpravi postavili v zgodovinsko perspektivo, ki jo je odprl egiptolog Jan Assmann. Ob primerjanju svetopisemskega monoteizma z razvojem religije v starem Egiptu ugotavlja, da sta zanj značilni opciji za resnico in za zvestobo, ki narekujeta zahtevo po spreobrnjenju. To ustvari novega »monoteističnega človeka«. Čeprav je mogoče nastanek monoteizma razumeti v luči »osne dobe« (Karl Jaspers), ki je odprla »transcendentalno vizijo«, se svetopisemski monoteizem od drugih razlikuje po ločitvi politične in verske sfere, do katere so v Izraelu privedle travmatske izkušnje ob izgubi kraljestva v času asirske, babilonske, perzijske in helenistične nadoblasti. Izrael je svojo identiteto poiskal v Svetem pismu pojem Izrael je s tem izgubil politični pomen in dobil religijskega. Pri tem je najpomembnejšo vlogo odigrala jezikovna redukcija, ki je razodetje skrčila na Pismo. Posledica te redukcije je bila jasno razlikovanje med resničnim Bogom in maliki, med katerimi je najmočnejši malik totalne države, v Svetem pismu simbolno prikazan kot »Egipt«. Ta zmožnost razlikovanja, imenovana tudi »mojzesovsko razlikovanje«, je najgloblja značilnost svetopisemskega monoteizma. Svetopisemska kultura promovira resnico, ki pa jo razume v šibkem smislu, kakor jo razume apostolska konstitucija. According to the apostolic constitution Veritatis gaudium by Pope Francis, the fundamental mission of theology is the transmission of the joy of truth. This idea will be discussed in the historical perspective developed by Egyptologist Jan Assmann. By comparing the rise of biblical monotheism with the evolution of religion in ancient Egypt, he finds that the specificity of biblical monotheism provides two fundamental options: option for the truth and option for the faithfulness. They both require conversion, which creates a new »monotheistic man«. Although the rise of monotheism may be understood in the light of the Axis Era (Karl Jaspers), which opened a »transcendental vision«, biblical monotheism differs from other types of monotheisms because it separates the political and religious spheres. This separation was the consequence of Israel’s traumatic experiences, namely, its loss of political autonomy under Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian and Hellenistic political supremacy. Israel found its new identity in the Bible. Therefore, the political dimension of Israel’s self-understanding was substituted by religious meaning. In this regard, the most important role was played by linguistic reduction of the revelation to the Script. The reduction resulted in a capacity to distinguish between the true God and idols, among which the most powerful is the total state, symbolized in the Bible as »Egypt«. This new capacity of distinction is also known as »mosaic distinction«, arguably the most consequential aspect of biblical monotheism. Biblical culture, however, promotes the truth in a weak sense as in the manner presented in the apostolic constitution

Članek obravnava iskanje resnice, kot se kaže v izbranih delih Ivana Cankarja, Fjodorja Mihajloviča Dostojevskega in Leva Nikolajeviča Tolstoja. Ivan Cankar je s svojim načelom etičnega poslanstva in resnice kot »najvišje ideje« umetnosti ostal zvest vse življenje. Bil je prvi slovenski pisatelj, ki je posebno globoko prodrl v problematiko človekove vesti. Dostojevski prek svojih literarnih junakov predstavlja svoje poglede o duševnih, moralnih in metafizičnih konfliktih. Tolstoj v svojih romanih kaže ogledalo človeških strasti, moči, šibkosti, groze in upanja rešitev za izpraznjenost sodobnega sveta vidi v duhovnosti, ki najučinkoviteje združuje ljudi vseh kultur in religij. Primerjava med avtorji in njihovimi deli odpira prostor za intertekstualno analizo in interreligiozno hermenevtiko. To omogoča razmislek o vplivu in recepciji literature velikih pisateljev, ki so analitiki človeške duše, na široko javnost v duhu ekumenizma in medreligijskega dialoga This article deals with the search for truth as manifested in selected works by Ivan Cankar, F. M. Dostoyevsky and L. N. Tolstoy. Throughout his life, Ivan Cankar remained true to his principle of having an ethical mission and of Truth being the “ultimate idea” of art. He was the first Slovenian writer to truly penetrate into the special problems of the human consciousness. Dostoyevsky, meanwhile, presents his views on psychological, moral and metaphysical conflicts through his literary protagonists. Tolstoy’s novels are a mirror for human passions, strengths, weaknesses, fears and hopes he sees the solution for the emptiness of the modern world in a spirituality that effectively unites people of all cultures and religions. Comparing these authors and their works gives rise to intertextual analysis and interreligious hermeneutics. This allows us to reflect on the influence and reception these great writers – these analysts of the human soul – on the general public in the spirit of ecumenism and interreligious dialogue.

Pričujoče magistrsko delo kritično analizira kompleksna in kontingenčna razmerja med politiko in lažjo ter tudi družbo, iz katere se prvi dve napajata. Politika pooseblja na eni strani skupek raznih konfliktov, zarot, hinavščine, izdajstva, na drugi strani pa predstavlja moč, sredstvo za delo v korist države, za narodov blagor oziroma skupno dobro. Complex and contingent relationships between politics and lie inside the society where they exist are critically analysed in my master thesis. On one side politics presents the mass of conflicts, conspiracies, hypocrisy, and betrayal, but on the other side politics presents power, the means to work for the benefit of people and the country.

Osebnostne pravice pripadajo človeku, vsakemu v enaki meri. Njihov namen je, da posameznika varujejo pred drugimi, četudi tem drugim ni povsem enak. Pravice, ki jih zagotavlja Zakon o pacientovih pravicah se nedvomno uvrščajo med osebnostne pravice. Zakon o pacientovih pravicah je odnos med zdravnikom in pacientom postavil na enakopravne temelje, dejansko je uzakonil partnerski odnos med njima. Pojasnilna dolžnost torej izhaja iz zakona in omogoča pacientu, da sodeluje v postopku svojega zdravljenja, da samostojno oblikuje svojo voljo in s tem svobodno in samostojno odloča o svojem zdravljenju. Zdravnik ima pravno in etično obveznost, da pacientu posreduje resnične in prave podatke o njegovem stanju, saj so le ti lahko podlaga za odločitev pacienta. Zakon o pacientovih pravicah pa je uzakonil tudi pravico zdravnika, da določena dejstva zamolči, kadar »zdravnik glede na okoliščine oceni, da bi mu takšno obvestilo povzročilo resno zdravstveno škodo, razen kadar pacient, ki je sposoben odločanja v svojo najboljšo zdravstveno korist, izrecno zahteva, da je o svojem zdravstvenem stanju popolnoma obveščen.” Govorimo o zdravnikovi pravici do terapevtskega privilegija oziroma obzirnem molku zdravnika. Vendar s tem, ko zdravnik pacientu odtegne določene podatke oziroma ga ne seznani o stanju bolezni, načinih in pričakovanih posledicah zdravljenja ali tudi o posledicah opustitve zdravljenja, pričakovanih posledicah posegov ali zdravil, mu odvzame možnost, da oblikuje svojo voljo in s tem, da se svobodno in samostojno odloča o svojem zdravljenju. S tem pa tudi posega v pacientovo zasebnost in njegovo človeško dostojanstvo, ne nazadnje pa je pravica do samoodločanja tudi ustavno zagotovljena pravica. Zdravnika s pravico do terapevtskega privilegija vrača v paternalistični odnos do pacienta, ko je bil le-ta samo object v postopku zdravljenja. Posega tudi v zaupen odnos med zdravnikom in pacientom, v odnos medsebojnega spoštovanja. Dejansko gre za situacijo, ki bi jo lahko opisali z besedami »ne laži, vendar tudi ne povej vse resnice«. To načenja zaupanje v zdravnika. Ne glede na to, da je razlog zdravnika dobronameren, pa lahko molk ali omejena razlaga pri pacientu povzroči več nelagodja in strahu, kot če bi poznal resnico. Odnos med zdravnikom in pacientom je odnos, ki mora temeljiti na zaupanju, ta pa lahko temelji samo na odkriti komunikaciji. Osnova za zaupanje ne morejo biti polresnice in zavajanje. Ustrezno poučen pacient ima boljšo možnost komunikacije s svojimi bližnjimi, v delovnem okolju in tudi več zaupanja v zdravnika in medicino na sploh. Pravica do uveljavitve terapevtskega privilegija je upravičena v primeru vnaprej izražene volje pacienta, da ne želi biti seznanjen s svojim zdravstvenim stanjem in v primeru pacientov z duševnimi motnjami. V vseh drugih primerih pa pravica do terapevtskega privilegija ne more biti ekskulpacijski razlog za neopravljeno ali slabo opravljeno pojasnilno dolžnost zdravnika. Personality rights belong to a person, to everyone equally. Their purpose is to the individual to protect against others, even if the other is not exactly the same. The rights provided by the Law on patient rights are without doubt classified as personality rights. The law is the relationship between the doctor and the patient placed on a equal footing, in fact it has legalized partner relationship between them. An explanatory duty, therefore, arises from the law and enables the patient to participate in the process of his treatment, to independently form his will and thereby freely and independently decide on his treatment. The doctor has a legal and ethical obligation to provide the patient with genuine and correct information about his condition, because only this is the basic information for the patient's decision. The law has legalized also the doctor's right to suppress certain facts, when "depending on the circumstances, the doctor estimates that such a notification would cause him serious health damage, except where a patient who is able to make decisions for his / her best health benefit explicitly requires that he / she wants to be fully informed of his state of health". This refers to the doctor's right to a therapeutic privilege or a considerte silence of a doctor. By disposing of specific data to a patient or informing the patient about the condition of the illness, the ways and the expected consequences of the treatment, or the consequences of the failure to treat, the expected consequences of interventions or medications, he will be deprived of his ability to form his own will and to freely and independently decide about his own treatment. By doing so, it interferes with patient's privacy and human dignity, and last but not least, the right to self-determination is also a constitutionally guaranteed right. The doctor returns the paternalistic attitude towards the patient with the right to a therapeutic privilege, when it was only an object in the treatment process. It also interferes with the confidential relationship between the doctor and the patient and also in the relationship of mutual respect between them. In fact, this is a situation that you could describe with words "not to lie, but also do not tell all the truth." This undermines trust in a doctor and medicine in general. Even if the doctor's behavior is well-intentioned, a silence or limited explanation of facts to the patient can cause more discomfort in fear than if he knew the truth. The relationship between a doctor and the patient is a relationship that must be based on trust and good communication. The basis for trust can not be half-hearted and misleading. A properly educated patient has a better chance of communicating with his immediate family, working environment and has more trust in his doctor and medicine in general. The right to exercise a therapeutic privilege is justified in the case of a patient's pre-expressed will, that he does not want to be acquainted with his state of health and in the case of patients with mental disorders. However in all other cases the right to a therapeutic privilege can not be an exculpatory reason for the doctors' duty or duty that is not performed or poorly performed.

V diplomski nalogi se bom ukvarjal z iskanjem najboljše in hkrati pravne odločitve s pomočjo pravičnosti, ki jo bom postavil za skupni imenovalec obema. V uvodu bom pojma pravičnost in pravo razdelil, saj nista nujno neločljivo povezana, nato pa bom skozi nalogo skušal oba pojma ponovno zdruţiti z namenom, da bi dokazal, da je le pravična pravna odločitev najboljša. V prvem delu se bom posvetil predstavitvi teorij, ki so se in se še ukvarjajo s pravičnostjo. Omejil se bom na teorije o materialni in formalni pravičnosti, vsebinskih obrazcev pravičnosti in načinov njihovega vsebinskega zapolnjevanja in razumevanja ter pogledov naravnega prava in pravnega pozitivizma na idejo pravičnosti. V drugem delu bom prikazal nekaj primerov, ki veljajo za teţke odločitve in na kak način naj razumemo idejo pravičnosti, da bi lahko tudi v takih primerih našli najboljšo pravno odločitev. Dotaknil se bom ekonomske analize prava, vprašanja materialne resnice in sodnikove svobode pri odločanju. V tretjem delu bom predstavil dve odločitvi sodišč. Prva se nanaša na odločitev Ustavnega sodišča v primeru, ko pritoţnik zatrjuje, da ne obstaja pravna podlaga za izpodbijani pravni akt in argumentiranje sodišča, ki je pritoţbi ugodilo. Drugi primer bo sodba Višjega sodišča, ki obravnava pritoţbo na sodbo, izdano na podlagi sporazuma o priznanju krivde, torej brez natančnega ugotavljanja materialne resnice o dogodku. Na koncu se bom pogajanjem in sporazumu o priznanju krivde nekoliko bolj posvetil in izrazil pomisleke o primernosti instituta, ki ţrtvuje ugotavljanje materialne resnice na račun izogibanja sodnim zaostankom. V sklepu bom potrdil hipotezo, da je izmed več moţnih najboljša le ena pravna odločitev, a le, če interpretira pravičnost v vsej svoji kompleksnosti. In the graduation thesis, I will deal with searching the best and at the same time legal decision based on justice, which will be a common denominator for both. In introduction, I will split the terms justice and law, since they are not necessarily inseparably related. Throughout the thesis, I will then try to join both of the terms again with the purpose to prove that only fair legal decision is the best one. In the first part, I will focus on presentation of the theories that have been dealing with justice. I will remain limited on the theories on material and formal justice, substantive forms of justice, and methods of their substantive filling and understanding, as well as perspectives of natural law and legal positivism on the idea of justice. In the second part, I will present some examples that are believed to be difficult decisions, and in what way we should understand the idea of justice in order to find the best legal decision also in such cases. I will mention economic analysis of law, a question of material truth, and judge’s decision-making freedom. In the third part, I will present two decisions of courts. The first one is related to the decision of Constitutional Court in a case when a complainant claims there is no legal basis for the challenged legal act and arguments of the court which granted the appeal. The second case will be a judgement of a Higher Court which deals with the appeal to judgement delivered on the basis of agreement on guilt confession, therefore, without a precise establishment of the material truth about the event. At the end, I will particularly focus on negotiations and agreement on guilt confession and express second thoughts about adequacy of the institute that sacrifices establishment of material truth at the expense of the court backlogs. In the conclusion, I will confirm the hypothesis that among several possibilities, the best one is only one legal decision, but only if interprets justice in all of its complexity.

Diplomska naloga opisuje uporabnost različnih dokaznih standardov in prima facie dokaza v pravdnem postopku. V diplomski nalogi sem najprej predstavila nekatera temeljna načela civilnega postopka, ki se povezujejo z vsebino dokaznih standardov. V nadaljevanju diplomske naloge sem pisala o dokazovanju in različnih vrstah dokazov. Pisala sem tudi o trditvenem in dokaznem bremenu, v jedru pa o dokaznih standardih v civilnem postopku s primeri sodb. Poznamo različne dokazne standarde, ki se povezujejo s stopnjami materialne resnice, ki so gotovost, prepričanje, verjetnost in dvom. Posebej sem se posvetila prima facie dokazu, ki v našem pravu še skorajda ni uporabljen institut, malo pa je tudi o njem napisanega v naši literaturi. Pravzaprav, tega instituta naš Zakon o pravdnem postopku ne pozna. Pri preučevanju tega instituta mi je pomagala sodba s področja gospodarskega prava, čeprav je bil ta instiut v tem primeru napačno uporabljen. Standard of evidence in civil procedure diploma describes usefulness of various standards of evidence in civil procedure and usefulness of prima facie evidence. Firstly, I wrote about some of the basic principles of civil procedure, which are connected to the concept of standard of evidence. Later on, I wrote about proving and various sorts of evidence. I also wrote about the burden of proof and burden of claim. The core of my diploma are standards of evidence, I also included cases. There are different standards of evidence, that are connected to material truth levels, which are certainty, beyond reasonable doubt, probability and doubt. I dedicated special attention to prima facie evidence, which was hardly ever used in Slovenian judicial practice and few words were written in Slovenian law literature. Actually, Slovenian Civil Procedure Law does not mention the concept of prima facie evidence. Very helpful with my research of prima facie evidence was an economic law case, although in this case the concept of prima facie evidence was not properly used.

Diplomsko delo obravnava vprašanje dokaznih standardov v izvršilnem postopku. Sami temi se najprej približamo preko spoznavanja vsebin, ki predstavljajo izhodišče dokaznih standardov v izvršilnem postopku. To dosežemo preko spoznavanja samega izvršilnega postopka in dokaznih standardov ter načel in ostalih vsebin, ki jih ovsebinjajo, kot je na primer načelo proste presoje dokazov (pomeni, da je sodniku prepuščena presoja o tem ali neko dejstvo šteje za resnično ali ne, seveda ob upoštevanju celotnega postopka), ki izhaja iz načela materialne resnice oz. je materialna resnica njegova podlaga. Spoznati moramo tudi, kaj je sama resnica in kakšna stopnja spoznanja o resnici je potrebna, da v izvršilnem postopku dosežemo zadovoljivo stopnjo dokaznega standarda. Poleg resnice je pri obravnavi dokaznega standarda drug pomembni sestavni del proces dokazovanja. Stopnja resnice, ki jo mora sodnik med spoznanjem doseči, je stopnja resnice o tistih dejstvih, ki jih stranka v postopku dokazuje in na katera opira svoje zahtevke. Izpolnitev dokaznega standarda je namreč uspeh dokazovanja, je dokazanost. Pri tem se v precejšnji meri naslonimo na pravdni postopek, sestavni del katerega dokazni postopek je in njegove zakonske določbe, ki se smiselno uporabljajo v izvršilnem postopku. Tu se srečamo z dokaznim bremenom v povezavi s trditvenim bremenom. Za stranke je namreč izrednega pomena, katera od njiju mora dejstva zatrjevati, saj mora dejstva, ki jih zatrjuje, opreti na dokaze (dokazno breme), da se ne bi postopek končal z non-liquet situacijo, kar bi pomenilo neuspešen dokazni postopek. Ker se dokazi presojajo na podlagi dokaznih standardov, nas to privede do spoznanja, da nižje postavljeni dokazni standard pomeni večjo verjetnost, da bo dokazni postopek uspešno izpeljan in obratno, obratno pa velja za višji dokazni standard. Za uspešno razumevanje samega pojma dokaznega standarda in presojanja o tem, kakšna stopnja dokaznega standarda je primerna v posameznem primeru, je dobro, da poznamo tudi teorije, ki so jih oz. jih še zastopajo nekateri pravniki in teoretiki. Pri tem izstopa predvsem teorija korespondence (spoznanje je resnično, kadar subjektivna slika ustreza objektivni stvarnosti), ki je opremljena z vedno več kritikami novejših teorij. Ta teorija bi namreč pomenila zahtevo po visoki stopnji prepričanja, morda lahko govorimo celo o gotovosti dokaznega standarda, ki pa jo je, glede na vsa znana dejstva in nekatere nepremostljive ovire med procesom spoznanja, težko pričakovati ali celo zahtevati. Zato se večina novodobnih teoretikov zavzema za verjetnost kot stopnjo dokaznega standarda in celo njeno prožnost (od verjetnosti do pretežne verjetnosti). Ob obravnavi teme hitro pridemo do spoznanja, da je definicija samega dokaznega standarda problematična in velja za eno najbolj spornih vprašanj teorije in prakse ter kliče po vsebinski napolnitvi. Če se osredotočimo na izvršilni postopek, se tam v večini primerov zahteva dokazni standard verjetnost, sicer naj to še vedno ne bi veljalo za meritorne sklepe (odločanje o glavni stvari), je pa dokazni standard izrecno znižan v postopku za izdajo začasne odredbe. To določa tudi rek fumus boni iuris, saj naj bi to vodilo v bolj smiselne, hitre postopke in pomenilo večjo ekonomičnost. To v izvršilnem postopku izhaja iz še enega vidnejšega načela, načela stroge formalnelegalitete. Po tem načelu še enkrat več presojamo o smiselnosti postavljanja previsokih dokaznih standardov v izvršilnem postopku. Izvršilni sodnik je namreč pri svojemodločanju vezan na izvršilni naslov in mora v njem ugotovljeno terjatev upoštevati.Prepovedano je ponovno odločanje o že pravnomočni zadevi. Ponovno pa se vprašanje dokaznih standardov postavlja pri odločanju o pravnih sredstvih v izvršilnem postopku, predvsem pri odločanju o ugovoru dolžnika in ugovoru tretjega. Tudi tukaj je nova ureditev prinesla spremembe, s tem ko prepušča dokončno odločitev o tem izvršilnemu sodniku in ne napotuje več na pravdo, četudi gre za The undergraduate thesis deals with the matter of standard of proof in an enforcement procedure. We have described the topic through indentifying the content that represents the platform of standards of proof in the enforcement procedure. This can be achieved through indentifying the enforcement procedure itself, the standards of proof as well as principles and other content that makes them meaninful such as the principle of discretion of proof (which means that the judge can decide whether a fact is real or not in this case of course the whole procedure is taken into account), which derives from the principle of material truth i.e. the material truth is its platform. We have to understand what the truth itself is and what stage of notion aboutthe truth is required to reach a satisfactory stage of the standard of proof in the enforcement procedure. There is yet another important element besides the truth in the procedure of standard of proof, namely the process of proving. The stage of the truth that the judge requires to reach during the recognition is the stage of the truth about the facts that the party to a proceeding proves and bases its demand upon. The fulfilment of such standard of proof is namely the success of evidence-taking itself i.e. corroboration. At this point we have been using the civil proceedings and its statutory provisions thatare reasonably used in the enforcement procedure. We are now faced with the burden of proof in the connection with the burden of allegation. It is namely of extraordinary importance to the parties which one of them has to allege the facts, since he/she has to base its facts on proof (burden of proof) in order for the procedure not to be concluded in non-liquet situation, which would mean an unsuccessful evidence-taking procedure. Since the evidences are viewed based on the standards of proof the latter leads us to the notion that lower set standards of proof mean greater possibility that the evidence-taking procedure shall be successfully carried out and vice versa, i.e. the same notion is applicable for higher standard of proof. To fully understand the definition of the standard of proof itself as well as the view of which stage of standard of proof is appropriate in individual case it is good that we arealso aware of the theories which are or which were represented by some of the jurists and theorists. At this point the theory of correspondence stands out (the notion is real when the subjective image complies with its objective reality) which however has recieved more and more critics of the modern theories. This theory would namely indicate the demand for a high stage of belief, we could even say the certainty of the standard of proof, which is nevertheless hard to expect due to the all known facts and some of the obstacles that cannot be crossed. Therefore the majority of new age theorists talk in favour of probability in the sense of being the stage of the standard of proof and even in the favour of its flexibility (ranging from probability to substantial probability). In discussing the topic we quickly note that the definition of the standard of proof itself is problematic and is known as one of the most disputable issues of the theory and on court and is in desperate need of amendment. If we focus on the enforcement procedure the standard of proof which is demanded in most of the case is the probability. However this should still not hold true for decision on the merits (decision on the substance of the case). The standard of proof is extremely low, nevertheless, in the proceedings of issuing an interim decision. The latter is also identified by the phrase fumus boni iuris, since this should lead to more reasonable and fast procedures and to be more economical. This derives also from yet another more obvious principle in the enforcement procedure namely the principles of strict formal legality. Under this principle we judge once again about the sense of setting the standard of proof too high in the enforcement procedure. The judge is namely bound in hi

S pojmom resnice se ukvarja predvsem filozofija, sposojajo pa si ga tudi druge znanosti in stroke. Tako je pojem resnice najprej filozofska kategorija, šele nato moralno-etična, psihološka, pravna … V filozofiji se je oblikovalo več skupin teorij resnic, najbolj znane so korespondenčne, varčne in epistemske teorije resnice. Za pravo, predvsem civilno, je značilna konsenzualna teorija resnice, za kazensko pa, tako trdi večina avtorjev, korespondenčna. Korespondenčna teorija resnice ima za resničen tisti stavek, ki je skladen z realnostjo. Vendar je v kazenskem procesnem pravu preveč zavestnih odstopanj od realne slike, zato je primerneje govoriti, da v kazenskem procesnem pravu velja ena od epistemskih teorij resnice, in sicer konstruktivistična. Slednja še vedno priznava veljavo korespondenčni, a hkrati opozarja tudi na aktivno udeležbo človeka pri oblikovanju končne resnice. Največje ovire pri iskanju resnice v kazenskem postopku predstavljajo dokazne prepovedi, ki ščitijo predvsem človekove pravice, poleg teh pa poznamo še nekatere druge ovire, ki ne izhajajo nujno iz zakona, temveč so človeške narave. The term truth is generally studied by philosophy, but the term is also used by other sciences and professions. This means that truth is philosphical term first, in second place is moral-ethical, psychological, juridical etc. There is more groups of theories of truth formed in philosopy. The most known are correspondence theories, minimalist theories and epistemic theories. The consensus theory is typical for the purpose of law, especially for the civil law. On the other hand, correspondence theory, argued by the majority of lecturers, is accepted in criminal law. Correspondence theory argues that a true statement is the one that is in accordance with reality. But in criminal processual law there is too many wilful deviations from reality. That is why one of the epistemic theories, so called constructivist theory, is proper for the purpose of criminal processual law. Constructivist theory still acknowledges correspondence theory but also points at our active participation in forming the final truth. The greatest impediments at truth finding in criminal procedure are evidentiary prohibitions, which shields human rights mostly. There are also some other obstacles, not originating in law on criminal procedure, which are of human nature.