Metrika članka

  • citati u SCindeksu: 0
  • citati u Google Scholaru:[=>]
  • posete u prethodnih 30 dana:4
  • preuzimanja u prethodnih 30 dana:3
članak: 1 od 1  
Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu
2016, vol. 64, br. 3, str. 192-204
jezik rada: engleski
članak
doi:10.5937/AnaliPFB1603192K


Constitutional provisions on judicial independence and EU standards
(naslov ne postoji na srpskom)
Institut za kriminološka i sociološka istraživanja, Beograd

e-adresa: kolakius@gmail.com

Sažetak

(ne postoji na srpskom)
Implementation of the 'Checks and balances' principle as one of the milestones in modern democracies, demonstrates its full complexity when it comes to balancing guaranties of judicial independence and the need to prevent misinterpretation or abuse of the rights. Additional issue in that process is determination of the border line between constitutional and guaranties of judicial independence prescribed by law. Raising that issue opens various questions which go beyond the legal framework itself. It actually tackles the historical, political and cultural country background. Furthermore, if analyzed from the prospective of the requirements defined in the accession negotiation process with the EU, constitutional guaranties of (non)application of the EU standards might demotivate candidate countries in their efforts to achieve substantial reform results.

Ključne reči

Reference

Kolaković-Bojović, M. Organizacija pravosuđa u Republici Srbiji i Poglavlje 23 Evropske integracije i kazneno zakonodavstvo (Poglavlje 23 - norma, praksa i mere). Zlatibor-Beograd: Serbian Society for Criminal Law and Practice
Musthafa, F. Does the Government want parrot judges.
Paterson, A., Paterson, C. (2012) Guarding the guardians?, Towards an independent, accountable and diverse senior judiciary. London: Centre Forum
Stevens, R. (2004) Reform in haste and repent at leisure: lolanthe, the Lord High Executioner and Brave New World. Legal Studies, 24(1-2): 1-34
Sueur, A.L. (2004) Developing mechanisms for judicial accountability in the UK. Legal Studies, 24(1-2): 73-98