Metrics

  • citations in SCIndeks: 0
  • citations in CrossRef:0
  • citations in Google Scholar:[]
  • visits in previous 30 days:10
  • full-text downloads in 30 days:1

Contents

article: 10 from 31  
Back back to result list
2016, vol. 55, iss. 74, pp. 1-20
Confederation and federation in the general theory of law and state and in positive law
Univeristy of Niš, Faculty of Law

emailmilan@prafak.ni.ac.rs
Abstract
Scientific interest in issues concerning federalism, which implies determining the difference between a confederation (a union of confederal states) and a federation (a federal state comprising federal entities) seems to have disappeared after the dissolution of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in 1992, the country which had existed in the period from 1945 to 1992 under different names: the Democratic Federal Yugoslavia (DFY), the Federal Peoples' Republic of Yugoslavia (FPRY), and finally the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY). Although a number of other confederations or federations (notably, the Soviet Union and Czechoslovakia) ceased to exist in the 20th century, history bears witness of the establishment of two important associations of states: the United Nations Organisation (UN) and the European Union (EU). They are highly significant for Serbia, which is a member state of the UN and cherishes close cooperation with the EU. However, the dissolution of the SFRY has not resolved some important issues among its former member states. The basic postulate of these problems is the fact that the Federal Peoples' Republic of Yugoslavia (FPRY as 'the second Yugoslavia') is not the successor state of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia ('the first Yugoslavia') because 'the first Yugoslavia' was never dissolved, i.e. its international personality did not cease to exist; namely, the 'second Yugoslavia' is only the continuator state (ensuring the continuity of the state in the territory of its predecessor), just as the Kingdom of Yugoslavia was the continuator state rather than the successor state of the Kingdom of Serbia. Hence, the problem comes down to the identity of legal subjects. The essential difference between a confederation and a federation are as follows: 1) confederation member states may autonomously decide whether they would act independently abroad (e.g. to maintain diplomatic relations, to conclude international agreements, etc.); on the other hand, federal entities (members of a federation) do not have such an option, or they may possibly be given such an option (to an extend which is considered relevant) by the central (federal) government; 2) the internal borders between confederation member states may be changed only by international treaties adopted at an international conference, whereas the internal borders between federal entities may be unilaterally established and changed by the central government; 3) confederation member states, in principle, have the secession right (ius secessionis) to withdraw from the confederation, whereas federal entities have no such right. It should be noted that a confederation, as a rule, has a capacity of legal personality in international law, just as its individual members. Yet, the difference between the internal state law and public international law is quite relative. Namely, as noted by Toma Živanović, international law (both private and public) is governed by collision norms. While the essence of private international law is conflict resolution involving subjective private rights and obligations arising from the internal law of different states, the essence of public international law is resolution of conflicts between different sovereign states. The basic difference between a confederation and a federation is that each confederation member state is the holder of supreme power (sovereignty), whereas the federal units in a federal state have no such power, given the fact that sovereignty is exclusively vested in the federation (federal state). The supreme power is a de facto matter; it implies the capacity to maintain public order in a specific territory. Relying on the comparative research of different confederations and federations, the author comes to a conclusion that the 'second Yugoslavia' (FPRY) was actually a confederation (despite its official title). However, this conclusion raises the question of borders between its former member states, particularly considering that these (FPRY) borders were not established by any international treaty. Given the fact that there is legal continuity between the Kingdom of Serbia, the 'First Yugoslavia' (Kingdom of Yugoslavia) and the 'Second Yugoslavia' (FPRY), the solution must be sought in the process of restitution, which implies a return to a prior state of affairs that existed before the creation of the (first) Yugoslav state.
References
Bornhak, C. (1896) Allgemeine Staatslehre. Berlin
Burdeau, G. (1966) Traité de sciences politiques. Paris
Burke, E. (1961) The philosophy of Edmund Burke. Ann Arbor, Ed. by L.I. Bredvold / R.G. Ross
Čulinović, F. (1961) Jugoslavija između dva rata. Zagreb
Dahm, G. (1961) Völkerrecht. Stuttgart, II
de la Bigne, de V.M. (1954) L'Activité étatique. Paris
de Louter (1920) Le droit international public positif. Oxford, I, str. 509u511
de Tocqueville, A. (1951) De la démocratie en Amerique. Paris: Gain
Duguit, L. (1928) Traité de droit constitutionnel. Paris: Ancienne librairie fonte oing & C-ie, II
Đorđević, J.S. (1988) Politički sistem - prilog nauci o čoveku i samoupravljanju. Beograd: Savremena administracija
Ebers, G.J. (1910) Die Lehre vom Staatenbünde. Breslau
Fauchille, P. (1922) Traité de Droit International Public. Paris
Ficker, H.G. (1926) Vertragliche Beziehungen zwischen Gesamtstaat und Einzelstaat im Deutschen Reich. Breslau
Foignet, R. (1905) Manuel élémentaire du droit international public. Paris
Giacometti, Z., Fleiner, F. (1949) Schwezerisches Bundesstaatsrecht. Zürich
Gligorijević, B. (2002) Kralj Aleksandar Karađorđević - srpsko-hrvatski spor. Beograd
Gligorijević, B. (2001) Kralj Petar II Karađorđeviću vrtlogu britanske politike ili kako je ukinuta monarhija u Jugoslaviji. Beograd
Gurvitch, G. (1931) Le temps present et l'idée du droit social. Paris: Vrin
Hachenburger, M. (1896) De la nature juridique du protectorat. Paris, thése
Haenel, A. (1873) Studien zum deutschen Staatsrechte. Leipzig
Haenel, A. (1892) Deutsches Staatsrecht. Leipzig
Hegel, G.W.F. (1981) Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts oder Naturrecht und Staatswissenschaft im Grundrisse. Berlin, Nach der Ausgabe von E. Gans, § 274, Zusatz
Hellbling, E.C. (1956) Österreichische Verfassung - und Verwaltungsgeschichte. Wien
Isaev, I.A. (1994) Istorija gosudarstva i prava Rossii. Moskva
Jellinek, G. (1882) Die Lehre von den Staatenverbindungen. Berlin
Kelsen, H.V. (1925) Allgemeine Staatslehre. Berlin, str. 194
Kosanović, S.N. (1984) Jugoslavija bila je osuđena na smrt - smisao Moskovskog sporazuma. Zagreb: Globus
Krizman, B. (1989) Hrvatska u Prvom svjetskom ratu, hrvatsko-srpski politički odnosi. Zagreb
Kunz, J.L. (1929) Die Staatenverbindungen. Stuttgart
Laband, P. (1911) Das Staatsrecht des Deutschen Reiches. Tubingen, itd: Mohr
le Fir, L. (1934) Međunarodno javno pravo. Beograd
Milaš, N. (1902/2004) Pravoslavno crkveno pravo. Mostar-Beograd-Šibenik, 2. Izdanje, fototipsko izdanje
Nikolić, K. (2011) Srbija u Titovoj Jugoslaviji (1941-1980). Beograd
Novak, V. (1930) Antologije jugoslovenske misli i narodnog jedinstva. Beograd
Očak, I. (1988) Gorkić - Život, rad i pogibija: Prilog biografiji. Zagreb
Petranović, B. (1988) Istorija Jugoslavije 1918-1988. Beograd
Petranović, B. (1992) Srbija u Drugom svetskom ratu 1939-1945. Beograd
Petranović, B., Zečević, M. (1988) Jugoslavija 1918-1988 - tematska zbirka dokumenata. Beograd
Petrović, M. (2001) Jugoslovenska ratna zbivanja i problem odnosa međunarodnoga i 'unutrašnjega' prava. in: Jugoslovenska kriza: pouke za međunarodno pravo, Niš: Centar za publikacije Pravnog fakulteta, str. 11-35
Petrović, M. (2004) Ustav i legitimitet - donošenje, promene i važenje ustava s težištem na pitanju legitimiteta kao jednog od osnovnih pojmova teorije ustava i ustavnog prava. in: Naučno savetovanje: Ustavno pitanjeu Srbiji, Niš: Pravni fakultet
Petrović, M. (2015) Prilog učenju o osnovnim pojmovima trijalističke teorije prava i države. Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta u Nišu, br. 70, 195-227
Petrović, M. (2016) Savezna država (federacija) i savez država (konfederacija) u opštoj teoriji države i prava i pozitivnom pravu (prvi deo). Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta u Nišu, vol. 55, br. 73, str. 1-24
Petrović, M.M. (2000) Jugoslovenska ratna zbivanja i problem odnosa međunarodnoga i 'unutrašnjega' prava. Facta universitatis - series: Law and Politics, vol. 1, br. 4, str. 463-491
Puchta, G.F. (1837) Das Gewohnheitsrecht. Erlangen
Renard, G. (1930) La Théorie de ľ Institution: Essai d'ontologie juridique. Paris
Schmitt, C. (1950) Der Nomos der Erde im Völkerrecht des Jus Publicum Europaeum. Köln: Grevin Verlag
Shaw, M. (2005) International law. Cambridge
Slijepčević, Đ. (1978) Jugoslavija uoči i za vreme Drugog svetskog rata. Minhen
Stanković, D. (1998) Nikola Pašić u Narodnoj skupštini. Beograd: Službeni list SRJ
Stanković, Đ.Đ. (1995) Nikola Pašić, saveznici i stvaranje Jugoslavije. Zaječar
Strupp, K. (1920) Das Völkerrechtliche Delikt. Berlin - Stuttgart - Leipzig: W. Kohlhammer
Šepić, D. (1983) Vlada Ivana Šubašića. Zagreb
Terré, F. (2009) Introduction générale au droit. Paris, 8-e éd
Timaschew, N. (1925) Grundzüge dessowjetrussischen Staatsrechts. Mannheim
von Holtzendorff, F. (1887) Handbuch des Völkerrechts, II: Die völkerrechtliche Verfassung und Grundordnung der auswärtigen Staatsbezehungen. Berlin: C. Habel
von Liszt, F. (1927) Le Droit International: Exposé systématique. Paris
Waitz, G. (1853) Das Wesen des Bundesstaates. Kieler Monatsschrift
Weiss, A. (1899) Manuel de Droit international privé. Paris, 2-e éd
Westerkamp, J.B. (1892) Staatenbund undBundesstaat: Untersuchungen über die Praxis und das Recht der modernen Bünde. Leipzig
Živanović, T. (1959) Sistem sintetičke pravne filozofije. Beograd