izpis_h1_title_alt

Izbira Sodnega sveta : ignorantia rationis nocet?
ID Fajdiga, Mohor (Author)

.pdfPDF - Presentation file, Download (152,11 KB)
MD5: AC6685AEB0323171FB48CC2F55DDDB3D
URLURL - Source URL, Visit https://www.pf.uni-lj.si/zalozba/zzr-33178/zadnja-stevilka-33179/ This link opens in a new window
Description: The provided source URL applies to the current issue. After the publication of a new issue, the data for this article will be available in the archive of the journal (https://www.pf.uni-lj.si/en/publisher/llr/).

Abstract
Kadrovanje v sodstvu je trenutno v Evropi posebej vroča tema. V Sloveniji ima v izbirnih postopkih osrednjo vlogo Sodni svet, ki naj bi kot garant sodniške neodvisnosti zagotavljal izbor najbolj kompetentnih kandidatov. Toda postopek izbire ni pregleden, obrazložitev izbire pa je preskopa in neprepričljiva. Avtor zato najprej oriše odziv slovenskih sodišč na táko odločanje Sodnega sveta. V sodni praksi se je uveljavil zadržan sodni nadzor, ki temelji na zaupanju diskrecijski izbiri Sodnega sveta. V prispevku je zato slovenska ureditev ocenjena v luči najnovejših evropskih standardov: pravice do učinkovitega sodnega varstva in z zakonom ustanovljenega sodišča, iz 6. člena Evropske konvencije o človekovih pravicah in 19. člena Pogodbe o EU. Kot problematična se izkažeta predvsem neustrezna obrazložitev odločitev in dejstvo, da Sodni svet v nasprotju z veljavno zakonodajo ne piše zapisnika o posvetovanju.

Language:Slovenian
Keywords:sodni svet, imenovanje sodnikov, obseg obrazložitve, vladavina prava, evropski standardi, transparentnost, z zakonom ustanovljeno sodišče, zapisnik o posvetovanju, Tsanova-Getcheva, Ástráđsson
Work type:Article
Typology:1.01 - Original Scientific Article
Organization:PF - Faculty of Law
Publication status:Published
Publication version:Version of Record
Year:2021
Number of pages:Str. 63-83, 242, 252
Numbering:Letn. 81
PID:20.500.12556/RUL-140826 This link opens in a new window
UDC:347.962(497.4)
ISSN on article:1854-3839
DOI:10.51940/2021.1.63-83 This link opens in a new window
COBISS.SI-ID:90682627 This link opens in a new window
Copyright:
Licenca CC BY-ND 4.0 je navedena v kolofonu serijske publikacije (https://www.pf.uni-lj.si/media/zzr.2021.web.pdf) in na pristajalni strani posameznega letnika (https://www.pf.uni-lj.si/zalozba/zzr-33178/zadnja-stevilka-33179/). (Datum opombe: 3. 10. 2022)
Publication date in RUL:19.09.2022
Views:1194
Downloads:124
Metadata:XML DC-XML DC-RDF
:
Copy citation
Share:Bookmark and Share

Record is a part of a journal

Title:Zbornik znanstvenih razprav
Shortened title:Zb. znan. razpr.
Publisher:Pravna fakulteta
ISSN:1854-3839
COBISS.SI-ID:223437312 This link opens in a new window

Licences

License:CC BY-ND 4.0, Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
Link:http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/
Description:Under the NoDerivatives Creative Commons license one can take a work released under this license and re-distribute it, but it cannot be shared with others in adapted form, and credit must be provided to the author.

Secondary language

Language:English
Title:Selection by the Judicial Council: ignorantia rationis nocet?
Abstract:
Recruitment in the judiciary is currently a particularly hot topic in Europe. In Slovenia, the Judicial Council, as a guarantor of judicial independence having a central role in the appointment procedure, is supposed to ensure the selection of the most competent candidates. However, the selection process fails to be transparent and the reasoning of the choice is insufficient and unconvincing. Therefore, the author first outlines the Slovenian courts’ response to such decision-making of the Judicial Council. Restrained judicial review based on trust in the discretionary choice by the Judicial Council has become established in case law. Therefore, the contribution assesses the Slovenian legal framework in light of the latest European standards: the right to efficient judicial protection and to a tribunal established by law from Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Article 19 of the Treaty of EU. Especially, the inadequate reasoning of decisions and the fact that the Judicial Council does not write a record of the consultation in violation of the applicable legislation turns to be problematic.

Keywords:council of the judiciary, appointment of judges, extent of reasoning, European standards, transparency, tribunal established by law, record of consultation, Cooperation and Verification Mechanism, Tsanova-Getcheva, Ástráđsson

Similar documents

Similar works from RUL:
Similar works from other Slovenian collections:

Back