izpis_h1_title_alt

Public benefit and public interest – two sides of the same coin?
ID Sever, Tina (Author)

.pdfPDF - Presentation file, Download (380,63 KB)
MD5: FD68EE138785B546EE186DDDCA3F42C0
URLURL - Source URL, Visit https://cepar.fu.uni-lj.si/index.php/CEPAR/article/view/598 This link opens in a new window

Abstract
Purpose: Driven by the question of how the concepts of public interest and public benefit differ, this paper delves into the Slovenian legal system. Through an in-depth analysis of legal concepts, national regulations, and case law from the Slovenian Constitutional Court and selected cases from the European Court of Human Rights, its aim is to illuminate the key differences between both terms. Ultimately, the paper seeks to establish fundamental guidelines for understanding the distinct meaning and application of each concept. Design/methodology/approach: The research is based on a content analysis research design, reviewing secondary literature sources. It employs qualitative methods by analysing the relevant theoretical points, rules, and constitutional case law in the Slovenian legal system, as well as selected European Court of Human Rights case law. The analysis focuses on identifying and extracting key theoretical arguments, legal definitions, and practical applications of both concepts. To distinguish between public benefit and public interest, the analysis adopts a comparative approach, examining how each concept is defined, applied, and balanced in different legal contexts. Additionally, synthesis is used to identify commonalities and divergences between different perspectives on these concepts. Finally, conclusions about the relationship between public benefit and public interest are drawn based on the analysed data. Findings: Public interest and public benefit are abstract concepts. The analysis of relevant Slovenian systemic regulations shows that the two are sometimes applied interchangeably. However, theory suggests that there are certain differences in terms of their tangibility and enforceability. Constitutional case law refers to both concepts in a general way without fully defining their content, yet it does not treat them as synonyms. Academic contribution to the field: Public interest and public benefit are central concepts of public administration science. Public interest is key in defining and shaping administrative relations decided in an administrative procedure. It represents the core value of the public sector, ensuring that its operations are legitimate. Public benefit, on the other hand, is the general benefit of an organised wider community, superior to the benefits of individuals and generally considered equivalent to substantive legality. As public and private interests collide, state intervention with appropriate regulation is necessary to protect the public benefit. Originality/significance/value: This research contributes to the understanding of the concepts of public interest and public benefit within the Slovenian legal system and is a novelty in the field as no such overview has been undertaken before. Its value lies in the analysis of Slovenian constitutional case law over the last twenty-two years and insights into European Court of Human Rights case law. The focus on European Court of Human Rights and Slovenian legislation and case law limits the generalisability of the findings to other contexts. This approach was chosen as much of the relevant legislation for this research is independent of EU influences. Nonetheless, being an EU member state, Slovenia’s legal framework shares some commonalities with other European systems. The added value of the analysis lies in its relevance for understanding how these concepts are treated in similar legal systems, offering valuable insights for comparative studies.

Language:English
Keywords:administrative decision-making, administrative-political process, constitutional case law, public benefit, public interest, Slovenia
Work type:Article
Typology:1.01 - Original Scientific Article
Organization:FU - Faculty of Administration
Publication status:Published
Publication version:Version of Record
Year:2024
Number of pages:Str. 163-198, 226-227
Numbering:Vol. 22, no. 1
PID:20.500.12556/RUL-158233 This link opens in a new window
UDC:34:35
ISSN on article:2591-2240
DOI:10.17573/cepar.2024.1.07 This link opens in a new window
COBISS.SI-ID:197060099 This link opens in a new window
Publication date in RUL:30.05.2024
Views:258
Downloads:57
Metadata:XML DC-XML DC-RDF
:
Copy citation
Share:Bookmark and Share

Record is a part of a journal

Title:Central European public administration review
Shortened title:CEPAR
Publisher:Fakulteta za upravo
ISSN:2591-2240
COBISS.SI-ID:293849600 This link opens in a new window

Licences

License:CC BY-NC-ND 4.0, Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
Link:http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
Description:The most restrictive Creative Commons license. This only allows people to download and share the work for no commercial gain and for no other purposes.

Secondary language

Language:Slovenian
Title:Javna korist in javni interes v slovenskem pravnem sistemu – dve plati istega kovanca?
Abstract:
Namen: Prispevek proučuje razliko med pojmoma javni interes in javna korist v slovenskem pravnem sistemu. S poglobljeno analizo pravnih pojmov, nacionalnih predpisov ter sodne prakse Ustavnega sodišča RS in izbranih primerov Evropskega sodišča za človekove pravice je namen prispevka osvetliti ključne razlike med navedenima pojmoma ter vzpostaviti temeljne smernice za razumevanje njunega različnega pomena in uporabe. Zasnova/metodologija/pristop: Raziskava temelji na vsebinski analizi sekundarnih virov. Uporablja kvalitativne metode z analizo relevantnih teoretičnih izhodišč, pravil in ustavnosodne prakse v slovenskem pravnem sistemu ter izbrane sodne prakse Evropskega sodišča za človekove pravice. Analiza se osredotoča na opredelitev ključnih teoretičnih argumentov, pravnih definicij in praktične uporabe omenjenih konceptov. Za razlikovanje med javno koristjo in javnim interesom je uporabljen primerjalni pristop, ki prikazuje, kako je posamezen pojem opredeljen, uporabljen in uravnotežen v različnih pravnih kontekstih. Podana je sinteza podobnosti in razlik med različnimi pogledi na ta pojma. Na podlagi analiziranih podatkov so oblikovani zaključki o razmerju med javno koristjo in javnim interesom. Ugotovitve: Javni interes in javna korist sta abstraktna pojma. Analiza relevantnih slovenskih sistemskih predpisov je pokazala, da se včasih uporabljata kot sinonima, a glede na teorijo med njima obstajajo določene razlike. Ustavnosodna praksa ju navaja na splošno in ju vsebinsko ne opredeljuje v celoti, vendar ju ne šteje za sinonima. Akademski prispevek k znanstvenem področju: Javni interes in javna korist sta osrednja pojma upravne znanosti. Javni interes je ključen pri opredeljevanju in oblikovanju upravnih razmerij, o katerih se odloča v upravnem postopku. Predstavlja temeljno vrednoto javnega sektorja in zagotavlja zakonitost njegovega delovanja. Javna korist pa je splošna korist organizirane širše skupnosti, ki ima prednost pred koristmi posameznikov in na splošno velja za enakovredno materialni zakonitosti. Ker so si javni in zasebni interesi pogosto nasprotni, je za zaščito javne koristi potrebno posredovanje države z ustreznimi predpisi. Izvirnost/pomen/vrednost: Raziskava prispeva k razumevanju konceptov javnega interesa in javne koristi v slovenskem pravnem sistemu in predstavlja novost na tem področju, saj takšen pregled doslej še ni bil opravljen. Njena vrednost je v analizi slovenske ustavnosodne prakse v zadnjih dvaindvajsetih letih in vpogledu v sodno prakso Evropskega sodišča za človekove pravice. Zaradi osredotočenosti na slovensko zakonodajo in sodno prakso ter judikaturo Evropskega sodišča za človekove pravice ugotovitev ni mogoče posploševati na druge kontekste. Ta pristop je bil izbran, ker je večina zakonodaje, pomembne za to raziskavo, neodvisna od vplivov EU. Kljub temu pa ima pravni okvir Slovenije zaradi njenega članstva v EU določene skupne značilnosti z drugimi evropskimi sistemi. Analiza je pomembna za razumevanje, kako so omenjeni koncepti obravnavani v podobnih pravnih sistemih, kar ponuja dragoceno podlago za primerjalne študije.

Keywords:upravno odločanje, upravno-politični proces, ustavnosodna praksa, javna korist, javni interes, Slovenija

Similar documents

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

Back