20.500.12556/DKUM-92846 Meddržavne tožbe kot sredstvo uveljavljanja obveznosti erga omnes partes iz Evropske konvencije o varstvu človekovih pravic in temeljnih svoboščin ter prava Evropske unije doktorska disertacija Inter-states actions as an instrument for enforcement of obligations erga omnes partes under Convention for the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms and European union law Nekatere kršitve mednarodnega prava so tako hude, da je njihova preprečitev v interesu vseh držav. Obveznosti, ki zasledujejo skupne interese in jih države dolgujejo mednarodni skupnosti, njihova kršitev pa upravičuje vse ostale članice skupnosti, da poskrbijo za njeno prenehanje, so obveznosti erga omnes. Nekatere multilateralne pogodbe pod okriljem mednarodnih organizacij vsebujejo določbe, ki državam pogodbenicam priznavajo pravni interes za začetek sodnega postopka proti pogodbenicam, ki kršijo obveznosti iz teh pogodb, ne glede na prizadetost nacionalnih interesov. Gre za posebne obveznosti erga omnnes partes. Od obveznosti erga omnes se razlikujejo po krogu upravičencev. Upravičena ni celotna mednarodna skupnost, temveč zgolj članice posamezne mednarodne organizacije oziroma pogodbenice posamezne mednarodne pogodbe. Doktorska disertacija se osredotoča na erga omnes partes vidik obveznosti iz Evropske konvencije o varstvu človekovih pravic in temeljnih svoboščin (v nadaljevanju EKČP) in prava Evropske unije (v nadaljevanju EU), v luči meddržavnih tožb kot enega izmed načinov njihovega uveljavljanja. Tako Svet Evrope, v okviru katerega je nastala EKČP, kakor tudi EU, imata mehanizma, ki državam članicam omogoča tožbo proti drugim državam članicam, ki kršijo pravila ene ali druge mednarodne organizacije. To sta 33. člen EKČP in 259. člen Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije (v nadaljevanju PDEU). Iz obvezne pristojnosti Evropskega sodišča za človekove pravice (v nadaljevanju ESČP) in Sodišča Evropske unije (v nadaljevanju SEU) je sklepati, da v teh postopkih prevladuje element kolektivnega varstva. Namen postopka je tako usmerjen v zagotavljanje spoštovanja konvencijskega in pravnega reda EU, ki je pred interesi strank postopka (pred interesom rešitve spora). Zato obstoj neposrednega pravnega interesa ni predpostavka za vložitev tožbe (tožba je lahko actio popularis). Oba meddržavna postopka sta preizkušena preko sledečih kriterijev: 1. narave mednarodne organizacije, v kateri sodišče deluje, v povezavi s stopnjo posega te mednarodne organizacije v suverenost posamezne članice, 2. pristojnosti in dostopa do sodišča, 3. zavezujoče narave in precedenčnega učinka odločb ter 4. mehanizmov izvršitve odločb. Ker je obveznosti erga omnes partes pripoznala tudi praksa Meddržavnega sodišča, prav tako pa ima slednje največ izkušenj z meddržavnimi tožbami, se obravnava posameznega kriterija dotakne postopka pred tem sodiščem. Podrobneje je analizirana sodna praksa. Posebna pozornost je posvečena vprašanju človekovih pravic, saj gre za ratio materia EKČP, kakor tudi pravnega reda EU. Napravljena je tudi analiza možne uporabe meddržavnih tožb za zaščito temeljnih vrednot EU – človekovega dostojanstva, svobode, demokracije, enakosti, pravne države in človekovih pravic. Doktorska disertacija ponuja predloge za izboljšavo obeh meddržavnih postopkov. Učinkovito uresničevanje obveznosti erga omnes partes pomeni tudi doseganje obsodilnih sodb v primeru njihovih kršitev in dosledno izvrševanje ter upoštevanje teh sodb s strani držav. Države pogodbenice EKČP in članice EU imajo interes, da se pravo EKČP in EU uveljavita v čimvečji meri, zato jima pravni ureditvi nudita aktivno legitimacijo za vložitev meddržavnih tožb, s katerimi se ugotavljajo kršitve pravnega reda. Z vidika učinkovitosti pravnega reda in polnega učinkovanja erga omnes partes elementov bi bila primerna reforma pravne ureditve, ki bi državam pogodbenicam EKČP in članicam EU priznavala aktivno legitimacijo tudi v postopku izvršitve teh sodb. Trenutni ureditvi 46. člena EKČP in 260. člena PDEU namreč aktivno legitimacijo za sprožitev postopkov zaradi neizvršitve sodb nudita le Odboru ministrov in Evropski komisiji (v nadaljevanju Komisija). Some violations of international law are so serious that their prevention is in the interest of all states. Obligations that pursue common interests and which states owe to the international community as whole are obligations erga omnes. Their violations justifies all other members of the community to ensure its termination. Some multilateral treaties under the auspices of international organizations contain provisions that recognize legal interest of the contracting states to initiate legal proceedings against the other contracting states that violate their obligations under these treaties regardless of the harm to national interests of claimant states. These are special obligations erga omnes partes. They differ from obligations erga omnes by the circle of beneficiaries to initiate proceedings. It is not the entire international community that is eligible, but only members of individual international organizations or parties to individual international treaties to bring the actions before international courts. The doctoral dissertation focuses on the erga omnes partes aspect of obligations from European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereafter ECHR) and European Union law (hereafter EU law) in the light of interstate actions as one of the ways of their enforcement. Both the Council of Europe, within which the ECHR was created, as well as the EU, have mechanisms that enable member states to bring an action against other member states which violate the rules of one or another international organization. These are Article 33 of the ECHR and Article 259 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (hereinafter TFEU). From the mandatory jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights (hereafter ECtHR) and the Court of Justice of the European Union (hereafter CJEU) it can be concluded that the element of collective protection prevails in these proceedings. The purpose of the procedure is thus aimed at ensuring compliance with the ECHR and EU legal order, which comes before the interests of the parties to the procedure (before the interest of resolving the dispute). Therefore, the existence of a direct legal interest is not a prerequisite for bringing an action (an action can act as actio popularis). Both interstate proceedings are tested through the following criteria: 1. the nature of the international organization in which the court operates, in connection with the degree of interference of this international organization in the sovereignty of individual members, 2. the jurisdiction and access to the court, 3. the binding nature and precedential effect of the decisions and 4. the mechanisms for the execution of the decisions. Since obligations erga omnes partes have also been recognized by the case law of the International Court of Justice, and the latter also has the most experience with interstate actions, criteria relating to the proceedings before this court are discussed. Case law is analyzed in more detail. Special consideration is given to the issue of human rights, as it is a ratio materia of the ECHR, as well as of the EU legal order. An analysis of the possible use of interstate actions to protect the fundamental values of the EU – human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and human rights is also made. The doctoral dissertation offers proposals for the improvement of both international procedures. The effective implementation of the obligations erga omnes partes also means bringing judgments of conviction in the case of their violations and the consistent enforcement of these judgments by the states. The ECHR contract states and EU member states have an interest in the application of ECHR and EU law to the maximum extent possible, so the legal system provides them with locus standi for filing interstate action for determination of violations of the legal order (Article 33 ECHR and 259 TFEU). From the point of view of the effectiveness of the legal order and erga omnes partes elements, a reform of the legal system would be appropriate. The current regulation of Article 46 of the ECHR and Article 260 of the TFEU provides locus standi for initiating proceedings regarding non-execution of these judgments only to the Committee of Ministers and the European Commission. Disertation proposes recognition of locus standi of the ECHR contracting states and EU members in the process of enforcing these judgments. Meddržavne tožbe Postopek zaradi neizpolnitve obveznosti Obveznosti erga omnes partes 33. člen EKČP 259. člen PDEU Interstate actions Infringement procedure Obligations erga omnes partes Article 33 ECHR Article 259 TFEU true true false J. Jakšić Slovenski jezik Angleški jezik Doktorsko delo/naloga 2025-05-19 12:01:14 2025-08-08 07:54:40 2025-08-11 12:22:03 0000-00-00 00:00:00 2025 0 Maribor 0 Maribor 320 str. 0000-00-00 NiDoloceno NiDoloceno NiDoloceno 0000-00-00 0000-00-00 0000-00-00 341.24/.45(043.3) 245185795 DOK_Jaksic_Jure_2025.pdf DOK_Jaksic_Jure_2025.pdf 1 7FE3C9905A7B73B3B18E275F6BA3B4B2 58f85f4207eae79bd59336f1cb893556448a29d5c971c5a1cba879813574151c f5b55a86-741c-11f0-bafb-00155d000105 https://dk.um.si/Dokument.php?lang=slv&id=194936 Pravna fakulteta 0 0 0