Search

This paper strives to present the relationship that exists between the state and churches and religious communities in the social context of Bosnia and Herzegovina, from three perspectives. The article begins by explaining the distinct jurisdiction of churches and religious communities on the one hand and the state on the other, and their cooperation for the benefit of the common good. Freedom for the churches and religious communities and a healthy secularism on the part of the state are prerequisites for fruitful collaboration. Therefore, instead of detachment and indifference, the paper advocates a better solution: differentiation and cooperation between churches and religious communities on the one hand and the state on the other. A secular state is seen as the only appropriate and feasible framework for acceptable relations between the state and the churches and religious communities in Bosnia and Herzegovina's current social context because that context is deeply marked by a multi-confessional presence. In a minimal way, Bosnia and Herzegovina's legal framework, in principle, gives sufficient space not only to democratic appreciation but to mutual respect and fruitful cooperation between the state and churches and religious communities. However, this is only on paper, and relations between the state and churches and religious communities are conducted according to the individual discretion of party officials and bureaucrats, and this may be diametrically opposite to what is prescribed by law. The signing of the Intergovernmental Agreement between the Holy See and Bosnia and Herzegovina could and should be an opportunity for legislation in Bosnia and Herzegovina that further strengthens and democratizes the important subject of relations between the state and churches and religious communities. The Agreement guarantees that what is accorded to the Catholic Church should, on the principle of non-discrimination, also be accorded to other churches and religious communities. However, with the establishment of the Interreligious Council the opposite has been allowed to happen and there seems to be no obvious solution to this. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper provides a critical evaluation of the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia of November 8, 2006, and finds it an insufficient foundation of a democratic constitutional state. Based on Carl Schmitt's theory, the Serbian regime is defined as most similar to a total pluralist party-state (totaler pluralistischer Parteistaat). Still, there are large cracks in the regime resulting from the dialectics of opposed tendencies towards a pro-Kosovo commissarial dictatorship (aiming at the introduction of a state of emergency in order to defend Kosovo and Metohia) and a pro-European sovereign dictatorship (aiming at "European integrations", but not at the construction of a democratic constitutional state). In the final section, the paper points out the problems facing the Serbian political actors in the coming period should they strive towards constitutional consolidation of Serbia and towards making European integrations part of the task of constructing a democratic constitutional state. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper the author analyses the possibility of 'creating' a European political people and forming a European political identity and a European political community. In the first, theoretical part of the paper, the author defines two concepts of people -- demos and ethnos -- and describes problems in identity building on purely political grounds of people as demos. By examining the references on a European political people in the EU legal foundations, the author illustrates dual premises of legitimacy for the Union and the Union's identity referents which are generally of a universalist nature. In the second, empirical part of the paper, the author presents how the European identity is formed, in line with classic distinction between 'civic' and 'ethnic' identity. Since the Eurobarometer survey showed a low level of European identification of EU member states' citizens, the author presents concepts which aim to overcome the low level of European afiliation. In the final part of the paper the question which is examined is whether the existence of a European political people is necessary for the future of the European integration. To this end, the author uses various theoretical approaches to the 'creation' of a European political people: economic/market approach, communitarian/ statist approach, 'constitutional patriotism' of Habermas, Weiler's 'multiple demoi' and pluralism/particularism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the first part of the paper the conceptual framework of the political science approach to the state is outlined using some key insights of the contemporary political theory of the state. The second part of the paper contains a critical discussion about the scope and the purpose of those insights and puts forward a possible partial reconstruction of the main types of the state as methodological grounds for the developmental and comparative research of the process of the socalled transition. As the methodological basis for a contemporary reconstruction of the theory of the state, the set of basic terms (power, government, authority) -- as identified by A. Passerin d'Entrèves -- can be used. A productive elaboration of these basic terms can be carried out by critically looking into the possibilities of combining the systematic approach by Passerin d'Entrevès, the genealogical approach by Barret-Kriegel and the historico-political one by Q. Skinner. Also, the author points out how a full reconstruction of the concept of the state is not possible without a parallel reconstruction of the concept of society. The state as the fundamental legal/political project of modernism is possible only as a complementary process to the creation of the civic society as the fundamental politico-economic project of modernism. The state (sovereign) and the society (civic) are modern creations whose raison d'être is the legal, economic and political subjectivization of the individual. The co-constitutive link between the state and the society -- the precondition for the possibility of the genuine process of the individual's emancipation in modernism -- is methodologically the central assumption for understanding the state and the logic of sovereignty. This reconstructed comprehensive understanding of the state enables a valid differentiation of the types of states in comparative research. The working hypothesis of this paper is to distinguish two pure types of the (modern) state: the power state (Machtstaat) and the legal state (Rechtsstaat). The reconstruction of the modern concept of the state and its major forms offers the final opportunity to identify the methodological injunction for looking into the logic of transition as the transition in the direction of the sovereign legal state in the fullness of its contemporary definition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article is divided into four parts. The first part presents the doctrine of the constitution as described in Gaudium et spes: in other words it deals with the relationship between church and politics. It deals with the nature and purpose of political community, the cooperation of all in political life, and the political community and the Church. The views of John Paul II on the role of believers in politics are presented through an analysis of the 1987 Synod document on the laity, Christifideles laici, which was published in 1990. The pope strongly urges the laity to become involved in political life and takes the position that abjuring from politics can be sinful, noting that all are subject to and all are protagonists in politics. The pope stresses the necessity of promoting solidarity and charitable works through politics. Church and laity are obliged to evangelize in social and economic life as well as culture. The paper goes on to present the basic ideas of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, and finally the ideas of the Doctrinal Note on Catholics in Politics, issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in 2002. The doctrine of recent Church documents on this topic may be summarized as follows: authority and the state stem from human nature and the moral law, and this means that they have a divine source. They are necessary for the functioning of human life. The common good and respect for persons are the key criteria for judging governments, politicians, regimes and parties. The autonomy and separation of church and state should be recognized. The pluralism of parties and regimes should be recognized. All Christians are called to become involved in political life: in fact, it is sinful not to be involved in politics. If laws or authorities are against the common good and the good of the person, then the believer politician should distance himself from such laws and authorities and should not vote for such laws. The Church should be a critical conscience of society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The processes of Europeization have invaded the public policy sphere and introduced into it, among other things, the altered views of the roles of policy players and their relationships in the processes of the formation and the implementation of public policy. As soon as these new developments had been detected, numerous political science debates understandably ensued about the changed roles and competences of the actors who operate at different political levels in the European Union. The paper begins with the definition of the policy actor in the research of the EU policy process. The usability of the traditional and the contemporary understanding of the policy actor in the EU policy system is looked into by means of the indicators of (non)statehood and the existing view of the role of the state, thereby articulating the dilemmas and the prospects for the potential new taxonomies of policy actors that might emerge as a consequence of the policy activity at the EU level, since the newly identified features breed suspicion in the unequivocal adequacy of the existing taxonomy of the actors. Also, the appropriateness of the categorization of the players according to their political level or to the structuralfunctional character of their activities is discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ages ago, Plato understood justice as the purport and the essential purpose of the very existence of the state. Though Plato distinguishes between the political justice of the state and the personal justice of the individual soul, it was Aristotle who in his practical philosophy developed, apart from the general justice, an appropriate understanding of the special or particular justice and its significance for social progress. The first part of this paper deals with the different types of justice, and the second with civil society. In order to understand the contemporary theories of political justice and the roles of civil society in its realization, the author looks into the history of the European political thought and "civil society", since "civic" or "civil society" ("societas civilis"), was originally a political society. In modernity, Hegel began differentiating between the state as a political community and the "civil society" as a non-political society; his intention was not to separate but to integrate them by means of the public scrutiny and the citizens' governance. Thus Hegel linked Locke's and Montesquieu's opposing definitions of the relationship between the civil society and the state. This is all the more important since Hegel's philosophy is often misinterpreted as the state totalitarianism since we overlook the dangers coming, especially today, both from the civil society reduced to economy and the absolute state, the dangers that Hegel, with his concept of customariness, detected and avoided. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]