Search

This paper presents an application of the explanatory model aimed at formulation and institutional development in the field of the Croatian upper secondary vocational education. Data was collected via 17 in-depth semi-structured interviews with informants directly involved in formulating relevant policy documents from the independence onwards. Informants were affiliated with competent central state entities, counties, employers’ associations, trade unions and relevant international organizations. The overall thesis that central state actors hold the greatest positional power over key institutional features such as financing, learning content and standards of delivery, is but partially validated. Indeed, central state actors represent the most powerful group. However, dynamics are predominantly structured around workings of two relatively stable and competitive coalitions: “the educational” vs. “the economic”, with the affiliation of central state actors commonly split between these two coalitions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

External competence of the EU to enter into contractual relations with third countries and international organizations in the field of private international law is determined by the existence of internal (inter-european) competence to address the issues in this area, as well as through the realization of such competence by Community legal instruments. Analogously, the member states have lost the possibility of concluding international agreements with third countries in areas of private international law which are, on the Community level, determined by community legal instruments - regulations. Exceptionally, according to the rules of Regulation (EC) No. 664/2009 and under certain conditions, there is a possibility for the member states to enter into contractual relations with third countries in areas that are on the inner (inter - european) level regulated by Regulation "Brussels II" and Regulation (EC) No. 4 / 2009. This option is of extremely great importance for Bosnia and Herzegovina. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper summarizes contemporary considerations regarding the concept of humanitarian intervention, emphasizing the report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty. The concept of sovereignty is examined in the light of contemporary international relations and reduction of state sovereignty due to the increasingly important role of international organizations. Having in mind determination of the international community to protect human rights, humanitarian intervention is understood as a responsibility to protect, rather than a right to intervene. The responsibility to protect consists of the responsibility to prevent roots of conflicts which may lead to humanitarian disasters, responsibility to react adequately and responsibility to rebuild. The central part of the paper deals with issues of legality and legitimacy of humanitarian intervention. For this purpose, provisions of international customary law and the UN Charter have been examined. Contemporary state practice is also taken into consideration. Undertaking of humanitarian intervention is examined when falling under the scope of the Security Council authorization, as well as in the case when such an authorization is missing. The paper also describes the difference between humanitarian intervention and other types of intervention. Chapter IV of the paper briefly goes through recent practice of humanitarian interventions. In conclusion, the concept of humanitarian intervention is described as a legitimate means appropriate for prevention of humanitarian disasters. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]