Search

Having the rules of contract interpretation as a starting point, in this article the author considers two indisputable conditions for the application of the contra proferentem rule: (1) ambiguity of the provision, as an issue separate from the fact that the provision has become disputable among the contractors; and (2) the fact that the contract was unilaterally proposed or independently drafted by one contracting party. The article then focuses on the following contentious issues: (a) whether the contra proferentem rule is necessarily related to the protection of the weaker party or it is applicable regardless of the power disproportion between the contracting parties; (b) whether conducting negotiations and the existence of a reasonable possibility for the other party to become acquainted with the general conditions before the contract conclusion preclude the application of this rule; (c) whether the contra proferentem rule should be applied restrictively or extensively and without special conditions in contemporary law; and (d) whether this rule is a general and universal legal principle or applicable only when expressly provided by the relevant national legislation. If answers to these questions can be graded, then they could be taken into account proportionally when measuring the scope of application of the contra proferentem rule. In that situation, it could be asserted that the greater the scope, intensity, and effectiveness of the negotiations that preceded the contract conclusion, the less the justification for the application of this rule of interpretation, and vice versa. On the other hand, starting from the inequality of the parties, it can be asserted that the greater the inequality between the parties in terms of bargaining power, experience, genuine inequality, etc., the greater the need to apply this principle. The author emphasizes that the contra proferentem rule is used for the interpretation of adhesion contracts. Therefore, its scope should be determined in each particular case, taking into account the actual influence of the other party on the choice of provisions governing the contractual relationship, and bearing in mind that between general conditions and adhesion contracts a sign of equality does not necessarily exist. Consequently, it seems that not only exclusive but also proportional application in determining this rule's scope in a specific situation is possible. The author also points out that the scope of its application may depend on the determination of the goal and value one protects, whereby the determination to protect the weaker party or to protect the conscientious and moral conduct of the party and the prohibition of abuse, can lead to different results. Accordingly, the author argues that although the contra proferentem rule is necessary to prevent potential abuses of the contracting party that independently creates the general conditions of the contract, this rule should not be abused by the other contracting party either. More precisely, it should not be used as an instrument in situations when, during the contract implementation phase, it becomes evident that the fulfillment of the other party's contract obligation has subsequently become difficult or costly. Respecting the postvention and preventative role it has, the contra proferentem rule is one of the subsidiary and special rules of interpretation. The rule is to be applied in compliance with general and other special rules of interpretation, primarily seeking the common intention of the parties. The application of the contra proferentem is conditioned and limited, and justified only when it is founded and appropriate. The extent of its scope in practice should depend on the circumstances of each particular case, while at the same time taking into account the basic principles of the contract law.

The article analyses forms of direct democracy from its historical forms, in Ancient Greece, to the modern ones, in Switzerland and the USA. Pointing towards the modern flaws of representative democracy, which dominates the present world, the author explores the forms of citizen participation - from participation to influence, which assists the overcoming of the democratic deficit in practice. Besides the traditional (classical) ones, the analysis also focuses on the innovative mechanisms, from informal to formal ones, from individual to collective mechanisms. The focus is on the procedures of direct citizen participation such as: elections, referendum (with its modalities, plebiscite and popular veto), citizens' initiatives, the right of legislative initiative, public meetings, as well as seeking new constructive solutions which enable the citizens not only to express their opinions through selecting the option for or against, but to actively participate and express their own opinions, positions, experiences and arguments - to participate in public deliberation. These are: public debate, public hearing, public consultations and public discussions, round tables and public presence in the form of mini-audiences, public opinion polls and participation in surveys, cooperation of state bodies with civil society organisations, public call for submission of proposals, remarks and petitions, public-private dialogue, focus groups, citizen panels, citizen conferences, citizens' advisory committees, town hall meetings, citizens juries, consensus conferences, the world cafe. In particular, the article points out that e-participation is nowadays utilised more often and gains significance, since it enables citizens to submit their proposals and remarks electronically, in the form of discussion and interaction via social networks and on-line dialogue platforms. It points towards the positive effects and advantages of direct involvement of citizens in the process of decision making and policy making, through contributions to correcting, stabilizing and consolidating the modern representative democracy. Considering the forms of direct citizen participation in the Serbian society, the next part of the article focuses on the public debate and analyses its legal framework in Serbia and the region. With an analysis of public hearings, the article confirms the author's initial hypothesis that public hearing is not synonymous to or a form of public debate (as often understood in the Serbian public). The author identified 13 original criteria of delineation by which these two institutes differ. Indicating the possibilities of application of other innovative mechanisms of citizen participation which have been proven in the practice of other countries, the author provides concrete recommendations and three possible legal routes for the improvement of public deliberation and concludes that by the power of an argumentative public deliberation and the participation of a larger number of citizens and all sectors of the society, as well as the involvement of their arguments in final texts of laws and other regulations, the present partocracy could be led to a rule of reason, i.e. that the state of political parties is transformed into a state of reason.

The article first determines a definition of public hearing and the multiple benefits of the application of this institute in comparative parliamentary law. Following an analysis of different modalities of public hearings in contemporary parliamentary practice and procedures for organisation and implementation of public hearings in three phases, the author suggests a classification of three basic types of public hearings: (1) legislative public hearings, which can also be labelled as consultative or informative, (2) control (oversight) hearings, and (3) investigative. After that, possibilities for realisation of the three mentioned types within the domestic legal framework are analysed. This is followed by an analysis and determination of the importance of public hearings, in particular for the national parliament, local self-government assemblies and civil society organisations. In the second part, the author analyses the development of public hearings in Serbia, primarily on the national level, i.e. the legal framework and previous practice of committees of the National Assembly in organisation and realisation of public hearings. Afterwards the focus is on transferring the good practice from the national to the local level and the first public hearings held in town and municipal assemblies in Serbia. The author notices that on both levels of government public hearings are initially applied in the same manner - first on the factual plan (in the form of so called thematic committee sessions) and only afterwards are they legally regulated. After conclusions, the author offers recommendations for further development, i.e. improvement of public hearings on the national and local level.