TY  - JOUR
AU  - Lukić-Radović, Maja
AU  - Manojlović-Nedeljković, Milena
PY  - 2023
UR  - https://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/1396
AB  - U ovom radu se na prvom mestu razmatra pravni okvir za formiranje i funkcionisanje zajedničkog istražnog tima na nivou Evropske unije, sa naglaskom na posledicama koje ova pravila mogu imati na uobličavanje zakonodavnog okvira Republike Srbije u ovoj oblasti, koji takođe predstavlja predmet analize autora, pri čemu je posebna pažnja posvećena praktičnim razmatranjima u postupku formiranja zajedničkog istražnog tima i originalnim elementima ovog progresivnog sredstva međunarodne saradnje. Drugo žarište ovog rada je podrška koju Evrodžast može pružiti u postupku formiranja i funkcionisanja zajedničkih istražnih timova čiji su učesnici kako države članice Evropske unije, tako i države koje nisu članice Evropske unije, te se u radu takođe razmatra i saradnja Republike Srbije sa Evrodžastom i predstavljaju mogućnosti za dalje unapređivanje međunarodne saradnje sa državama članicama Evropske unije nakon potpisivanja Sporazuma o saradnji Evrodžasta i Republike Srbije 2019. godine, uz navođenje primera zajedničkog istražnog tima koji je podržan od strane Evrodžasta, kao ilustracije prednosti ovog instrumenta međunarodne saradnje.
AB  - This paper primarily considers the legal framework for the formation and functioning of a joint investigation team at the level of the European Union, with specific reference to the consequences that these rules may have on shaping the legislative framework of the Republic of Serbia in this area. In analyzing the Serbian normative framework, the authors particularly focus on practical considerations in the process of setting up of a joint investigation team and the original elements of this progressive tool of international cooperation, established and funded by Eurojust (EU Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation). The second focal point of this paper is the support that may be provided by Eurojust in the process of formation and functioning of joint investigative teams, whose participants include both EU Member States and non-EU countries. In this regard, the authors consider the cooperation of the Republic of Serbia with Eurojust and present the opportunities for further strengthening of international cooperation with the EU Member States Union after signing the Cooperation Agreement between Eurojust and the Republic of Serbia in 2019. The advantages of this instrument of international cooperation are illustrated by referring to successful examples of joint investigation teams supported by Eurojust.
PB  - Univerzitet u Nišu - Pravni fakultet, Niš
T2  - Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta u Nišu
T1  - Efikasnost zajedničkog istražnog tima kao instrumenta za prikupljanje i razmenu dokaza u prekograničnim istragama
T1  - Effectiveness of the joint investigation team as an instrument for gathering and exchange of evidence in cross-border investigations
EP  - 124
IS  - 100
SP  - 93
VL  - 62
DO  - 10.5937/zrpfn0-46661
UR  - conv_1693
ER  - 

@article{
author = "Lukić-Radović, Maja and Manojlović-Nedeljković, Milena",
year = "2023",
abstract = "U ovom radu se na prvom mestu razmatra pravni okvir za formiranje i funkcionisanje zajedničkog istražnog tima na nivou Evropske unije, sa naglaskom na posledicama koje ova pravila mogu imati na uobličavanje zakonodavnog okvira Republike Srbije u ovoj oblasti, koji takođe predstavlja predmet analize autora, pri čemu je posebna pažnja posvećena praktičnim razmatranjima u postupku formiranja zajedničkog istražnog tima i originalnim elementima ovog progresivnog sredstva međunarodne saradnje. Drugo žarište ovog rada je podrška koju Evrodžast može pružiti u postupku formiranja i funkcionisanja zajedničkih istražnih timova čiji su učesnici kako države članice Evropske unije, tako i države koje nisu članice Evropske unije, te se u radu takođe razmatra i saradnja Republike Srbije sa Evrodžastom i predstavljaju mogućnosti za dalje unapređivanje međunarodne saradnje sa državama članicama Evropske unije nakon potpisivanja Sporazuma o saradnji Evrodžasta i Republike Srbije 2019. godine, uz navođenje primera zajedničkog istražnog tima koji je podržan od strane Evrodžasta, kao ilustracije prednosti ovog instrumenta međunarodne saradnje., This paper primarily considers the legal framework for the formation and functioning of a joint investigation team at the level of the European Union, with specific reference to the consequences that these rules may have on shaping the legislative framework of the Republic of Serbia in this area. In analyzing the Serbian normative framework, the authors particularly focus on practical considerations in the process of setting up of a joint investigation team and the original elements of this progressive tool of international cooperation, established and funded by Eurojust (EU Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation). The second focal point of this paper is the support that may be provided by Eurojust in the process of formation and functioning of joint investigative teams, whose participants include both EU Member States and non-EU countries. In this regard, the authors consider the cooperation of the Republic of Serbia with Eurojust and present the opportunities for further strengthening of international cooperation with the EU Member States Union after signing the Cooperation Agreement between Eurojust and the Republic of Serbia in 2019. The advantages of this instrument of international cooperation are illustrated by referring to successful examples of joint investigation teams supported by Eurojust.",
publisher = "Univerzitet u Nišu - Pravni fakultet, Niš",
journal = "Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta u Nišu",
title = "Efikasnost zajedničkog istražnog tima kao instrumenta za prikupljanje i razmenu dokaza u prekograničnim istragama, Effectiveness of the joint investigation team as an instrument for gathering and exchange of evidence in cross-border investigations",
pages = "124-93",
number = "100",
volume = "62",
doi = "10.5937/zrpfn0-46661",
url = "conv_1693"
}

Lukić-Radović, M.,& Manojlović-Nedeljković, M.. (2023). Efikasnost zajedničkog istražnog tima kao instrumenta za prikupljanje i razmenu dokaza u prekograničnim istragama. in Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta u Nišu
Univerzitet u Nišu - Pravni fakultet, Niš., 62(100), 93-124.
https://doi.org/10.5937/zrpfn0-46661
conv_1693

Lukić-Radović M, Manojlović-Nedeljković M. Efikasnost zajedničkog istražnog tima kao instrumenta za prikupljanje i razmenu dokaza u prekograničnim istragama. in Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta u Nišu. 2023;62(100):93-124.
doi:10.5937/zrpfn0-46661
conv_1693 .

Lukić-Radović, Maja, Manojlović-Nedeljković, Milena, "Efikasnost zajedničkog istražnog tima kao instrumenta za prikupljanje i razmenu dokaza u prekograničnim istragama" in Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta u Nišu, 62, no. 100 (2023):93-124,
https://doi.org/10.5937/zrpfn0-46661 .,
conv_1693 .

TY  - CONF
AU  - Lukić-Radović, Maja
AU  - Vlajković, Marija
PY  - 2021
UR  - https://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/1269
AB  - The Covid-19 pandemic has generated a one-in-a-generation challenge upon the EU, consisting of immediate danger for life and health, savings and jobs of its citizens, as well as for the stability and proper functioning of political and legal systems of its Member States. The manner in which the EU as a whole reacted to such sudden and grave challenge is by no means indicative of its political and legal-constitutional substance, and, consequently, of its capacity to subsist in its present form or to develop further. The centrepiece of the Next Generation EU (NGEU) is the Recovery and Resilience Facility, which should help Member States address the economic and social impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. The establishment of the pandemic recovery fund may be regarded not only as an ad hoc measure, but also as a crucial milestone in the path to overcoming the disbalance between Union solidarity and national interests. However, the whole EU budget deal depended on the acceptance of the Rule of Law Mechanism by all Member States. In the first part, this paper will analyse the COVID-19 recovery fund compromise solution as it has been finally agreed. Firstly, we will try to determine the effectiveness of the conditionality mechanism, in the light of European Council Conclusions on the "interpretative declaration on the new Rule of Law Mechanism" and its legal effects. Secondly, we will tackle the issue of the enforcement of the Rule of Law protection mechanism, having in mind the causal link that should be detected, between the protection of the financial interests of the EU, with the non-respect of the EU values enshrined in the Article 2 TEU, by particular Member State(s). Consequently, we will try to envisage the impact of the implementation of this conditionality mechanism, taking into consideration which Member States, and EU citizens, would be "hit" hardest by it. In the second part of the paper an attempt shall be made to perceive the conditionality mechanism, tied to the recovery fund, from the perspective of the principle of solidarity. Ultimately, this paper will try to answer the following question: in view of the necessary shift of priorities and the need for urgent reaction to the COVID-19 crisis, is the common European answer, in view of the core values of the EU and the principle of solidarity, optimal, and above all, will it be effective?
PB  - Josip Juraj Strossmayer Univ Osijek, Osijek
C3  - EU 2021 - the Future of the EU In and After the Pandemic
T1  - How firm are the bonds that tie the EU together? Eu rule of law conditionality mechanism and the next generation EU recovery fund
EP  - 88
SP  - 57
VL  - 5
UR  - conv_3134
ER  - 

@conference{
author = "Lukić-Radović, Maja and Vlajković, Marija",
year = "2021",
abstract = "The Covid-19 pandemic has generated a one-in-a-generation challenge upon the EU, consisting of immediate danger for life and health, savings and jobs of its citizens, as well as for the stability and proper functioning of political and legal systems of its Member States. The manner in which the EU as a whole reacted to such sudden and grave challenge is by no means indicative of its political and legal-constitutional substance, and, consequently, of its capacity to subsist in its present form or to develop further. The centrepiece of the Next Generation EU (NGEU) is the Recovery and Resilience Facility, which should help Member States address the economic and social impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. The establishment of the pandemic recovery fund may be regarded not only as an ad hoc measure, but also as a crucial milestone in the path to overcoming the disbalance between Union solidarity and national interests. However, the whole EU budget deal depended on the acceptance of the Rule of Law Mechanism by all Member States. In the first part, this paper will analyse the COVID-19 recovery fund compromise solution as it has been finally agreed. Firstly, we will try to determine the effectiveness of the conditionality mechanism, in the light of European Council Conclusions on the "interpretative declaration on the new Rule of Law Mechanism" and its legal effects. Secondly, we will tackle the issue of the enforcement of the Rule of Law protection mechanism, having in mind the causal link that should be detected, between the protection of the financial interests of the EU, with the non-respect of the EU values enshrined in the Article 2 TEU, by particular Member State(s). Consequently, we will try to envisage the impact of the implementation of this conditionality mechanism, taking into consideration which Member States, and EU citizens, would be "hit" hardest by it. In the second part of the paper an attempt shall be made to perceive the conditionality mechanism, tied to the recovery fund, from the perspective of the principle of solidarity. Ultimately, this paper will try to answer the following question: in view of the necessary shift of priorities and the need for urgent reaction to the COVID-19 crisis, is the common European answer, in view of the core values of the EU and the principle of solidarity, optimal, and above all, will it be effective?",
publisher = "Josip Juraj Strossmayer Univ Osijek, Osijek",
journal = "EU 2021 - the Future of the EU In and After the Pandemic",
title = "How firm are the bonds that tie the EU together? Eu rule of law conditionality mechanism and the next generation EU recovery fund",
pages = "88-57",
volume = "5",
url = "conv_3134"
}

Lukić-Radović, M.,& Vlajković, M.. (2021). How firm are the bonds that tie the EU together? Eu rule of law conditionality mechanism and the next generation EU recovery fund. in EU 2021 - the Future of the EU In and After the Pandemic
Josip Juraj Strossmayer Univ Osijek, Osijek., 5, 57-88.
conv_3134

Lukić-Radović M, Vlajković M. How firm are the bonds that tie the EU together? Eu rule of law conditionality mechanism and the next generation EU recovery fund. in EU 2021 - the Future of the EU In and After the Pandemic. 2021;5:57-88.
conv_3134 .

Lukić-Radović, Maja, Vlajković, Marija, "How firm are the bonds that tie the EU together? Eu rule of law conditionality mechanism and the next generation EU recovery fund" in EU 2021 - the Future of the EU In and After the Pandemic, 5 (2021):57-88,
conv_3134 .

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Lukić-Radović, Maja
PY  - 2020
UR  - https://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/1209
AB  - Član 50. UEU, kao jedini pravni mehanizam za napuštanje EU koji pruža pravo EU, omogućuje značajno visok nivo fleksibilnosti za proces napuštanja uopšte, i, posebno, za sadržinu eventualnog sporazuma o povlačenju. Imajući u vidu način na koji se "Bregzit" odvijao do sada, čini se da je član 50. UEU izdržao test prakse i dokazao se kao mudro rešenje. S druge strane, koraci koje Vlada Ujedinjenog Kraljevstva svesno preduzima u pravcu kršenja zaključenog Sporazuma o napuštanju EU i prava EU pokazuju da obavezujući karakter prava EU nije čisto pravna pojava, već pre svega neposredna posledica političkog i vrednosnog značaja koji EU ima za njene članice i državljane. Detaljno uređenje prava pojedinaca - državljana EU koji imaju prebivalište, rade ili studiraju u Ujedinjenom Kraljevstvu i obratno, sadržano u Sporazumu o napuštanju zaključenom između EU i Ujedinjenog Kraljevstva, nasuprot neuspesima da se postigne saglasnost o mnogim drugim pitanjima, pokazuje snagu fenomena stečenih ličnih prava. Bregzit je u praksi potvrdio da još nije nastalo nadnacionalno građansko pravo EU, koje bi bilo nezavisno od državljanstva neke od država članica. Specifična i složena institucionalna struktura EU otvara značajna pitanja na planu odnosa države koja napušta EU sa EU i njenim preostalim članicama, trećim državama i međunarodnim organizacijama. Sudbina međunarodnih obaveza prema trećim stranama, stečenih pre napuštanja od strane EU, kao i od strane države koja napušta EU zajedno sa EU, na osnovu mešovitih sporazuma, ostaje nejasna, uzrokujući veliku pravnu nesigurnost. Brojne teškoće, sporovi, troškovi i neizvesnosti nastali usled Bregzita potvrđuju stvar da suština EU leži u političkom i na vrednostima zasnovanom savezu, koji teži mnogo većem jedinstvu od onog koje postoji danas. Napuštanje takvog saveza je pojava koju je teško zamisliti i pravno urediti.
AB  - This article provides analysis of the most prominent legal issues arising as a consequence of a voluntary withdrawal of a Member State from the European Union pursuant to Article 50 TEU. Particular attention is given to the aspects which have not been explicitly regulated, as well as to those that remain unclear due to the complex wording of Article 50 TEU. Following the introduction, the first section focuses on the termination of application of EU law. The second section provides a more detailed insight into the consequences of the voluntary withdrawal on the issues related to the EU citizenship. The next section elaborates on the legal framework for establishing relations between the withdrawing state and the EU under international law. Finally, the last section of the paper analyzes the consequences for the position of the withdrawing state vis-à-vis international organizations and under international law in general.
PB  - Univerzitet u Nišu - Pravni fakultet, Niš
T2  - Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta u Nišu
T1  - Napuštanje EU - posledice u skladu sa pravom EU i sa međunarodnim pravom
T1  - Withdrawal from the European Union: Consequences under EU law and international law
EP  - 245
IS  - 89
SP  - 227
VL  - 59
DO  - 10.5937/zrpfn0-28713
UR  - conv_1688
ER  - 

@article{
author = "Lukić-Radović, Maja",
year = "2020",
abstract = "Član 50. UEU, kao jedini pravni mehanizam za napuštanje EU koji pruža pravo EU, omogućuje značajno visok nivo fleksibilnosti za proces napuštanja uopšte, i, posebno, za sadržinu eventualnog sporazuma o povlačenju. Imajući u vidu način na koji se "Bregzit" odvijao do sada, čini se da je član 50. UEU izdržao test prakse i dokazao se kao mudro rešenje. S druge strane, koraci koje Vlada Ujedinjenog Kraljevstva svesno preduzima u pravcu kršenja zaključenog Sporazuma o napuštanju EU i prava EU pokazuju da obavezujući karakter prava EU nije čisto pravna pojava, već pre svega neposredna posledica političkog i vrednosnog značaja koji EU ima za njene članice i državljane. Detaljno uređenje prava pojedinaca - državljana EU koji imaju prebivalište, rade ili studiraju u Ujedinjenom Kraljevstvu i obratno, sadržano u Sporazumu o napuštanju zaključenom između EU i Ujedinjenog Kraljevstva, nasuprot neuspesima da se postigne saglasnost o mnogim drugim pitanjima, pokazuje snagu fenomena stečenih ličnih prava. Bregzit je u praksi potvrdio da još nije nastalo nadnacionalno građansko pravo EU, koje bi bilo nezavisno od državljanstva neke od država članica. Specifična i složena institucionalna struktura EU otvara značajna pitanja na planu odnosa države koja napušta EU sa EU i njenim preostalim članicama, trećim državama i međunarodnim organizacijama. Sudbina međunarodnih obaveza prema trećim stranama, stečenih pre napuštanja od strane EU, kao i od strane države koja napušta EU zajedno sa EU, na osnovu mešovitih sporazuma, ostaje nejasna, uzrokujući veliku pravnu nesigurnost. Brojne teškoće, sporovi, troškovi i neizvesnosti nastali usled Bregzita potvrđuju stvar da suština EU leži u političkom i na vrednostima zasnovanom savezu, koji teži mnogo većem jedinstvu od onog koje postoji danas. Napuštanje takvog saveza je pojava koju je teško zamisliti i pravno urediti., This article provides analysis of the most prominent legal issues arising as a consequence of a voluntary withdrawal of a Member State from the European Union pursuant to Article 50 TEU. Particular attention is given to the aspects which have not been explicitly regulated, as well as to those that remain unclear due to the complex wording of Article 50 TEU. Following the introduction, the first section focuses on the termination of application of EU law. The second section provides a more detailed insight into the consequences of the voluntary withdrawal on the issues related to the EU citizenship. The next section elaborates on the legal framework for establishing relations between the withdrawing state and the EU under international law. Finally, the last section of the paper analyzes the consequences for the position of the withdrawing state vis-à-vis international organizations and under international law in general.",
publisher = "Univerzitet u Nišu - Pravni fakultet, Niš",
journal = "Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta u Nišu",
title = "Napuštanje EU - posledice u skladu sa pravom EU i sa međunarodnim pravom, Withdrawal from the European Union: Consequences under EU law and international law",
pages = "245-227",
number = "89",
volume = "59",
doi = "10.5937/zrpfn0-28713",
url = "conv_1688"
}

Lukić-Radović, M.. (2020). Napuštanje EU - posledice u skladu sa pravom EU i sa međunarodnim pravom. in Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta u Nišu
Univerzitet u Nišu - Pravni fakultet, Niš., 59(89), 227-245.
https://doi.org/10.5937/zrpfn0-28713
conv_1688

Lukić-Radović M. Napuštanje EU - posledice u skladu sa pravom EU i sa međunarodnim pravom. in Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta u Nišu. 2020;59(89):227-245.
doi:10.5937/zrpfn0-28713
conv_1688 .

Lukić-Radović, Maja, "Napuštanje EU - posledice u skladu sa pravom EU i sa međunarodnim pravom" in Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta u Nišu, 59, no. 89 (2020):227-245,
https://doi.org/10.5937/zrpfn0-28713 .,
conv_1688 .

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Lukić-Radović, Maja
PY  - 2018
UR  - https://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/1044
AB  - Odredba osnivačkih ugovora kojom su propisane dužnost lojalne (iskrene) saradnje država članica sa komunitarnim institucijama i korelativna dužnost uzdržavanja od mera koje bi ugrozile ostvarenje ciljeva osnivačkih ugovora, bila je od Rimskog ugovora do danas predmet tumačenja Suda Evropske unije. Ona je poslužila kao osnov za brojna i bitna usavršavanja i učvršćivanja komunitarnog pravnog sistema, među kojima su utvrđivanje načela prednosti prava Zajednice, isključive prećutne nadležnosti Zajednice u spoljnim poslovima, načela delotvornosti i dr. Čini se da će na pitanje da li je reč o jedinstvenom načelu lojalnosti ili o skupu srodnih dužnosti tek praksa Suda Evropske unije u budućnosti dati konačan odgovor. Ukoliko se prihvati da postoji, čini se da je načelo lojalnosti najsrodnije načelu autonomije prava Evropske unije i po značaju za razvoj pravnog sistema Evropske unije i po tome što se neposredno graniči sa sferom državnih interesa i političkog života. .
AB  - The provision of the founding treaties in which duty of loyal (sincere) cooperation of Member-States with Community institutions is stipulated, together with the correlating duty of abstention from measures that may jeopardize attainment of aims of the founding treaties, has been the subject of interpretation of the European Court of Justice since the Rome Treaty until present-day, having served as the grounds for numerous and material improvements and build ups of the Community legal system, which encompassed the principle of primacy of Community law, implied exclusive competence of the Community in external relations, the principle of effectiveness of Community law, etc. It appears that only case law of the ECJ in the future may provide answer to the question whether there is a single principle of loyalty, or simply a bundle of related duties. If one accepts that it exists, the principle of loyalty seems most closely related to the principle of autonomy of EU law, both judging by its importance for the development of the legal system of the EU, and by the fact that it directly borders the political sphere.
PB  - Univerzitet u Beogradu - Pravni fakultet, Beograd
T2  - Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu
T1  - Lojalnost unutar Evropske unije - pravna ili samo politička obaveza
T1  - Loyalty within the European Union: A legal or merely a political duty
EP  - 249
IS  - 3
SP  - 235
VL  - 66
DO  - 10.5937/AnaliPFB1803235L
UR  - conv_467
ER  - 

@article{
author = "Lukić-Radović, Maja",
year = "2018",
abstract = "Odredba osnivačkih ugovora kojom su propisane dužnost lojalne (iskrene) saradnje država članica sa komunitarnim institucijama i korelativna dužnost uzdržavanja od mera koje bi ugrozile ostvarenje ciljeva osnivačkih ugovora, bila je od Rimskog ugovora do danas predmet tumačenja Suda Evropske unije. Ona je poslužila kao osnov za brojna i bitna usavršavanja i učvršćivanja komunitarnog pravnog sistema, među kojima su utvrđivanje načela prednosti prava Zajednice, isključive prećutne nadležnosti Zajednice u spoljnim poslovima, načela delotvornosti i dr. Čini se da će na pitanje da li je reč o jedinstvenom načelu lojalnosti ili o skupu srodnih dužnosti tek praksa Suda Evropske unije u budućnosti dati konačan odgovor. Ukoliko se prihvati da postoji, čini se da je načelo lojalnosti najsrodnije načelu autonomije prava Evropske unije i po značaju za razvoj pravnog sistema Evropske unije i po tome što se neposredno graniči sa sferom državnih interesa i političkog života. ., The provision of the founding treaties in which duty of loyal (sincere) cooperation of Member-States with Community institutions is stipulated, together with the correlating duty of abstention from measures that may jeopardize attainment of aims of the founding treaties, has been the subject of interpretation of the European Court of Justice since the Rome Treaty until present-day, having served as the grounds for numerous and material improvements and build ups of the Community legal system, which encompassed the principle of primacy of Community law, implied exclusive competence of the Community in external relations, the principle of effectiveness of Community law, etc. It appears that only case law of the ECJ in the future may provide answer to the question whether there is a single principle of loyalty, or simply a bundle of related duties. If one accepts that it exists, the principle of loyalty seems most closely related to the principle of autonomy of EU law, both judging by its importance for the development of the legal system of the EU, and by the fact that it directly borders the political sphere.",
publisher = "Univerzitet u Beogradu - Pravni fakultet, Beograd",
journal = "Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu",
title = "Lojalnost unutar Evropske unije - pravna ili samo politička obaveza, Loyalty within the European Union: A legal or merely a political duty",
pages = "249-235",
number = "3",
volume = "66",
doi = "10.5937/AnaliPFB1803235L",
url = "conv_467"
}

Lukić-Radović, M.. (2018). Lojalnost unutar Evropske unije - pravna ili samo politička obaveza. in Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu
Univerzitet u Beogradu - Pravni fakultet, Beograd., 66(3), 235-249.
https://doi.org/10.5937/AnaliPFB1803235L
conv_467

Lukić-Radović M. Lojalnost unutar Evropske unije - pravna ili samo politička obaveza. in Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu. 2018;66(3):235-249.
doi:10.5937/AnaliPFB1803235L
conv_467 .

Lukić-Radović, Maja, "Lojalnost unutar Evropske unije - pravna ili samo politička obaveza" in Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu, 66, no. 3 (2018):235-249,
https://doi.org/10.5937/AnaliPFB1803235L .,
conv_467 .

TY  - CONF
AU  - Lukić-Radović, Maja
AU  - Čučković, Bojana
PY  - 2018
UR  - https://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/1049
AB  - The paper analyzes the proposal to amend the core element of the Common European Asylum System, Dublin IV Regulation, from two different perspectives - principle of solidarity between Member States and protection of asylum seekers' human rights. An in-depth analysis is provided of novel solutions introduced by Dublin IV, their comparison with provisions contained in Dublin III, as well as an intersection of current state of negotiations between Member States within relevant EU institutions with a view to reach an acceptable version of the future document. The focus is on two important issues. Firstly, does Dublin IV enhance solidarity between Member States or does it do the exact opposite - further regresses the poor level of solidarity attained in Dublin III? Solidarity principle is implemented through a number of Dublin IV provisions, such as those concerning equitable distribution of applicants for international protection, the new fairness mechanisms and corrective allocation mechanisms. However, it remains to be seen whether these and other mechanisms based on solidarity principle will have any meaningful effect and whether there are any realistic prospects of applying them in practice, especially taking into account rather negative previous experiences. Secondly, changes brought by Dublin IV are analyzed from the perspective of human rights protection. This part of the paper focuses on certain problematic issues that emerge with regard to the level of human rights protection guaranteed by the Regulation and its compatibility with relevant standards established in the case-law of both the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights. Namely, application of a number of provisions contained in Dublin IV may easily result in violations of asylum seekers' human rights, right to family life and prohibition of torture in particular. This may seriously weaken the protection of fundamental rights of asylum seekers, especially rights of vulnerable asylum seekers, attained through the jurisprudence of two European courts. In the two enumerated operative parts of the paper attempts are made to assess the position of Dublin IV changes as compared not only to its currently applicable counterpart, but also to common European standards born out of application of Dublin system in practice, from the perspectives of both the principle of solidarity and human rights protection. It appears that the proposed Dublin IV Regulation tends to sacrifice protection of human rights for the sake of the principle of solidarity. Since attainment of solidarity in practice is not warranted, the proposed regulation may end up making both the principle of solidarity and protection of human rights illusions rather than imperatives, making way for a preferred but highly debatable aim of a more functional asylum system.
PB  - Josip Juraj Strossmayer Univ Osijek, Osijek
C3  - EU Law In Context - Adjustment to Membership and Challenges of the Enlargement
T1  - Dublin iv regulation, the solidarity principle and protection of human rights - step(s) forward or backward?
EP  - 30
SP  - 10
VL  - 2
UR  - conv_3050
ER  - 

@conference{
author = "Lukić-Radović, Maja and Čučković, Bojana",
year = "2018",
abstract = "The paper analyzes the proposal to amend the core element of the Common European Asylum System, Dublin IV Regulation, from two different perspectives - principle of solidarity between Member States and protection of asylum seekers' human rights. An in-depth analysis is provided of novel solutions introduced by Dublin IV, their comparison with provisions contained in Dublin III, as well as an intersection of current state of negotiations between Member States within relevant EU institutions with a view to reach an acceptable version of the future document. The focus is on two important issues. Firstly, does Dublin IV enhance solidarity between Member States or does it do the exact opposite - further regresses the poor level of solidarity attained in Dublin III? Solidarity principle is implemented through a number of Dublin IV provisions, such as those concerning equitable distribution of applicants for international protection, the new fairness mechanisms and corrective allocation mechanisms. However, it remains to be seen whether these and other mechanisms based on solidarity principle will have any meaningful effect and whether there are any realistic prospects of applying them in practice, especially taking into account rather negative previous experiences. Secondly, changes brought by Dublin IV are analyzed from the perspective of human rights protection. This part of the paper focuses on certain problematic issues that emerge with regard to the level of human rights protection guaranteed by the Regulation and its compatibility with relevant standards established in the case-law of both the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights. Namely, application of a number of provisions contained in Dublin IV may easily result in violations of asylum seekers' human rights, right to family life and prohibition of torture in particular. This may seriously weaken the protection of fundamental rights of asylum seekers, especially rights of vulnerable asylum seekers, attained through the jurisprudence of two European courts. In the two enumerated operative parts of the paper attempts are made to assess the position of Dublin IV changes as compared not only to its currently applicable counterpart, but also to common European standards born out of application of Dublin system in practice, from the perspectives of both the principle of solidarity and human rights protection. It appears that the proposed Dublin IV Regulation tends to sacrifice protection of human rights for the sake of the principle of solidarity. Since attainment of solidarity in practice is not warranted, the proposed regulation may end up making both the principle of solidarity and protection of human rights illusions rather than imperatives, making way for a preferred but highly debatable aim of a more functional asylum system.",
publisher = "Josip Juraj Strossmayer Univ Osijek, Osijek",
journal = "EU Law In Context - Adjustment to Membership and Challenges of the Enlargement",
title = "Dublin iv regulation, the solidarity principle and protection of human rights - step(s) forward or backward?",
pages = "30-10",
volume = "2",
url = "conv_3050"
}

Lukić-Radović, M.,& Čučković, B.. (2018). Dublin iv regulation, the solidarity principle and protection of human rights - step(s) forward or backward?. in EU Law In Context - Adjustment to Membership and Challenges of the Enlargement
Josip Juraj Strossmayer Univ Osijek, Osijek., 2, 10-30.
conv_3050

Lukić-Radović M, Čučković B. Dublin iv regulation, the solidarity principle and protection of human rights - step(s) forward or backward?. in EU Law In Context - Adjustment to Membership and Challenges of the Enlargement. 2018;2:10-30.
conv_3050 .

Lukić-Radović, Maja, Čučković, Bojana, "Dublin iv regulation, the solidarity principle and protection of human rights - step(s) forward or backward?" in EU Law In Context - Adjustment to Membership and Challenges of the Enlargement, 2 (2018):10-30,
conv_3050 .