TY  - JOUR
AU  - Đorđević, Mila
AU  - Zdravković, Ana
AU  - Vojnović, Sava
PY  - 2025-11
UR  - https://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/2375
AB  - The debates on access to justice emerged from the historical contexts of post-industrial Western countries, and the concept gained prominence in the 1960s, during the rise of the welfare state (Maranlou, 2014: 17).1 A major turning point in the discourse was the Florence Access to Justice Project, led by Mauro Cappelletti and Bryant Garth (1981). In October 1979, a conference at the European University Institute examined the prospects for further action, and participants sought to identify the most pressing issues, evaluate key insights, and assess the broader significance of what they termed the “access to justice” movement (Cappelletti, Garth, 1981: 3).
Cappelletti and Garth discuss three “waves” of access to justice. The first wave was concerned primarily with access to courts, and the emphasis was on the problems faced by poor and marginalized groups in accessing expensive legal services and complex legal systems. The second wave related to access to justice gaps that arise not predominantly because of socio-economic factors, but as a result of the nature of the problems people experience in particular contexts. For example, so-called “diffuse interests” include consumer problems, where large groups are affected by similar issues, but there are difficulties in launching individual claims and, as a result, a significant access to justice gap. The third wave, while continuing to incorporate the concerns of the first and second waves, broadened the concern of access to justice even further, so that a host of procedural innovations that might allow access to justice began to be discussed. This included alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and other means by which people might resolve their problems without accessing the courts (Garth, Cappelletti, 1981: 9-25).
PB  - Lisboa : Lisbon Public Law Research Centre, Faculdade de Direito da Universidade de Lisboa
T2  - e-Publica: revista electrónica de direito público, Vol. 12, No. 2 (1-8)
T1  - Access to justice and enforcement of rights – an introduction
EP  - 8
SP  - 1
ER  - 

@article{
author = "Đorđević, Mila and Zdravković, Ana and Vojnović, Sava",
year = "2025-11",
abstract = "The debates on access to justice emerged from the historical contexts of post-industrial Western countries, and the concept gained prominence in the 1960s, during the rise of the welfare state (Maranlou, 2014: 17).1 A major turning point in the discourse was the Florence Access to Justice Project, led by Mauro Cappelletti and Bryant Garth (1981). In October 1979, a conference at the European University Institute examined the prospects for further action, and participants sought to identify the most pressing issues, evaluate key insights, and assess the broader significance of what they termed the “access to justice” movement (Cappelletti, Garth, 1981: 3).
Cappelletti and Garth discuss three “waves” of access to justice. The first wave was concerned primarily with access to courts, and the emphasis was on the problems faced by poor and marginalized groups in accessing expensive legal services and complex legal systems. The second wave related to access to justice gaps that arise not predominantly because of socio-economic factors, but as a result of the nature of the problems people experience in particular contexts. For example, so-called “diffuse interests” include consumer problems, where large groups are affected by similar issues, but there are difficulties in launching individual claims and, as a result, a significant access to justice gap. The third wave, while continuing to incorporate the concerns of the first and second waves, broadened the concern of access to justice even further, so that a host of procedural innovations that might allow access to justice began to be discussed. This included alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and other means by which people might resolve their problems without accessing the courts (Garth, Cappelletti, 1981: 9-25).",
publisher = "Lisboa : Lisbon Public Law Research Centre, Faculdade de Direito da Universidade de Lisboa",
journal = "e-Publica: revista electrónica de direito público, Vol. 12, No. 2 (1-8)",
title = "Access to justice and enforcement of rights – an introduction",
pages = "8-1"
}

Đorđević, M., Zdravković, A.,& Vojnović, S.. (2025-11). Access to justice and enforcement of rights – an introduction. in e-Publica: revista electrónica de direito público, Vol. 12, No. 2 (1-8)
Lisboa : Lisbon Public Law Research Centre, Faculdade de Direito da Universidade de Lisboa., 1-8.

Đorđević M, Zdravković A, Vojnović S. Access to justice and enforcement of rights – an introduction. in e-Publica: revista electrónica de direito público, Vol. 12, No. 2 (1-8). 2025;:1-8..

Đorđević, Mila, Zdravković, Ana, Vojnović, Sava, "Access to justice and enforcement of rights – an introduction" in e-Publica: revista electrónica de direito público, Vol. 12, No. 2 (1-8) (2025-11):1-8.

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Vojnović, Sava
PY  - 2024
UR  - https://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/1894
AB  - In order to gain a better understanding of contemporary political realism, as well as of the theories of two classical political philosophers, this paper argues that the methodological roots of a contextualist model of realism can be found, among others, in the writings of Aristotle and Machiavelli. It is argued that the methodological assumptions of contextualist political realism can be formulated through two main notions: 1) the experiential basis - analysis of politics through reliance on experience from political practice; and 2) contextualism - avoiding universal claims as much as possible, i.e., making claims about politics always within a socio-historical context. Using those lenses, the paper points out the methodological elements of Aristotles and Machiavellis political theories that are in line with this version of political realism, claiming both of them could be perceived as forerunners to a certain degree.
T2  - Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu
T1  - Methodological predecessors of contextualist political realism
EP  - 103
IS  - 1
SP  - 73
VL  - 72
DO  - 10.51204/Anali_PFBU_24104A
UR  - conv_3001
ER  - 

@article{
author = "Vojnović, Sava",
year = "2024",
abstract = "In order to gain a better understanding of contemporary political realism, as well as of the theories of two classical political philosophers, this paper argues that the methodological roots of a contextualist model of realism can be found, among others, in the writings of Aristotle and Machiavelli. It is argued that the methodological assumptions of contextualist political realism can be formulated through two main notions: 1) the experiential basis - analysis of politics through reliance on experience from political practice; and 2) contextualism - avoiding universal claims as much as possible, i.e., making claims about politics always within a socio-historical context. Using those lenses, the paper points out the methodological elements of Aristotles and Machiavellis political theories that are in line with this version of political realism, claiming both of them could be perceived as forerunners to a certain degree.",
journal = "Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu",
title = "Methodological predecessors of contextualist political realism",
pages = "103-73",
number = "1",
volume = "72",
doi = "10.51204/Anali_PFBU_24104A",
url = "conv_3001"
}

Vojnović, S.. (2024). Methodological predecessors of contextualist political realism. in Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu, 72(1), 73-103.
https://doi.org/10.51204/Anali_PFBU_24104A
conv_3001

Vojnović S. Methodological predecessors of contextualist political realism. in Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu. 2024;72(1):73-103.
doi:10.51204/Anali_PFBU_24104A
conv_3001 .

Vojnović, Sava, "Methodological predecessors of contextualist political realism" in Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu, 72, no. 1 (2024):73-103,
https://doi.org/10.51204/Anali_PFBU_24104A .,
conv_3001 .

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Vojnović, Sava
PY  - 2023
UR  - https://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/1397
AB  - Polazeći od globalnog značaja Oktobarske revolucije kao istorijskog događaja, kao i kompleksnosti društvenih odnosa u takvim okolnostima, cilj rada jeste da se što temeljnije sagledaju korelacije između same revolucije i društvenih okolnosti koje joj prethode. U radu se tumače istorijski podaci i pretresaju glavnim argumenti unutar teorija revolucija. Fokus je na strukturalnim činiocima i analizi koju nudi Teda Skočpol (Theda Skocpol), s naglaskom na ulozi proletarijata. Osnovna teza jeste da je jedan od ključnih uslova (uzroka) postojanje razgranate mreže seoskih komuna i radničkih udruženja, uz dovoljno čvrste veze unutar klasa. Odnosno, nezadovoljstvo ekonomskim stanjem i oslabljenost centralne vlasti ne bi sami po sebi doveli do revolucionarnih dešavanja, kao što se ni udružene aktivnosti proletarijata i lidera opozicionih stranaka ne smeju prenebregnuti.
AB  - Starting from the global importance of the October Revolution as a historical event, as well as the complexity of social relations in such circumstances, the objective of this paper is to look as thoroughly as possible into the correlations between the Revolution itself and social circumstances that preceded it. The paper interprets historical data and examines the main arguments within theories of revolutions. The focus is on structural factors and the analysis presented by Theda Skocpol, with an additional emphasis on the role of the proletariat. The basic thesis is that one of the key conditions is the existence of branched networking of the peasant communes and workers' associations, with sufficiently strong connections within the classes. That is, discontent with the economic situation and the weakening of the central government would not in themselves lead to revolutionary events, just as joint activities of the proletariat and the leaders of opposition parties should not be neglected.
PB  - Sociološko društvo Srbije, Beograd
T2  - Sociološki pregled
T1  - Osvrt na uzroke oktobarske revolucije kroz dopunu analize Tede Skočpol
T1  - Overview of the causes of the October revolution through the supplemented analysis of Theda Skocpol
EP  - 296
IS  - 1
SP  - 260
VL  - 57
DO  - 10.5937/socpreg57-40996
UR  - conv_1265
ER  - 

@article{
author = "Vojnović, Sava",
year = "2023",
abstract = "Polazeći od globalnog značaja Oktobarske revolucije kao istorijskog događaja, kao i kompleksnosti društvenih odnosa u takvim okolnostima, cilj rada jeste da se što temeljnije sagledaju korelacije između same revolucije i društvenih okolnosti koje joj prethode. U radu se tumače istorijski podaci i pretresaju glavnim argumenti unutar teorija revolucija. Fokus je na strukturalnim činiocima i analizi koju nudi Teda Skočpol (Theda Skocpol), s naglaskom na ulozi proletarijata. Osnovna teza jeste da je jedan od ključnih uslova (uzroka) postojanje razgranate mreže seoskih komuna i radničkih udruženja, uz dovoljno čvrste veze unutar klasa. Odnosno, nezadovoljstvo ekonomskim stanjem i oslabljenost centralne vlasti ne bi sami po sebi doveli do revolucionarnih dešavanja, kao što se ni udružene aktivnosti proletarijata i lidera opozicionih stranaka ne smeju prenebregnuti., Starting from the global importance of the October Revolution as a historical event, as well as the complexity of social relations in such circumstances, the objective of this paper is to look as thoroughly as possible into the correlations between the Revolution itself and social circumstances that preceded it. The paper interprets historical data and examines the main arguments within theories of revolutions. The focus is on structural factors and the analysis presented by Theda Skocpol, with an additional emphasis on the role of the proletariat. The basic thesis is that one of the key conditions is the existence of branched networking of the peasant communes and workers' associations, with sufficiently strong connections within the classes. That is, discontent with the economic situation and the weakening of the central government would not in themselves lead to revolutionary events, just as joint activities of the proletariat and the leaders of opposition parties should not be neglected.",
publisher = "Sociološko društvo Srbije, Beograd",
journal = "Sociološki pregled",
title = "Osvrt na uzroke oktobarske revolucije kroz dopunu analize Tede Skočpol, Overview of the causes of the October revolution through the supplemented analysis of Theda Skocpol",
pages = "296-260",
number = "1",
volume = "57",
doi = "10.5937/socpreg57-40996",
url = "conv_1265"
}

Vojnović, S.. (2023). Osvrt na uzroke oktobarske revolucije kroz dopunu analize Tede Skočpol. in Sociološki pregled
Sociološko društvo Srbije, Beograd., 57(1), 260-296.
https://doi.org/10.5937/socpreg57-40996
conv_1265

Vojnović S. Osvrt na uzroke oktobarske revolucije kroz dopunu analize Tede Skočpol. in Sociološki pregled. 2023;57(1):260-296.
doi:10.5937/socpreg57-40996
conv_1265 .

Vojnović, Sava, "Osvrt na uzroke oktobarske revolucije kroz dopunu analize Tede Skočpol" in Sociološki pregled, 57, no. 1 (2023):260-296,
https://doi.org/10.5937/socpreg57-40996 .,
conv_1265 .

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Vojnović, Sava
PY  - 2023
UR  - https://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/1407
AB  - Polazeći od Rolsovog koncepta građanske neposlušnosti, autor tvrdi da se ona sprovodi na opravdanim moralnim osnovama i da se mora razlikovati od svih drugih deliktnih radnji. Ona je komunikabilan čin nenasilnog ukazivanja javnosti na probleme u okviru jednog sistema - čime sebi garantuje poziciju odanosti pravu, a ne suprotno. U radu se prvo analizira pojam građanske neposlušnosti, uz pitanje njene opravdanosti, kao i Dvorkinovo stanovište o tumačenju spornih pravnih normi od strane građana koji odbijaju poslušnost istim. Nakon toga se preispituju svrhe kažnjavanja koje se navode u teoriji sankcija - u svetlu primene na građansku neposlušnost, zajedno sa potencijalnim tretmanom građanske neposlušnosti od strane sudija. Autor smatra da bi trebalo ostaviti prostora za to da se u svakom konkretnom slučaju, prema proceni suda, takvim neposlušnim pojedincima ili izriču ublažene sankcije ili da se u potpunosti oslobode kazne.
AB  - Starting from Rawls's concept of civil disobedience, the author argues that it is carried out on justified moral grounds and must be distinguished from all other tortious actions. It is a communicative act that non-violently and publicly points out problems within a system, thereby guaranteeing itself a position of loyalty to the law, not the opposite. The paper first analyzes the concept of civil disobedience, along with the question of its justification, as well as Dworkin's point of view on the interpretation of disputed legal norms by citizens who refuse to obey them. It then examines the purposes of punishment as stated in the theory of sanctions - applied to civil disobedience, along with the potential treatment of civil disobedience by judges. The author believes that in each specific case, according to the judgment of the court, such disobedient individuals could either be given reduced sanctions or be completely exempted from punishment.
PB  - Univerzitet Union - Pravni fakultet, Beograd
T2  - Pravni zapisi
T1  - (Ne)kažnjavanje građanske neposlušnosti
T1  - Impunity (or not) for civil disobedience
EP  - 178
IS  - 1
SP  - 148
VL  - 14
DO  - 10.5937/pravzap1-40771
UR  - conv_2827
ER  - 

@article{
author = "Vojnović, Sava",
year = "2023",
abstract = "Polazeći od Rolsovog koncepta građanske neposlušnosti, autor tvrdi da se ona sprovodi na opravdanim moralnim osnovama i da se mora razlikovati od svih drugih deliktnih radnji. Ona je komunikabilan čin nenasilnog ukazivanja javnosti na probleme u okviru jednog sistema - čime sebi garantuje poziciju odanosti pravu, a ne suprotno. U radu se prvo analizira pojam građanske neposlušnosti, uz pitanje njene opravdanosti, kao i Dvorkinovo stanovište o tumačenju spornih pravnih normi od strane građana koji odbijaju poslušnost istim. Nakon toga se preispituju svrhe kažnjavanja koje se navode u teoriji sankcija - u svetlu primene na građansku neposlušnost, zajedno sa potencijalnim tretmanom građanske neposlušnosti od strane sudija. Autor smatra da bi trebalo ostaviti prostora za to da se u svakom konkretnom slučaju, prema proceni suda, takvim neposlušnim pojedincima ili izriču ublažene sankcije ili da se u potpunosti oslobode kazne., Starting from Rawls's concept of civil disobedience, the author argues that it is carried out on justified moral grounds and must be distinguished from all other tortious actions. It is a communicative act that non-violently and publicly points out problems within a system, thereby guaranteeing itself a position of loyalty to the law, not the opposite. The paper first analyzes the concept of civil disobedience, along with the question of its justification, as well as Dworkin's point of view on the interpretation of disputed legal norms by citizens who refuse to obey them. It then examines the purposes of punishment as stated in the theory of sanctions - applied to civil disobedience, along with the potential treatment of civil disobedience by judges. The author believes that in each specific case, according to the judgment of the court, such disobedient individuals could either be given reduced sanctions or be completely exempted from punishment.",
publisher = "Univerzitet Union - Pravni fakultet, Beograd",
journal = "Pravni zapisi",
title = "(Ne)kažnjavanje građanske neposlušnosti, Impunity (or not) for civil disobedience",
pages = "178-148",
number = "1",
volume = "14",
doi = "10.5937/pravzap1-40771",
url = "conv_2827"
}

Vojnović, S.. (2023). (Ne)kažnjavanje građanske neposlušnosti. in Pravni zapisi
Univerzitet Union - Pravni fakultet, Beograd., 14(1), 148-178.
https://doi.org/10.5937/pravzap1-40771
conv_2827

Vojnović S. (Ne)kažnjavanje građanske neposlušnosti. in Pravni zapisi. 2023;14(1):148-178.
doi:10.5937/pravzap1-40771
conv_2827 .

Vojnović, Sava, "(Ne)kažnjavanje građanske neposlušnosti" in Pravni zapisi, 14, no. 1 (2023):148-178,
https://doi.org/10.5937/pravzap1-40771 .,
conv_2827 .

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Vojnović, Sava
PY  - 2022
UR  - https://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/1327
AB  - Tomas Hobs i Žan-Žak Ruso spadaju među najznačajnije novovekovne političke filozofe, koji svoje teorije zasnivaju na ideji društvenog ugovora. Oba autora polaze od prirodne jednakosti svih ljudi i nesigurnosti prirodnog stanja, ali na prvi pogled završavaju u sasvim drugačijim perspektivama o suverenitetu i odnosima unutar političkog društva. Ruso insistira na zajedničkom suverenitetu svih građana, koji imaju zagarantovan ekonomski minimum, neotuđivo ovlašćenje donošenja zakona i brige o opštoj volji, pri čemu svi zajedno istovremeno konstituišu i one nad kojima se vlada. Hobs, sa druge strane, nalaže da narod bira suverena koji se nalazi uvek u prirodnom stanju i mora da ima veliku moć kako bi mogao da ispuni svoju ulogu zaštitnika. Ipak, u radu se iznose argumenti u prilog tome da njihove pozicije zapravo nisu toliko različite, imajući na umu Rusoovu izvršnu vlast i mudre zakonotvorce, a kod Hobsa široko postavljena prava podanika. Teza rada jeste da kod obojice narod autorizuje i nadzire, a neko drugi vlada.
AB  - Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau are among the most important modern political philosophers, who base their theories on the idea of social contract. Both authors start from the natural equality of all people and the uncertainty of the natural state, but at first glance they end up with completely different perspectives on sovereignty and relations within a political society. Rousseau insists on the common sovereignty of all citizens, who have a guaranteed economic minimum and the inalienable authority to enact laws and care for the general will, by which they all together simultaneously constitute those who are governed. Hobbes, on the other hand, dictates that the people elect a sovereign who is always in their natural state and must have great power in order to fulfil their role as protector. Yet, the paper argues that their positions are not really that different, bearing in mind Rousseau's executive power and wise legislators, and Hobbes' strong rights of subjects. The thesis of the paper is that in both of them the people authorize and supervise, and someone else rules.
PB  - Univerzitet u Banjoj Luci - Fakultet političkih nauka, Banja Luka i Institut za političke studije, Beograd
T2  - Politeia
T1  - Teorija društvenog ugovora Tomasa Hobsa i Žanžaka Rusoa - ujedinjeni ili suprotstavljeni?
T1  - Social contract theory of Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau: United or opposed?
EP  - 127
IS  - 24
SP  - 109
VL  - 12
DO  - 10.5937/politeia0-43357
UR  - conv_2850
ER  - 

@article{
author = "Vojnović, Sava",
year = "2022",
abstract = "Tomas Hobs i Žan-Žak Ruso spadaju među najznačajnije novovekovne političke filozofe, koji svoje teorije zasnivaju na ideji društvenog ugovora. Oba autora polaze od prirodne jednakosti svih ljudi i nesigurnosti prirodnog stanja, ali na prvi pogled završavaju u sasvim drugačijim perspektivama o suverenitetu i odnosima unutar političkog društva. Ruso insistira na zajedničkom suverenitetu svih građana, koji imaju zagarantovan ekonomski minimum, neotuđivo ovlašćenje donošenja zakona i brige o opštoj volji, pri čemu svi zajedno istovremeno konstituišu i one nad kojima se vlada. Hobs, sa druge strane, nalaže da narod bira suverena koji se nalazi uvek u prirodnom stanju i mora da ima veliku moć kako bi mogao da ispuni svoju ulogu zaštitnika. Ipak, u radu se iznose argumenti u prilog tome da njihove pozicije zapravo nisu toliko različite, imajući na umu Rusoovu izvršnu vlast i mudre zakonotvorce, a kod Hobsa široko postavljena prava podanika. Teza rada jeste da kod obojice narod autorizuje i nadzire, a neko drugi vlada., Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau are among the most important modern political philosophers, who base their theories on the idea of social contract. Both authors start from the natural equality of all people and the uncertainty of the natural state, but at first glance they end up with completely different perspectives on sovereignty and relations within a political society. Rousseau insists on the common sovereignty of all citizens, who have a guaranteed economic minimum and the inalienable authority to enact laws and care for the general will, by which they all together simultaneously constitute those who are governed. Hobbes, on the other hand, dictates that the people elect a sovereign who is always in their natural state and must have great power in order to fulfil their role as protector. Yet, the paper argues that their positions are not really that different, bearing in mind Rousseau's executive power and wise legislators, and Hobbes' strong rights of subjects. The thesis of the paper is that in both of them the people authorize and supervise, and someone else rules.",
publisher = "Univerzitet u Banjoj Luci - Fakultet političkih nauka, Banja Luka i Institut za političke studije, Beograd",
journal = "Politeia",
title = "Teorija društvenog ugovora Tomasa Hobsa i Žanžaka Rusoa - ujedinjeni ili suprotstavljeni?, Social contract theory of Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau: United or opposed?",
pages = "127-109",
number = "24",
volume = "12",
doi = "10.5937/politeia0-43357",
url = "conv_2850"
}

Vojnović, S.. (2022). Teorija društvenog ugovora Tomasa Hobsa i Žanžaka Rusoa - ujedinjeni ili suprotstavljeni?. in Politeia
Univerzitet u Banjoj Luci - Fakultet političkih nauka, Banja Luka i Institut za političke studije, Beograd., 12(24), 109-127.
https://doi.org/10.5937/politeia0-43357
conv_2850

Vojnović S. Teorija društvenog ugovora Tomasa Hobsa i Žanžaka Rusoa - ujedinjeni ili suprotstavljeni?. in Politeia. 2022;12(24):109-127.
doi:10.5937/politeia0-43357
conv_2850 .

Vojnović, Sava, "Teorija društvenog ugovora Tomasa Hobsa i Žanžaka Rusoa - ujedinjeni ili suprotstavljeni?" in Politeia, 12, no. 24 (2022):109-127,
https://doi.org/10.5937/politeia0-43357 .,
conv_2850 .