Show simple item record

International law aspects of the decision of the Constitutional court of Serbia on constitutionality and legality of the Brussels agreement

dc.creatorĐerić, Vladimir
dc.creatorPapić, Tatjana
dc.date.accessioned2024-05-21T11:05:50Z
dc.date.available2024-05-21T11:05:50Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.identifier.issn0003-2565
dc.identifier.urihttps://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/1664
dc.description.abstractČlanak analizira međunarodnopravne akspekte odluke Ustavnog suda Srbije (USS) o odbacivanju zahteva za ocenu ustavnosti i zakonitosti Prvog sporazuma o načelima normalizacije odnosa između Beograda i Prištine (Briselski sporazum). Stav Suda je bio da se on ne predstavlja kao ratifikovani međunarodni ugovor, nego politički sporazum, te da stoga nema nadležnost da razmatra njegovu ustavnost i zakonitost. Iako se konačni zaključak USS o prirodi Briselskog sporazuma može smatrati ispravnim, članak pokazuje da je obrazloženje takvog zaključka problematično sa stanovišta međunarodnog prava. Članak pokazuje i kako je USS trebalo da rešava pitanja prirode Briselskog sporazuma, primenjujući opšta pravila o tumačenju međunarodnih sporazuma.sr
dc.description.abstractThis article deals with international law aspects of the decision of the Constitutional Court of Serbia (CCS) to dismiss a request for assessment of constitutionality and legality of the First agreement of principles governing the normalization of relations (Brussels Agreement) accepted by representatives of Serbia and Kosovo on 19 April 2013. CCS ruled inter alia that it did not have jurisdiction to consider constitutionality and legality of the Brussels Agreement since it was not a ratified international treaty, but a political agreement. The authors consider that the CCS ruling was correct one, but that its reasoning was flawed from international law perspective. CCS chose to determine the nature of the Brussels Agreement starting from the definition of international treaty in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, which inter alia provides that international treaty is an international agreement concluded by states. This led to a discussion of whether Kosovo is a state, in which CSS adopted positions that are at variance with applicable rules of international law. The authors then show that CSS had at least two different lines of reasoning that would lead it to the same conclusion, but without the problems inherent in the approach actually chosen by the court. In particular, the conclusion that the Brussels Agreement is a political agreement can be reached through customary rules of interpretation contained in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.en
dc.relationDeo istraživanja I analize za ovaj članak je nastao u okviru istraživačkog projekta 'Sudovi kreatori politike: Razmatranje uloge ustavnih sudova kao nosilaca promena na Zapadnog Balkanu', pod okriljem Regionalnog programa za unapređenje istraživanja na Za
dc.rightsopenAccess
dc.sourceAnali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu
dc.subjectUstavni sud Srbijesr
dc.subjectpriznanje državasr
dc.subjectmeđunarodni ugovorisr
dc.subjectKosovosr
dc.subjectBriselski sporazumsr
dc.subjectrecognition of statesen
dc.subjectKosovoen
dc.subjectinternational treatiesen
dc.subjectConstitutional court of Serbiaen
dc.subjectBrussels agreementen
dc.titleMeđunarodnopravni aspekti odluke Ustavnog suda Srbije o ustavnosti i zakonitosti Briselskog sporazumasr
dc.titleInternational law aspects of the decision of the Constitutional court of Serbia on constitutionality and legality of the Brussels agreementen
dc.typecontributionToPeriodical
dc.rights.licenseCC BY
dc.citation.epage214
dc.citation.issue2
dc.citation.other64(2): 200-214
dc.citation.rankM24
dc.citation.spage200
dc.citation.volume64
dc.identifier.doi10.5937/AnaliPFB1602200D
dc.identifier.fulltexthttps://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/bitstream/id/1796/1657.pdf
dc.identifier.rcubconv_3053
dc.type.versionpublishedVersion


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record