Prikaz osnovnih podataka o dokumentu

The separation of powers in ancient Athens

dc.creatorGligić, Sanja
dc.date.accessioned2024-03-11T14:10:56Z
dc.date.available2024-03-11T14:10:56Z
dc.date.issued2010
dc.identifier.issn0003-2565
dc.identifier.urihttps://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/526
dc.description.abstractPojedini autori pokušali su u antičkoj Atini da pronađu korene Monteskjeove teorije o podeli vlasti na legislativu, egzekutivu i sudstvo. Osnov njihovih polaznih stavova bilo je Aristotelovo razlikovanje tri funkcije, koje mogu služiti državnom uređenju: ekklesiazein (savetodavna), arkhein (ona koja se odnosi na upravne organe) i dikazein (sudska). U postupku odlučivanja o 'tužbi protiv zakona' (graphe paranomon), koju je uveo Perikle, uočili su sudsku kontrolu zakonitosti. Međutim, novi radovi o ovom sredstvu pokazuju da graphe paranomon nije mogla da posluži jačoj kontroli skupštine od strane sudova. S druge strane, analiza političkih institucija neposredne atinske demokratije upućuje na zaključak da skupština, upravni i sudski organi antičke Atine nisu u punom smislu reči bili podeljeni na legislativu egzekutivu i sudstvo u modernom značenju.sr
dc.description.abstractIn Western political theory, ever since Montesquieu formulated his theory of the tripartite separation of powers in the eighteenth century, there has always been a strong sense that the legislature, the executive and the judiciary ought to be independent bodies. There have even been attempts to read this doctrine back into ancient Athens, relying most heavily on Aristotle's distinction between ekklesiazein (being an assembly-member) arkhein (being a public official) and dikazein (sitting as a judge). The main objective of this article is to examine that ancient political theorists had no reason to regard Montesquieu's theories as normative. Moreover, Aristotle's purpose in this passage lies in classifying the functions that go to make up a full citizen, and nowhere does he suggest that these powers ought to be exercise by different people. The author tries to present interpretation about development of the political institution that becomes the central features of the fully developed democracy of the ancient Athens. This finding shows that in Athenian demokratia of the fifth century B.C., both in constitutional theory and in everyday political praxis the demos (people) exercised the kratos (sovereign power) in all three spheres of legislation, executive action and jurisdiction.en
dc.publisherUniverzitet u Beogradu - Pravni fakultet, Beograd
dc.rightsopenAccess
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.sourceAnali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu
dc.subjectpolitičke institucijesr
dc.subjectpodela vlastisr
dc.subjectgraphe paranomonsr
dc.subjectdemokratijasr
dc.subjectAristotelsr
dc.subjectthe separation of powersen
dc.subjectthe political institutionsen
dc.subjectgraphe paranomonen
dc.subjectdemocracyen
dc.subjectAristotleen
dc.titleO podeli vlasti u antičkoj Atinisr
dc.titleThe separation of powers in ancient Athensen
dc.typearticle
dc.rights.licenseBY
dc.citation.epage336
dc.citation.issue2
dc.citation.other58(2): 315-336
dc.citation.spage315
dc.citation.volume58
dc.identifier.rcubconv_203
dc.type.versionpublishedVersion


Dokumenti

DatotekeVeličinaFormatPregled

Uz ovaj zapis nema datoteka.

Ovaj dokument se pojavljuje u sledećim kolekcijama

Prikaz osnovnih podataka o dokumentu