Zum Inhalt springen
Acta Politica Polonica

Vorher: Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Szczecińskiego. Acta Politica

2/2024 (58)
OpenAlex

Für die gesamte Zeitschrift, laut OpenAlex.

Zitate
245
Publikationen
252
H-index
5
I10-index
1
Mittlere Zitierhäufigkeit (2 Jahre)
0,44
Erhaltene Zitate nach Jahr
Diagramm der Zeitschriftenzitate. Die genauen Werte stehen in der Tabelle darunter. 2017: 9 2018: 8 2019: 7 2020: 8 2021: 31 2022: 21 2023: 38 2024: 39 2025: 39 2026: 42 2017 2026
Datentabelle anzeigen
Erhaltene Zitate nach Jahr
JahrPublikationenZitate
2017339
2018298
2019177
2020158
20211631
20222121
20231338
20242039
20251939
2026642

Daten abgerufen:

Was bedeuten diese Zahlen?

Publikationen und Zitate umfassen die dieser Zeitschrift zugeordneten OpenAlex-Datensätze. Der H-Index ist die größte Anzahl h von Publikationen mit jeweils mindestens h Zitaten. Der I10-Index zählt Publikationen mit mindestens 10 Zitaten. Das Diagramm zeigt die in einem Jahr erhaltenen Zitate; das laufende Jahr ist unvollständig. Die Abdeckung kann von WNUS und anderen Diensten abweichen.

Der Zweijahresdurchschnitt ist eine OpenAlex-Kennzahl und nicht der Journal Impact Factor von Clarivate.

In OpenAlex ansehen (neuer Tab)
Google Scholar

Implementation of the Agreement on the succession of the former SFRY

DOI: 10.18276/ap.2024.58-01
Zitieren

Der Volltext ist verfügbar

Abstract

The process of state succession, according to the rules of classical international law and the dominant theory of universal succession taken from Roman law, is inconsistent due to the sources of international law that regulate it. To standardize the practice of dealing with predecessor states and successor states in cases of succession, two international conventions were adopted: the Convention on the Succession of States Concerning International Treaties in 1978 and the Convention on the Succession of States Concerning State Property, Archives, and Debts in 1983. Although the former convention entered into force in 1996, the latter one never did. However, both conventions attempted to standardize the way succession cases are handled under international law. In the case of the former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY), the process of succession following unconstitutional secession became highly politicized, particularly after the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. The instrumentalization of international public law for political purposes in this case is still relevant today, as it highlights the politicization of international relations and legal norms. The Succession Agreement, signed in 2001 was a positive step towards fairly dividing the assets and liabilities of the SFRY among the successor states. However, even 23 years after its signing, this process has not been completed. Furthermore, there have been violations of basic human rights by Croatia and Slovenia regarding the succession of acquired rights of former citizens of the SFRY, despite these countries now having the status of EU members. The conclusion suggests the necessity of further cooperation and the solving of key issues to achieve stability and prosperity in the region.
PDF-Vorschau

PDF öffnen

Bibliographie (18)
  1. Aćić, M. & Grujić, M. (2022). The role of selected financial organizations in the reconstruction of Bosnia and Herzegovina after the Dayton Peace Agreement. Acta Politica Polonica, 1 (53), 15–28. DOI: 10.18276/ap.2022.53-02.
  2. Aćić, M. (2018). Lessons and issues of the Yugoslav state. Glossa Iuridica, 3–4, 166–181. Ahmedi B., & Ademi A. (2023), Succession of states in international law, International Journal of Legal Sciences, 11, 47. Retrieved from: http://eprints.unite.edu.mk/id/eprint/1363 (18.01.2024).
  3. Antić, O. (2012). Neke napomene o Sporazumu o pitanjima sukcesije. Godišnjak Pravnog fakulteta.
  4. Avramov, S., Kreća, M. (2003). Međunarodno javno pravo, Savremena administracija. Brownlie, I. (1990). Principles of Public International Law (4th ed.). Clarendon Press: Oxford. Councile of Europe (2021). Adopté par la Commission de Venise lors de sa 62e session plénière. Retrieved from: https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-AD(2005)004 (19.01.2024).
  5. Cowger Jr, A.R. (1985). Rights and obligations of successor states: An alternative theory. Case Western Reserve Jornal of International law, 17 (2), 298. Retrieved from: https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1756&context=jil (19.01.2024).
  6. Craven, M.C. (1998). The problem of state succession and the identity of states under international law. European Journal of International Law, 9 (1), 142–162. DOI: 10.1093/ejil/9.1.142.
  7. Čolović, V. (2013). Garancije država i stečena prava u uslovima sukcesije – opšta pitanja (sa osvrtom na Sporazum o pitanjima sukcesije SFRJ), Proceedings of the international scientific conference, „Regulisanje otvorenih pitanja između država sukcesora SFRJ,” Institut za međunarodnu politiku i privredu.
  8. Čolović, V. (2015). Sporazum o pitanjima sukcesije-zaštita privatne svojine. Annual of the Faculty of Law/Godisnjak Fakulteta Pravnih Nauka, 5 (5). Devaney, J. (2020). What Happens Next? The Law of State Succession. In Jure Vidmar, Sarah McGibbon & Lea Raible (Eds.), Research Handbook on Secession, GCILS Working Paper Series, (6) (Forthcoming).
  9. Dimitrijević, D. (2013). Sporazum o pitanjima sukcesije SFR Jugoslavije i međunarodno pravo. Institut za međunarodnu politiku i privredu.
  10. Dimitrijević, D. (2018). Sukcesija arhiva SFR Jugoslavije kao dela zajedničke kulturno-istorijske zaostavštine. Institut za međunarodnu politiku i privredu. ECHR – The Council of Europe. (2015b). Case Mile Novaković aganinst Croatia. Retrieved from: https://uredzastupnika. gov.hr/UserDocsImages/dokumenti/Presude%20i%20odluke/Novakovi%C4%87%20protiv%20Hrvatske,%20 presuda.pdf (19.01.2024).
  11. ECHR – The Council of Europe. (2015a). Case Y. Against Slovenia. (Application no. 41107/10) verdict. Retrieved from: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/app/conversion/docx/?library=ECHR&id=001-162940&filename=CASE%20OF%20 Y.%20v.%20SLOVENIA%20 %20%5BMontenegrin%20Translation%5D%20by%20the%20COE%20Human%20 Rights%20Trust%20Fund.docx&logEvent=False (19.01.2024).
  12. Kreća, M. (2012). Međunarodno javno pravo. Beograd: Centar za izdavaštvo. Novaković, Š. (2017). Arhivsko gradivo socijalističkog razdoblja u procesu provedbe aneksa D sporazuma o pitanjima sukcesije. Glasnik arhiva i Arhivističkog udruženja Bosne i Hercegovine, 47, 9–19.
  13. Official Gazette of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. (2002). Sporazum o pitanjima sukcesije SFRJ 2001. Retrieved from: https://pf.uns.ac.rs/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Sporazum_o_pitanjima_sukcesije_SFRJ_2001.pdf (21.01.2024).
  14. Shaw, M.N. (2017). International law (6th ed.). Cambridge University Press.
  15. Stanivuković, M. & Živković, M. (2004). Međunarodno privatno pravo. Beograd: Službeni list SCG. Tabaković, S.E. & Božić, V.B. (2022). Platforma za “Okončanje ratnog perioda” na prostorima bivše SFRJ sprovođenjem ratifikovanog Ugovora o pitanjima sukcesije uz posebni osvrt na “Anex G”. Baština, 56, 181–198. DOI: 10.5937/bastina32-37309.
  16. Tams, C.J. (2016). State succession to investment treaties: Mapping the issues. ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal, 31 (2), 314–343. DOI: 10.1093/icsidreview/siw006. Tekst Sporazuma o pitanjima sukcesije. (2022). Retrieved from: http://www.podaci.net/_z1/9128867/S-psukce01v0206.html. The Federal Republic of Germany, Federal Supreme Court (BGH) (1991). Case No 2 BGs 38/9. Retrieved from: http://ebooks.cambridge.org/clr/case.jsf?bid=CBO9781316152232&id=CBO9781316152232A007 (21.01.2024).
  17. Vidačak, L. (2021, January 1). Ni nakon 20 godina nije postignuta suglasnost oko raspodjele imovine. Retrieved from: https://www.vecernji.ba/vijesti/ni-nakon-20-godina-nije-postignuta-suglasnost-oko-raspodjele-imovine-1735646 (21.01.2024).
  18. Vladušić, L. (2011). Provođenje sporazuma o pitanjima sukcesije bivše SFRJ. Zbornik radova Ekonomskog fakulteta u Istočnom Sarajevu, (5), 319–333.