2006. Ã©vi 1. szÃ¡m - Jura - PÃ©csi TudomÃ¡nyegyetem

More documents

Recommendations

Info

164 gyar alakok. 2000 és Pénzügykutató, Budapest 1994. (Lányi Gusztáv i. m. 575–576. o.) 16 Vö. Wiatr, Jerzy J.: A politikai viszonyok szociológiája, Kossuth, 1980. 277–278. o. 17 Vö. Ranney, Austin: Politics in the United States (In: Comparative Politics Today. General editors: Almond, Gabriel A. – Powell, G. Bringham. Harper Collins Publishers, New York 1992.) 570 p. 18 Fontos további szempont a részvételek közötti különbségre az európai és az USA-beli politikai pártok természetében – tágabban értelmezve az európai (pártközpontú) és az USA-beli lobbysta-típusú érdekartikulációs (politikai) folyamat jellegében – keresendõ. Vö. Janda, Kenneth–Berry, Jeffrey M.–Goldman, Jerry: Az amerikai demokrácia, Osiris Kiadó, Budapest 1996. 185–186. o. 19 Vö. Körösényi András: A magyar politikai rendszer, Osiris Kiadó, Budapest 1998. 31. o. 20 Vö. Simon János: Politikai kultúra Magyarországon a „melankolikus forradalom” alatt és után (1989–1992). In: Törésvonalak és értékválasztások (szerk.: Balogh István). MTA Varga Tamás: Politikai magatartás és részvétel Politikai Tudományok Intézete, Budapest 1994. 184. o. 21 Ranney, Austin i.m. 575. p. 22 Janda, Kenneth–Berry, Jeffrey M.–Goldman, Jerry i. m. 185. o. 23 A nem magyar részvételi adatok forrása: Wolfram Nordsieck, Germany 1997–2006. (http://www.parties-andelections.de) 24 Kritikusan elemzi Arató Krisztina: EU – népszavazás Magyarországon c. tanulmányában. In: Magyarország Politikai Évkönyve 2004 (szerk. Sándor Péter, Vas László, Sándor Ágnes, Tolnai Ágnes), Demokrácia Kutatások Magyar Központja Közhasznú Alapítvány, Budapest 2004 25 A magyar választási részvételi adatok forrása: http:// www.valasztas.hu (az Országos Választási Iroda honlapja). JURA 2006/1.
Miljeno Brekalo–Nada Petricevic: ˇ ´ The Legal Character of Transformation and Privatization of Social Ownership… 165 Miljeno Brekalo professor of law Nada Petricevic ˇ ´ dipl. iur. Josip Juraj Strossmayer University, Osijek FORUM The Legal Character of Transformation and Privatization of Social Ownership in the Republic of Croatia Abstract: Due to the new economy policy based on the market economy the social ownership has been unfit and there has been need to transform it into the individually conceptualized right of ownership. The article deals with the process of transformation and privatization. Key words: ownership, social ownership, transformation & privatization. 1. Introduction In the ex-socialist countries there was a type of socialist ownership that represented the type of collective ownership. This type of ownership was established for the first time, understandably, in the USSR, which was present in all the ex-socialist countries. However, both the former SFRY and their republics and autonomous provinces developed a different form of socialist ownership that represented a constitutional category during their existence and was defined as «social ownership». 2. Social Ownership «The social ownership is a socialist social-economic relation. The means of production and other means of work, as well as mineral and other natural resources belong to each member of the society and to all together at the same time, but not to anyone in totality and not to anyone exclusively.» (Horvat, 1972) During the existence of the SFRY the law theoreticians who were in the function of creating the official politics, interpreted the social ownership as the form of ownership the titular of which was the society, e.g. the social community. The means of production belonged to all the members of the society altogether and not to anyone individually. According to this interpretation, the means of production belonged to the society in the totality and not to any special social (legal) subject. Namely, it was stated then that means of production served exclusively to the social labour in order to satisfy personal and common needs and interests of working people and to develop material basis of socialist society and socialist self-management relations. 3. Transformation & Privatization Consequently, the social ownership was the basic institution of socio-economic order in the former SFRY that was ideologically strongly “coloured”. The ideological coloration of the social ownership can be best seen in the following statement of the then political structures and apologetic law theoreticians of: “the social ownership cancels the alienation of the working class from the means of productions and other working conditions as a source of human exploitation”. The then political and law theoreticians claimed that this aspect of collective ownership excluded the possibility of private and state ownership of means of production, thus the possibility of worker’s exploitation by an individual or the state was excluded. Due to this interpretation, the thing that was omitted was any legal argumentation representing the individual concept of ownership where the titular was known. In the Republic of Croatia the terms of “transformation” and “privatization” of social ownership are very often used as synonyms, e.g. there is no difference between the terms mentioned. The notional difference is of great importance so that one could understand the transformation of the former constitutional institute of social ownership that was ideologically strongly “colored” in the former Socialist Republic of Croatia, e.g. in the Socialist Federative Republic of Yugoslavia. The transformation is a process of transforming the social ownership into public (state) ownership, where the state becomes the owner of all owners’ rights. The privatization presents the transfer of owner’s rights of the state, e.g. the public sector to the private owners with the corresponding owner’s rights. Due to the ideological construction of the term JURA 2006/1.
Page 1 and 2:
A Pécsi Tudományegyetem Állam-
Page 3 and 4:
TARTALOM STUDIUM BOROS JÁNOS: Prag
Page 5 and 6:
CONTENTS STUDIUM JÁNOS BOROS: Prag
Page 7 and 8:
Boros János: Pragmatizmus és demo
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Drinóczi Tímea-Zeller Judit: A h
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Horváth István: Az elvárások é
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Juhász László: A bírói határo
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Kelemen Dániel: Az angol társasá
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Kõhalmi László: A jogi személly
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Herbert Küpper: Das parlamentarisc
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Kitti Maros: Research on peyotism f
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Nagy Éva: A fogyasztási célú hi
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Pánovics Attila: A Nemzeti Civil A
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Zeller Judit: Jogalkotási feladato
Page 113 and 114: Zeller Judit: Jogalkotási feladato
Page 121 and 122: Ádám Antal: Az azték, a maja és
Page 127 and 128: Adrian Mihai Inceu-Irimie Popa: Inc
Page 141 and 142: Irimie Emil Popa-Adrian Inceu: Law
Page 143 and 144: Juhász Botond: A Miskolci Doktoran
Page 149 and 150: Máté Julesz: Advances in legislat
Page 159 and 160: Varga Tamás: Politikai magatartás
Page 161 and 162: Varga Tamás: Politikai magatartás
Page 163: Varga Tamás: Politikai magatartás
Page 167 and 168: Miljeno Brekalo-Nada Petricevic: ˇ
Page 169 and 170: Dávid Lilla: „Emlékkönyv Loson
Page 179 and 180: Fábián Adrián: PhD Tanulmányok
Page 181 and 182: Fábián Adrián: PhD Tanulmányok
Page 183 and 184: Horváth Dóra: „A fenntartható
Page 189 and 190: Juhász Botond: Hazai Jogtörténé
Page 191 and 192: Kovács Eszter: A Jogtörténeti ta
Page 193 and 194: Kovács Eszter: A Jogtörténeti ta
Page 195 and 196: Kun Tibor: „Aurelio Lepre: Hábor
Page 201 and 202: Rónaszéki Andrea: „Fenyvesi Csa
Page 203 and 204: A „JURA” korábbi számainak ta
Page 205 and 206: A „JURA” korábbi számainak ta
Page 207: A „JURA” korábbi számainak ta
show all

2006. Ã©vi 1. szÃ¡m - Jura - PÃ©csi TudomÃ¡nyegyetem

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?