Primerjava pooblastil lovskega in ribiškega čuvaja ter naravovarstvenega nadzornika

Srečko Krope (Author), Dragan Milutinović (Author)

Abstract

Namen prispevka: Namen prispevka je predstaviti delovanje in pooblastila lovskih, ribiških čuvajev in naravovarstvenih nadzornikov, pri tem pa povzeti dosedanjo zakonodajo, ugotoviti enakost ali različnost njihovih pooblastil in predlagati morebitne spremembe pri izvajanju nalog in uporabi pooblastil. Metode: Prispevek temelji na pregledu in analizi obstoječe literature s področja varstva narave, lovstva, ribištva in prekrškovne zakonodaje ter področja pooblastil. Ugotovitve: Ugotovili smo, da bi bilo treba zaradi nestrokovnega izrazoslovja in poenotenja pooblastil nadzorno-čuvajske službe v zakonodaji ustrezneje »konkretizirati« in spremeniti, jih združiti v enotna pooblastila, zagotoviti praktično usposabljanje (ki ga izvaja policija), opraviti strokovno usposabljanje in preizkus znanja za vodenje ter odločanje v prekrškovnem postopku in uvesti enotne uniforme za nadzorno-čuvajsko službo. Praktična uporabnost: V zadnjih nekaj letih je v okviru nevladnih organizacij precej polemik o tem, kdo ima pooblastila in kakšna so ta pooblastila. Zlasti se s to problematiko veliko ukvarja Lovska zveza Slovenije, ki za svoje lovske čuvaje želi pridobiti nekoliko več pooblastil, ki bi bila podobna pooblastilom naravovarstvenih nadzornikov. Izvirnost/pomembnost prispevka: Primerjave obravnavanih pooblastil do zdaj v Sloveniji še ni bilo, zato prispevek predstavlja začetek razprav o pooblastilih, izobraževanju in usposabljanju ter vodenju prekrškovnega postopka.

Keywords

lovski čuvaj;ribiški čuvaj;naravovarstveni nadzornik;pooblastila;

Data

Language:	Slovenian
Year of publishing:	2019
Typology:	1.04 - Professional Article
Organization:	UM FVV - Faculty of Criminal Justice
UDC:	(639.2+639.1):351.78
COBISS:	3823850
ISSN:	1580-0253
Parent publication:	Varstvoslovje
Views:	409
Downloads:	23
Average score:	0 (0 votes)
Metadata:

Other data

Secondary language:	English
Secondary title:	Comparison of Powers of the Game and Fish Warden and the Environmental Supervisor
Secondary abstract:	Purpose: The aim of the paper is to present activities and powers of the game and fish wardens and the environmental supervisors. Therefore, the review of legislation, the comparison of powers, and the assessment of similarities and differences between them are made. The paper suggests some possible changes in the performance of tasks and the use of powers for game and fishing wardens. Design/Methods/Approach: The article is based on the literature review and analysis of existing legislation in the field of nature conservation, hunting and fishing. Findings: Non-professional terminology and unequal powers of the supervisory-warden services have been identified. It is crucial to properly concretise and change the powers at least in the legislation. The powers should be harmonised and the terminology standardised. The practical training should be provided (by the police) for wardens, who should undergo professional training and pass the professional examination to prove leadership and decision-making competencies in the misdemeanour procedure. The common uniforms for the supervisory-warden services should be introduced. Practical Implications: There has been a debate within the NGOs in the last few years about the powers: who has or should have the powers and what kind of powers are suitable for them. The Hunting federation of Slovenia is particularly concerned with this issue, since they want to obtain more powers for game wardens, the powers that would be similar for example to the environmental supervisors. Originality/Value: A comparison of the powers of the discussed subjects has not yet been presented nor a comparison has been made. Therefore, this contribution represents the beginning of debate on powers, education and training, and on the conduct of misdemeanour operations.
Type (COBISS):	Scientific work
Pages:	str. 248-263
Volume:	ǂLetn. ǂ21
Issue:	ǂšt. ǂ3
Chronology:	2019
ID:	11506418