diplomsko delo
Ana Bakše (Author), Jernej Letnar Černič (Mentor)

Abstract

Diplomska naloga je posvečena ustavnemu sodišču in pobudi za oceno ustavnosti. Ustavno sodišče je neodvisen in avtonomen državni organ, ki izvršuje ustavnosodno presojo. Je najvišji organ sodne oblasti na nacionalni ravni. Njegove odločbe so zavezujoče. Kot primer pobude sta izbrani dve odločbi ustavnega sodišča, ki se nanašata na financiranje osnovnošolskega izobraževanja v zasebnih šolah. V prvi odločbi ustavno sodišče presojalo neskladje 86. člena Zakona o organizaciji in financiranju vzgoje in izobraževanja z drugim odstavkom 57. člena ustave. Ustava terja od države, da se osnovnošolsko izobraževanje financira iz javnih sredstev. Zagovarja stališče, da je osnovnošolska izobrazba javna korist. Zakonska ureditev pa zasebnim šolam za izvajanje obveznega akreditiranega javnega programa zagotavlja 85- odstotno sofinanciranje. Predhodna odločba ustavnega sodišča, ki se je nanašala na vse tipe in stopnje izobraževanja, določila, da je v zakonodajalčevem polju proste presoje, v kolikšnem deležu bo sofinanciral zasebne šole. Ustavno sodišče je v presoji ugotovilo protiustavnost, zato je izdalo ugotovitveno odločbo in zakonodajalcu naložilo, da neskladje odpravi v roku enega leta. Nekaj let po odločitvi je ustavno sodišče ponovno pred podobno dilemo, le da se tokratna presoja nanaša na jutranje varstvo, dopolnilni pouk ter popoldansko bivanje. Ob enem pa pobudniki opomnijo ustavno sodišče na neizvršitev odločbe. Sodniki odločijo, da zadeva ni v neskladju z ustavo, saj da je jutranje varstvo, dopolnilni pouk ter popoldansko bivanje del razširjenega programa in ne obveznega. Ob enem pa ustavo sodišče okara zakonodajalca za neodzivnost, vendar se ne odloči za določitev načina izvršitve

Keywords

ustava;ustavno sodišče;pobuda za oceno ustavnosti in zakonitosti;odločba ustavnega sodišča;osnovnošolsko izobraževanje;

Data

Language: Slovenian
Year of publishing:
Typology: 2.11 - Undergraduate Thesis
Organization: FDŠ
Publisher: [A. Bakše]
UDC: 347.191.11(043.2)
COBISS: 98651651 Link will open in a new window
Views: 6
Downloads: 2
Average score: 0 (0 votes)
Metadata: JSON JSON-RDF JSON-LD TURTLE N-TRIPLES XML RDFA MICRODATA DC-XML DC-RDF RDF

Other data

Secondary language: English
Secondary abstract: Dissertation is dedicated to the Constitutional Court and the initiative to assess its constitutionality. The Constitutional Court is an independent and autonomous state body that exercises constitutional law. At the national level, it is the highest judicial body. Its decisions are binding. As an example of an initiative, were chosen two decisions of the Constitutional Court relating to the financing of primary education in private schools. In the first decision, the Constitutional Court assessed the inconsistency of Article 86 of the Organization and Financing of Education Act with the second paragraph of Article 57 of the Constitution. The Constitution requires the state to finance primary education from public funds. It advocates the view that primary education is a public good. The legal regulation provides private schools with 85% cofinancing for the implementation of the mandatory accredited public program. A previous decision of the Constitutional Court, which referred to all types and levels of education, determined that it is up to the legislator to decide to what extent he will cofinance private schools. In its assessment, the Constitutional Court found the act unconstitutional, so it issued a declaratory decision and ordered the legislator to eliminate the discrepancy within one year. A few years after the decision, the Constitutional Court is again faced with a similar dilemma, only this time the assessment refers to morning care, supplementary classes and afternoon stay. At the same time, the initiators remind the Constitutional Court of the non-execution of the decision. The judges decide that the case is not unconstitutional, as morning care, supplementary classes and afternoon stays are part of the extended program and not mandatory. At the same time, the Constitutional Court reprimands the legislator for unresponsiveness, but does not decide to determine the manner of execution
Type (COBISS): Final reflection paper
Thesis comment: Fak. za državne in evropske študije
Source comment: Dipl. delo 1. stopnje bolonjskega študija; Nasl. z nasl. zaslona; Opis vira z dne 23. 2. 2022;
Pages: 1 spletni vir (1 datoteka PDF (60 str.))
ID: 14617790