University of Zenica, Zenica, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Gotovo da ne postoji osoba koja bar jednom u životu nije bila stranka u
upravnom postupku. Efikasnost upravnog postupka jedan je od stubova
vladavine prava kao ideala kojima teže progresivne zajednice. U Bosni i
Hercegovini na snazi su četiri zakona o upravnom postupku i četiri zakona o
upravnim sporovima. Rad problematizira pitanje pozicije stranke u slučaju
kontinuirane šutnje uprave, tj. da li stranka ima na raspolaganju dovoljno
instrumenata da se zaštiti, da ostvari svoje pravo ukoliko organ uprave ne donosi
odluku po njenom zahtjevu. Uz mogućnost da se od nadležnih sudova u
upravnom sporu zatraži donošenje presude kojom će se organu uprave naložiti
donošenje odluke, ispostavlja se da je problematičan način provedbe takve
presude. Zakoni na entitetskim i državnom nivou predviđaju različite odredbe
kao mogućnosti provedbe. Posljednja stajališta sudske prakse ukazuju da u
određenim situacijama stranka može potraživati sudske penale na dnevnom nivou
u novčanim iznosima za svaki dan nedonošenja odluke. Pored toga, stranka u
smislu provođenja sudske odluke kojom se organu uprave nalaže donošenje
odluke na raspolaganju ima i mogućnosti da zahtjeva pokretanje disciplinskog,
prekršajnog ali i krivičnog postupka.
There is almost no person who has not been a party to administrative
proceedings at least once ih his/her life. Efficiency of administrative procedure
is on of the pillars of the rule of law as an ideal that progressive communities
strive for. Four laws on administrative procedure and four laws on administrative
disputes are in force in Bosnia and Herzegovina. This paper problematizes the
issue of party's position in case of continous silence of administration, i.e.
whether the party has at its disposal enough instruments to protect itself, to
exercise its right if the administrative body does not make a decision at its
request. With the possibility that competent courts in an administrative dispute
may be asked to issue a judgment ordering administrative body to make a
decision, it turns out that the way of implementing such a judgment is
problematic. Laws at the entity and state level provide for various provisions as
implementation options. The latest court decision points out that in certain
situations, a party can claim court penalties on a daily basis in monetary amounts
for each day of failure to make a decision. In addition, the party, in terms of the
implementation of a court decision ordering the administraive body to make a
decision, has the option of demanding the initiation of disciplinary, infringement
and criminal proceedings.
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.