Socijalna zaštita u Republici Srbiji: Prednosti i mane novog zakona o socijalnoj zaštiti

Author(s): Vukašin Nišavić / Language(s): Serbian

Following delivery of new a Law on Social Protection, we can say that the system of social protection in the Republic of Serbia has been enhanced. The law has improved the position of socially handicaped categories of population, and enabled to have a higher number of persons with social protection and provided an increase of cash amount of material support. According to the Law, the social welfare institutions may be established by other legal and natural persons, which open the opportunity of providing social protection services for the entities that are not established by national or social capital, but only by capital that is in private ownership. This will certainly improve the quality of social protection, because it will create an open market and competition between services shall increase service quality. As for the conditions that must be met in order to obtain the right to some kind of tangible support, a new law introduces a variety of innovations. On the one hand, too restrictive conditions regarding the right on remuneration for assistance and care of another person, provided by regulations on pension and disability insurance have been reduced, which will certainly lead to an increase the number of beneficiaries of the mentioned law. On the other hand, the law provision regulating that person who is incapacitated for work together with application for financial aid must also submit a final court order, judicial settlement or evidence about proceeding before competent court in order to determine the obligation of alimony will certainly lead to a reduction in number of users of this kind of material support. The existing law is expanded by the new law; also certain new rights are introduced making the whole system of social protection more complete. The Country of Serbia has brought closer its social welfare system to European standards, especially in terms of decentralization and the introduction of private capital in the social protection system and has showed that in conditions of economic crisis the State is taking care of the vulnerable layers of population.

Uspostavljanje Vrhovnoga suda BiH: aktualna pravna misao o teoretskoj nedosljednosti u praksi

Author(s): Maja Sahadžić / Language(s): Croatian

Uniform application of law with respect to all citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina may be ensured only throughout legal unity and equality before the law. This is conceivable solely as long as if integral and hierarchical legal system with the Supreme Court at the top exists. Unity of the state is always discussed through legal unity and rule of law. As a matter of fact, the Supreme Court is ensuring uniform application and interpretation of law; equality of citizens before the law; and individual interests of citizens. Without the Supreme Court, legal certainty, equality before the law and uniform application of law for all citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina is compromised through differences in interpretation and application of substantive and procedural law before all courts in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Establishing the Supreme Court in Bosnia and Herzegovina would correspond to effective and rational fashion of legal acts harmonization e.g. final decision-making related to interpretation and application of substantive and procedural law before all courts in Bosnia and Herzegovina irrespective of establishing mechanism and aspect towards other courts.

Treba li BiH jedan vrhovni sud?

Author(s): Ljubomir Ožegović / Language(s): Serbian

The paper, which tries to answer the question of whether Bosnia and Herzegovina needs one Supreme Court, from theoretical and practical aspects, has shown the environment in which arguments are looked for in order to justify one of two possible answers and solutions. As in many other situations in life, which seems are not exceptions, so in this case it is not possible to find only those arguments that speak in favor of single answer. In order to attempt to find an appropriate solution, the author pays special attention to the supreme jurisdiction of the courts which are either constitutionally or by the law defined as the uniform application of law and ensuring the equality of citizens. After comparing this competence with the same powers of the supreme courts in other legal systems in the neighboring area and outside it, and bringing in correlation with certain international legal standards, the author tries to give a realistic view on how is possible to incorporate mentioned values in the legal justice system of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Vrhovni sud BiH: Odgovor na probleme ili samo još jedan projekat u kontinuiranim reformama pravosuđa

Author(s): Sevima Sali-Terzić / Language(s): Bosnian

The question if BiH needs one Supreme Court at the State level is a complex issue that involves much more consideration than just the mere creation of another court. This complexity derives not from various general arguments ‘for’ and ‘against’ its creation that tend to be more political rather than legal. It derives from variety of legal issues, primarily the constitutional bases for the creation of such Court, its jurisdiction, position within the legal BiH system, relation to other Entity courts including Supreme Courts and with the Court of BiH, etc. Also, the discussion should involve strategic issues of the further constitutional development and judicial reform. Is the creation of the BiH Supreme Court crucial for the further judicial reform and for the achievement of a more functional State? Or, is it more important to resolve some other, more difficult problems that judiciary faces in BiH, such as: huge backlog, trial in reasonable time, failures in the implementation of the Judicial Reform Strategy, continuing political pressures, lack of human and material resources, etc.? Author argues that in order to find the best solution it is important to carefully consider all the various questions and issues and not just to view the creation of the BiH Supreme Court as yet another project within judicial or constitutional reform.

Strukturalni dijalog o reformi pravosuđa u BiH: pregled

Author(s): Kristina Čuturić / Language(s): Croatian

Prvi sastanak između BiH i EU o pravosuđu održan je u Banja Luci, 7. lipnja 2011. godine. U zaključku sastanka, Europska komisija je usvojila nekoliko preporuka: Prvi set preliminarnih preporuka, vezano za provedbu Strategije za reformu sektora pravde, Europska komisija: - Naglašava da Strategija za reformu sektora pravde uzima u obzir nadležnosti različitih institucija na državnoj, entitetskim, kantonalnim razinama i razini Brčko distrikta, i sadrži mnoga pitanja koja su relevantna za buduću europsku integraciju Bosne i Hercegovine; - preporučuje da relevantne domaće vlasti procijene stanje njihove trenutačne koordinacije i suradnje u provedbi Strategije za reformu sektora pravde. To se posebno odnosi na utvrđivanje nedostataka, njihovo pravovremeno rješavanje a samim tim i oživljavanje provedbe strategije; - u tom smislu, potiče sve nadležne vlasti da garantira aktivno, efikasno i konstruktivno sudjelovanje u radnim skupinama i Tehničkom tajništvu za provedbu strategije; - potiče sve relevantne vlasti i institucije da se uključe u konstruktivnu raspravu u cilju utvrđivanja mjera koje mogu dalje unaprijediti neovisnost, profesionalizam i odgovornost u cijelom sektoru; - naglašava značaj rješavanja problema neriješenih predmeta na efikasan i pravovremen način. U tom smislu, finalizirat će se, što je prije moguće, posebne zakonske mjere za rješavanje komunalnih predmeta, koje će se sustavno provesti, pri čemu će prioritet imati najugroženiji sudovi u zemlji. Također je potrebno razmotriti dodatne mjere kojima bi se sudovi rasteretili od predmeta koji mogu biti upućeni drugim institucijama (npr. javnim bilježnicima).

Pregled najvažnijih javnopravnih događaja u 2012. godini

Author(s): Anida Ključanin / Language(s): Bosnian

Potpisivanjem Sporazuma o stabilizaciji i pridruživanju 16. juna 2008. godine Bosna i Hercegovina je preuzela obavezu ispunjenja određenih standarda u domenu kvaliteta državne uprave i kapaciteta institucija, donošenja zakona i njihove implementacije, a prije svega usklađivanja Ustava sa Evropskom konvencijom o ljudskim pravima i temeljnim slobodama. Međunarodna zajednica iz godine u godinu podstiče reforme, posebno na polju zakonodavstva i pravosuđa i daje jednoglasnu podršku evropskoj perspektivi Bosne i Hercegovine kao suverene i jedinstvene države. U tom cilju i Evropska komisija izrađuje godišnje izvještaje o napretku BiH. Izvještaj za 2012. godinu naznačio je mali napredak u uspostavljanju funkcionalnih i održivih institucija. U izvještaju je također naznačeno da „uspostava učinkovitog koordinacijskog mehanizma između različitih nivoa vlasti za prenošenje, primjenu i provedbu zakona EU tako da zemlja može govoriti jednim glasom o pitanjima EU, ostaje kao pitanje koje se mora riješiti“. Napredak Bosne i Hercegovine na putu evroatlantskih integracija označen je kao slab i u izvještaju koji je visoki predstavnik Valentin Inzko podnio Vijeću sigurnosti UN-a.

Zaključci sa stručne rasprave sa inozemnim učešćem Vrednovanje rada sudija i tužilaca u BiH (Sarajevo 29. 05. 2018)

Author(s): Edin Šarčević / Language(s): Bosnian

Conclusions from the expert discussion with foreign participation Evaluation of the work of judges and prosecutors in BiH (Sarajevo, 29. 05. 2018)

Uspostavljeni sistem vrednovanja rada tužilaca u Bosni i Hercegovini i njegove posljedice

Author(s): Džermin Pašić / Language(s): Bosnian

Understanding the importance of the prosecutor’s role in the reformed criminal justice system in Bosnia and Herzegovina is the cornerstone in ensuring more efficient work of prosecution service in B&H, and thereby more efficient suppression of crimes in general. One of the instruments that could ensure more efficient work of prosecution is the objective, purposeful and simulative evaluation of prosecutors’ work. System of prosecutorial evaluation in Bosnia and Herzegovina in its essence is not in line with the basic principles and purpose of criminal proceedings. The established system that is based on few selected criteria must be changed. New concept should take into consideration the new position of the prosecutor in the reformed criminal justice system, and all qualitative criteria that go along that position. All criteria that cannot be influenced by the prosecutor must not be taken into consideration.

Sistem normiranja rada tužilaca u Bosni i Hercegovini

Author(s): Demirel Delić / Language(s): Bosnian

The purpose of this paper is to present legal framework for individual and colective evaluation of prosecutors in the Bosnia and Herzegovina, criteria used for evaluation (quantity and quality criteria), bodie involved in these procedures (High Judicial Council and Prosecutorial Council of Bosnia and Herzegovina) and it's power. The main question arising from current legal framework is: what are the consequences of current particular evaluation criteria of prosecutors based on quantity and quality, does it de/stimulate best prosecutors to work harder and with more quality? The aim of assessing the work of a prosecutor will be presented within the scope of this article as well. Legal basis for the evaluation of prosecutor performance is set out in the provisions of the Law on the High Judicial Council and Prosecutorial Council of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Further and more detailed description is provided in the implementing act, issued by the High Judicial Council and Prosecutorial Council of Bosnia and Herzegovina on the basis of the legal authority. Criteria and measures for the evaluation comprise „prosecutor norms“ according to which a check is made whether the prosecutor solved the prescribed number of cases in the course of a year, and with what quality of those decisions, altogether with „work ethics“. Argumentation in the paper is based on statistic of Prosecutor's Offices in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and it's evaluation. In conclusion, the Bosnia and Herzegovina is a state where a system of formal evaluation is applied, wherein the assessment is based on the scoring principle. The paper is based on a finding solution/constructive criticism for improvement of the current evaluation system.

Zapažanja o Radnom tekstu amandmana na Ustav Republike Srbije sa obrazloženjima (referencama Venecijanske komisije) u delu koji se odnosi na sudstvo

Author(s): Dragana Boljević / Language(s): Serbian

The Republic of Serbia has itself committed to amending of the Constitution as far back as 2013 by adoption of the National Judicial Reform Strategy, subsequently by adoption of the Action Plan for Chapter 23 on 23 April 2016 for the purpose of strengthening the independence of the judiciary. The Ministry of Justice has, mid 2017, initiated an informal consultative process, while not offering an official stance of the State regarding the future Constitutional solutions, and on 22 January 2018 published the Working Version of the Draft Amendments to the Constitution. The process itself was led with absence of a proper debate or even dealing with the topic of strengthening of the judiciary which was the reason for change of the Constitution, and included scorn, even threats to the participants, as well as to judges and public prosecutors in general, for which reason many associations decided not to participate in the verbal debate any longer. At a first glance, the proposed solutions correspond to the suggestions from the 2007 Opinion of the Venice Commission regarding the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia and recommendations of the European Union introduced into the Action Plan for the Chapter 23: the so-called probationary appointment of judges to a three-year mandate in the National Assembly is abolished, conditions for termination of office of a judge is raised to the Constitutional level, the High Judicial Council is entrusted with selection and termination of office of all judges and presidents of courts while from its composition, at least formally, the Minister of Justice and president of the Committee of the National Assembly for the Judiciary are removed. Working Version of the Amendments does not mention any of the numerous Opinions the Venice Commission gave regarding the legal acts of Serbia; it does not contain any or it does not contain adequate explanation; those provided however do not make reference to any international standards, but only to one of Venice Commissions’ reports from 2007, and to individual, taken out of context, parts of Opinions regarding legal acts of Armenia, Georgia, Albania, Montenegro, which do not contain general positions but are related to specific proposals of solutions in special socio-historical situations of particular countries with different legal traditions; from the provided reasons, one cannot see why a specific solution was proposed, out of many possibilities, and whether it is the most optimal solution for organization of the judiciary in the Republic of Serbia. In terms of content, the Ministry of Justice has neglected the Legal Analysis of the Constitutional frame in the Republic of Serbia from 2014, which has been accepted by the whole of the judiciary, and proposed contrary solutions instead. The Judicial power remains undefined and systemically unarranged, material guarantees of the independence of the judiciary are still lacking, as are the right of judges to professional gathering and their freedom of expression of opinion. The Amendments relocate the influence of the legislative and executive to the Judicial Academy (which by means of selection of attendees in fact substantially selects judges) and to the ruling political majority since they undermine the High Judicial Council and turn it into an instrument of the parliamentary majority, which is set to decide on all matters that are the most important for the judiciary. The current constitutional guarantees of the independence of the judiciary (by omitting the current prohibition of any political influence on judge in performing the judicial function, by providing the Minister with the authority to commence a disciplinary proceeding and a procedure of dismissal of a judge, and by introduction of judicial practice as a source of law), immovability of a judges (by allowing movability of a judge irrespective of their will in any situation of “reorganization of the judicial system”) are all being diminished while incompatibility of the judicial function with other functions or jobs is defined broadly and imprecisely (incompatibility with a “private” function will allow for prohibition of professional gathering of judges). All in all, the proposed solutions do not remove, but increase the scope for political influence to the judiciary.

Nacrt amandmana na ustavne odredbe o pravosuđu i mišljenje Venecijanske komisije br. 921/2018 o Nacrtu amandmana

Author(s): Vida Petrović-Škero / Language(s): Serbian

The text analyses the Draft of the Amendment to the Constitution’s judicial articles and the opinion of the Venetian committee on the Amendment draft. After the consultancy process, The Ministry of justice published on 22nd January 2018 the working version of the Constitutional amendment draft, in line with the obligations RS accepted with the adoption of the Action plan for chapter 23. In February and March 2018 public debates were held on the changes in the Constitution that should have been the foundation for the Amendment draft. It is obvious that the Ministry of Justice was not guided by the majority of stated opinions neither in the public debate, nor in written texts when they wrote the Amendment draft. The Ministry has done the Amendment draft with no explanation. It remains vague why they accepted the solutions that are in defiance with many standards and are not in line with our standards. The Ministry of justice gave a written explanation, after which the Venetian committee during the 115 plenary session (Venice 22-23 Jun 2018) adopted the opinion No. 921/2018. For 29 amendments, Venetian committee gave over 40 recommendations, highlighting 8 main ones, referring to the membership of High counsel of judiciary, High counsel of prosecutors and the role of National assembly, dissolution of High counsel of judiciary, dismissal, unique law application and election and responsibilities of public prosecutors and deputy public prosecutors. By analyzing the given opinion, it cannot be concluded that we are ”on the good path” to provide de-politicization of the justice system and guarantee independence through the process of Constitution changes.

Druga stručna rasprava o vrednovanju rada sudija i tužilaca u BiH

Author(s): Author Not Specified / Language(s): Bosnian

Institucije za edukaciju sudija i tužilaca u Bosni i Hercegovini i Republici Srbiji: komparativna analiza

Author(s): Davor Trlin,Arben Murtezić / Language(s): Bosnian

The aim of this analysis is to provide an overview of specific segments of education of judicial officials in BiH and to compare them with Serbia, which has a Judicial Academy, in order to raise, in the scientific and professional public, the question of the possible need for the existence of a judicial academy in BiH, i.e. the transformation of Judicial and Prosecutorial Training Centers in BiH into judicial academies or one Judicial Academy.

Pravosudni ispit: relikt koji odolijeva

Author(s): Branko Perić / Language(s): Bosnian

The author addresses the objectives and historical achievements of the bar exam concept, simultaneously considering two legislative texts (from the years 1986 and 2011), with critical reviews of the scant and inconsistent legal provisions. The author places a special focus on the composition and operation of bar exam commissions, showing the way in which current practice has evolved to the point of self-destruction. In the second part, the author discusses possible directions of development of the idea to introduce a plan and program of training in the most complex legal affairs and verification of the acquired knowledge and skills, advocating the consideration of a model of educative processes in the form of judicial schools, according to specifically designed programs, which will enable the acquisition of practical knowledge and skills that are necessary for the most complex legal affairs.

Obrazovanje pravnika za sudijsku/tužilačku funkciju u BiH: uporedba sa modelom Pravosudne akademije u Republici Srbiji

Author(s): Dragoslav Erdelić / Language(s): Serbian

Obrazovanje pravnika za sudijsku i tužilačku funkciju u Bosni i Hercegovini bi se u najkraćem moglo svesti na nekoliko faza i to: završetak pravnog fakulteta, obavljanje pripravničkog staža u sudu ili tužilaštvu, polaganje pravosudnog ispita, rad na poziciji stručnog saradnika u sudu ili tužilaštvu, odnosno sticanje radnog iskustva za imenovanje na poziciju sudije ili tužioca. Samo obrazovanje pravnika za sudijsku/tužilačku funkciju u Bosni i Hercegovini nije regulisano posebnim zakonom. Pravnici u Bosni i Hercegovini se obrazuju u skladu sa zakonima o visokom obrazovanju, a tek nakon položenog pravosudnog ispita i stečenog propisanog radnog staža na poslovima pravnika, stiču uslove za obavljanje sudijske/tužilačke funkcije.

Ustavni sud o “kontroli razumevanja” ustavom garantovanih prava u sudskim odlukama

Author(s): Irena Pejić / Language(s): Serbian

In principle, a constitutional complaint before the Constitutional Court initiates the procedure of “control of comprehension” of fundamental rights by the ordinary court. As an instrument for the protection of fundamental rights, a constitutional complaint may lead to deepening the tensions between the Constitutional Court and ordinary courts. This potential “dispute” can be perceived from two different perspectives. The first one considers a dilemma about the principle of the separation of powers, i.e. whether it is allowed for the authority which is not part of the judicial system to review ordinary court decisions. Arguments in favor of establishing the Constitutional Court control of court decisions can be found in the general theoretical justification of constitutional review. If the constitutional review in abstract is not a threat to the legislative power of the National Assembly, the constitutional complaint as an instrument of “control of comprehension” of fundamental rights by ordinary courts does not constitute an interference with their independence. Thus, this form of inter partes constitutional review is in accordance with the rule of law. The second level of analysis refers to the effect of the Constitutional Court control in regard to ordinary courts and citizens, i.e. the consequences caused by the Constitutional Court decision. The main goal of constitutional review is to remove unconstitutional acts from a legal order, but the question remains whether it is enough for the right holder. The Constitutional Court performs a control of constitutional justifiability in order to find out any violation of fundamental rights. If there is a violation, the case should be returned to the State authority or ordinary court which is obliged to respect the standpoints contained in the Constitutional Court decision. According to the Serbian national law, a court decision could be annulled by the Constitutional Court decision, but with no clear indication of what happens with a violated right. The question is whether the Constitutional Court is obliged to return “the case” to an ordinary court after annulment or not. We believe an explicit provision should be introduced into the Constitutional Court Act of the Republic of Serbia, as follows: after the Constitutional Court has resolved a specific constitutional issue as to whether a fundamental right has been violated, the ordinary court should have the authority to finally decide on a specific dispute in accordance with the Constitutional Court decision. Thus, the Constitutional Court decision should not annul the judgment ab initio; rather, the judgment should be revoked and the case file should be sent to the ordinary court for a retrial in order to restore the fundamental rights of the applicant. The effects of the Constitutional Court decision are ex nunc so that the final decision regarding a specific case should be made by the ordinary court. In this manner, both principles can be preserved: the principle of constitutionality and legality as well as the principle of the separation of powers.

Uticaj jurisdikcije Evropskog suda za ljudska prava na odlučivanje Ustavnog suda Srbije u postupku po ustavnoj žalbi

Author(s): Maja Nastić / Language(s): Serbian

The impact of the jurisdiction of the ECtHR on the Constitutional Court decisions is analyzed based on the normative framework established by the Constitution of Serbia (2006). Of particular importance are the provisions of the Constitution governing the relationship between national and international law, the basic principles of human and minority rights as well as the provisions on the Constitutional Court. By establishing the jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court to decide on constitutional complaints, the Republic of Serbia became a part of the large number of countries that recognized the importance of this legal instrument. At the same time, the constitutional complaint emerges as a specific „reference point“ between the national constitutional court and the European Court of Human Rights. It is the last legal remedy to be used before possible referral to the European Court. The complainants often turn to the Constitutional Court because of violation of their rights enshrined in the ECHR. However, when the protection of this rights is also ensured by the Constitution, the Constitutional Court shall assess the violation or denial of the right concerning the relevant provisions of the Constitution. The impact of the jurisdiction of the European Court on the decision-making of the Constitutional Court in the procedure of constitutional appeals is analyzed from two aspects: a general one, concerning the fundamental principles on which human rights protection system is based and from the perspective of individual guarantees of human rights. The Constitutional Court shows its willingness to adapt its jurisdiction and bring it into line with the ECHR and the case-law of the European Court. Moreover, the Constitutional Court of Serbia demonstrates that it understands the ECHR as a living instrument. However, the Constitutional Court should not be overshadowed and blindly guided by the case-law of the European Court or to use it as a “paravane“ to justify political desirable decisions. This is important because it is expected that the Constitutional Court will show the path that regular courts should follow to protect human rights and freedoms.

Primena prakse Evropskog suda za ljudska prava od strane Ustavnog suda u postupcima po ustavnim žalbama

Author(s): Nataša Plavšić / Language(s): Serbian

The European Convention on Human Rights and the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights have special position in the legal order of the Republic of Serbia – they are part of the of the Serbian legal system, they are below the Constitution and above the law and they are directly implemented and applicable. This special position of the European Convention and the jurisdiction of the Strasbourg Court have been recognized by the Constitutional Court of Serbia who frequently applies Strasbourg standards and jurisdiction. The paper analyzed the examples of good practice of the Constitutional Court in the implementation and harmonization of its case-law with the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights and challenges that the Constitutional Court is facing in this process.

Pravosudni ispit u BiH: Analiza stanja i iskustva

Author(s): Nihad Odobašić / Language(s): Bosnian

Bar Exam is one of the most important steps in legal education. In Bosnia and Herzegovina, passing the bar exam is possible before the entity and state levels, respectively before the Ministry of Justice of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Federal Ministry of Justice and Ministry of Justice of Republika Srpska. Based on the personal experience of the author, this paper examines the most important legal solutions regarding the procedure and content of the bar exam, discussing key segments that need to be modified in order for bar exam to fit its primary purpose: adequate examination of the jurist's knowledge. The first part of the paper presents the conditions, as well as the two-part structure of the bar exam. The oral part of the exam, with its new design after the recent changes of the Federal Ministry of Justice is problematical since it does not enable complete insight into the candidate's knowledge. The second part of the paper is about basic statistics results on the performance and success rate of the bar exam before the Federal Ministry of Justice. Following part of the paper is devoted to the composition of the bar examination commissions and the fundamental criterion of "high reputation of legal expert" required for appointment to the Commission. There are several examples that point to a broad interpretation of the above criterion, which results in erroneous practice in the appointment of the examination commissions. In the final part of the paper, I analyze the existence of informal preparatory seminars as well as the participation of examination commissions members in such seminars. In this segment of the pre-bar exam seminars there is a lack of regulation on the participation of commissions members as lecturers, since they later examine candidates who have previously met in such informal trainings. The concluding considerations outline the key problems in the current system of passing the bar exam in Bosnia and Herzegovina, as well as possible solutions to preserve the bar exam as the most important examination of the knowledge of every jurist's career.

Primena međunarodnog prava u postupcima po ustavnoj žalbi Ustavnog suda Republike Srbije

Author(s): Tijana Šurlan / Language(s): Serbian

The position of the International Law in the national legal system is defined in the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia (Article 16). International law forms the integral part of the national legal system and it is directly applicable. In addition to the general definition of the position of the International Law, the significance and place of international legal acts in the field of human rights protection is additionally defined. The determination of human rights is grounded on the provisions of the Constitution, International Law and law to a certain extent (Article 18). The interpretation of human rights needs to be further aligned with the standards and practices of international institutions that monitor the implementation of human rights. The normative framework for the application of the International Law in proceedings before the Constitutional Court has therefore been created and it is the Court prerogative to implement it. The paper cites the Constitutional Courts jurisprudence in two categories of cases: cases whose normative framework inevitably had to introduce international legal acts and cases where it was not necessary but it was appropriate. For the purpose of comparing and presenting methods of application of the International Law in the European Court of Human Rights jurisprudence has been used. Cases that were considered treated the same rights, as the cases of the Constitutional Court which were analysed as illustration - the human right of asylum, prohibition of torture and the rights of the child. The overall conclusion is that the Constitutional Court rarely applies international law in its constitutional complaint procedure. The provisions of the Constitution do not create obligation to apply international law, but create international law as an integral part of the legal system, with the instruction to implement standards and case-law of international institutions protecting the human rights. International Law, rich in legal acts protecting human rights, as well as the experience of the international institution, form great amount of helpful tools for further development of the protection of human rights and thus it should be used in the procedures before the Constitutional Court.