DOCSLIB.ORG

The Wolf Theiss Guide To

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Wolf Theiss Guide To THE WOLF THEISS GUIDE TO: Dispute Resolution in Central, Eastern & Southeastern Europe 2018 Edition THE WOLF THEISS GUIDE TO: Dispute Resolution in Central, Eastern & Southeastern Europe This 2018 Wolf Theiss Guide to Dispute Resolution in Central, Eastern & Southeastern Europe is intended as a practical guide to the general principles and features of the basic legislation and procedures in countries included in the publication. While every effort has been made to ensure that the content is accurate when finalised, it should be used only as a general reference guide and should not be relied upon as definitive for planning or making definitive legal decisions. In these rapidly changing legal markets, the laws and regulations are frequently revised, either by amended legislation or by administrative interpretation. Status of information: Current as of 1 January 2018 Conception, design, and editing: WOLF THEISS Rechtsanwälte GmbH & Co KG, Attorneys-at-Law Schubertring 6, 1010 Vienna, Austria www.wolftheiss.com © 2018 WOLF THEISS Rechtsanwälte GmbH & Co KG. All Rights Reserved. Dispute Resolution in Central, Eastern & Southeastern Europe CONTENT TABLE OF CONTENTS FOREWORD 03 COUNTRY CHAPTERS ALBANIA 06 AUSTRIA 20 BOSNIA & HERZEGOVINA 38 BULGARIA 56 CROATIA 72 CZECH REPUBLIC 88 HUNGARY 104 KOSOVO 120 POLAND 136 ROMANIA 152 SERBIA 172 SLOVAK REPUBLIC 190 SLOVENIA 208 UKRAINE 226 OUR OFFICES 247 1 Dispute Resolution in Central, Eastern & Southeastern Europe FOREWORD FOREWORD As a leading law firm in CEE/SEE and home to one of the biggest dispute resolution teams in the region, we see it as our obligation to keep our clients up-to-date with legal developments that may affect their businesses. Global financial uncertainty has brought with it a growing need for dispute resolution services across the region, in particular, in heavily regulated sectors such as energy, financial services or healthcare. Unexpected questions may arise, such as “Should we initiate legal proceedings? Where and when? What legal tools and procedures are available to us? How do we stay one step ahead of competitors and adversaries? How do we avoid costly investigations so we can protect our reputation?” In response to this, we are very pleased to present the fourth edition of the Wolf Theiss Guide to Dispute Resolution in Central, Eastern and Southeastern Europe. With the majority of our work involving cross-border representation, the Wolf Theiss Guide to Dispute Resolution is a source of information for those who seek to get a general overview of dispute settlement and the relevant legal developments in each of the countries where Wolf Theiss provides services: Albania, Austria, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Kosovo, Poland, Romania, Serbia, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, and Ukraine. The new guide follows the same structure as the previous editions. Each country chapter describes the legal system, the litigation process, business crime, insolvency, arbitration, and enforcement of arbitral awards and foreign judgments, and ends with a chart giving a summary of the relevant procedures and costs in the respective jurisdiction, plus handy practice tips. We trust that that you find the guide useful. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Clemens Trauttenberg ¡ June 2018 Partner, Head of the Disputes Practice Group, Wolf Theiss I would like to thank all colleagues at Wolf Theiss who assisted in the preparation of this publication. Their efforts to ensure the continuing update of the Guide are very much appreciated. I would also like to acknowledge former Wolf Theiss Partner Bettina Knoetzl for her contributions to previous editions of the guide. 3 Dispute Resolution in Central, Eastern & Southeastern Europe WOLF THEISS REGION Warsaw POLAND Kyiv Prague CZECH UKRAINE REPUBLIC SLOVAK REPUBLIC Bratislava Vienna AUSTRIA Budapest HUNGARY Ljubljana ROMANIA SLOVENIA Zagreb CROATIA Bucharest BOSNIA & Belgrade HERZEGOVINA Sarajevo SERBIA BULGARIA Sofia ALBANIA EUROPE WOLF THEISS REGION WOLF THEISS DESK Warsaw POLAND Kyiv Prague CZECH UKRAINE REPUBLIC SLOVAK EUROPE REPUBLIC Bratislava Vienna AUSTRIA Budapest HUNGARY Ljubljana ROMANIA SLOVENIA Zagreb CROATIA Bucharest BOSNIA & Belgrade HERZEGOVINA Sarajevo SERBIA BULGARIA Sofia ALBANIA 5 6 Dispute Resolution in Central, Eastern & Southeastern Europe ALBANIA ALBANIA 7 1. LEGAL SYSTEM The Albanian legal system is based on codified principles of civil, criminal and administrative law. Judicial precedents are taken into consideration by courts, but without having a binding effect, except for unifying decisions issued by the Joint Colleges of the Supreme Court. 2. LITIGATION The Albanian court system is composed of District Courts, Courts of Appeal, Administrative Courts and Appellate Administrative Courts, Courts of Serious Crimes and Appellate Court of Serious Crimes, Military Courts and Appellate Military Courts, and the Supreme Court. There is also a Constitutional Court whose influence is increasing, especially due to an expansion of the “constitutional due process” review of other courts’ decisions. In each District Court (court of first instance), there are special court departments in charge to decide on: commercial disputes; disputes related to minors and family; and civil disputes. Cases in District Courts are heard by a single judge or a panel of three judges. Matters exclusively heard by a panel of three judges include: claims valued at more than ALL 20 million (approximately EUR 156,000); claims on declaring a person as missing or deceased; and claims on removing or limiting the capacity to act of a person. In the Courts of Appeal, cases are heard by a panel of three judges, while the High Court decides in panels of five judges. In the Supreme Court, Joint Panels also hear cases with the participation of all judges. The Joint Colleges of the Supreme Court are responsible for the unification and amendment of court practice. Penal, administrative and civil colleges established at the Supreme Court pre-hear the claims and decide whether the claim shall be rejected or refer the case for judgement to the panel of three judges. Decisions of the Supreme Court are proclaimed, along with the reasoning behind the decision, no later than 30 (thirty) days from the date of the termination of the judicial examination. Decisions of the Joint Panels, along with their reasoning, are published in the Periodical Bulletin of the Supreme Court. Decisions that serve the unification or amendment of court practice are published immediately in the next issue of the Official Gazette. In certain cases, courts may also grant interim measures. The Albanian court system is rather efficient, despite the fact that no precise time frame is provided for the rendering of judgments. The time frame is generally allowed to be reasonably defined by the judges. Decisions by the first instance courts (i.e., District Courts) may be appealed before the Courts of Appeal. As a general principle, all decisions issued by a court of first instance may be challenged in the Courts of Appeal, except for those cases when appeal is excluded by law. An appeal request may only be denied when: (i) the appeal is presented after the deadline provided by law; (ii) the appeal is made against a decision where an appeal is not permitted; or (iii) the appeal is made by an individual that is not legally entitled to file an appeal. 8 Dispute Resolution in Central, Eastern & Southeastern Europe ALBANIA Upon request of the parties, the Appeals Court may examine facts and other legal aspects examined by the court of first instance, and may allow the presentation of new evidence in support of the appeal. After considering the case, the Appeals Court can decide to: (i) uphold and leave in effect the decision of the first instance court; (ii) change the decision; (iii) revoke the decision and terminate the case; or (iv) revoke the decision and send the case back to the first instance court for retrial. Decisions issued by the Court of Appeals are final and may be challenged before the Supreme Court only when: (i) the law has been violated or applied incorrectly; (ii) there are grave violations of procedural norms (i.e. Article 467 of the Civil Procedure Code); (iii) decisive proof or evidence requested by the parties during trial has not been provided; (iv) the reasoning of the decision is clearly illogical; or (v) the provisions on jurisdiction and authority have been violated. Litigation costs are mainly composed of court and attorneys’ fees, expenses for expert opinions and witnesses (including remuneration for any business days missed), and translation costs. The fees, expenses and remunerations for witnesses and translators are defined by the Council of Ministers. The court and attorneys’ fees awarded to the plaintiff shall be charged to the defendant if the claim has been accepted by the court. However, if a party is exempted by the court with respect to the awarding of court fees, the fees shall be charged to the other party only if the claim has been accepted by the court. The defendant shall generally have the right to demand court fees be awarded in proportion to the refused part of the claim. The defendant shall have the right to demand court fees be awarded, even if the case is over. Final decisions of the court can be enforced by obtaining an instrument of immediate enforceability (“IEI”). The IEI gives its holder the right to have an enforcement order issued by the District court and to have the execution carried out immediately by the bailiffs’ office. The adjudication of administrative disputes is made through independent proceedings by the administrative courts and within a shorter period of time. The maximum term for administrative proceedings at the administrative courts of first instance is 60 (sixty) days. Administrative courts are organised as: (i) Administrative Courts of First Instance which are established and function in the same regions as Courts of Appeal; (ii) the Administrative Appellate Court - currently there is only one Appellate Administrative Court which is located in Tirana, Albania; and (iii) the Administrative College of Supreme Court.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Freedom House, Its Academic Advisers, and the Author(S) of This Report
    Croatia by Tena Prelec Capital: Zagreb Population: 4.17 million GNI/capita, PPP: $22,880 Source: World Bank World Development Indicators. Nations in Transit Ratings and Averaged Scores NIT Edition 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 National Democratic 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.75 Governance Electoral Process 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3 3 3 Civil Society 2.75 2.75 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.75 2.75 2.75 2.75 2.75 Independent Media 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4.25 4.25 Local Democratic 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 Governance Judicial Framework 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 and Independence Corruption 4.5 4.5 4.25 4 4 4 4 4.25 4.25 4.25 Democracy Score 3.71 3.71 3,64 3.61 3.61 3.68 3.68 3.68 3.71 3.75 NOTE: The ratings reflect the consensus of Freedom House, its academic advisers, and the author(s) of this report. The opinions expressed in this report are those of the author(s). The ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing the highest level of democratic progress and 7 the lowest. The Democracy Score is an average of ratings for the categories tracked in a given year.
    [Show full text]
  • Annex 4: Mechanisms in Europe
    ANNEX 4: MECHANISMS IN EUROPE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL FOR THE FORMER YUGOSLAVIA Conflict Background and Political Context The Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY) emerged from World War II as a communist country under the rule of President Josip Broz Tito. The new state brought Serbs, Croats, Bosnian Muslims, Albanians, Macedonians, Montenegrins, and Slovenes into a federation of six separate republics (Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Macedonia, Montenegro, and Serbia) and two autonomous provinces of Serbia (Kosovo and Vojvodina). Ten years after Tito’s death in 1980, the country was in economic crisis and the mechanisms he had designed to both repress and balance ethnic demands in the SFRY were under severe strain. Slobodan Milošević had harnessed the power of nationalism to consolidate his power as president of Serbia. The League of Communists of Yugoslavia dissolved in January 1990, and the first multiparty elections were held in all Yugoslav republics, carrying nationalist parties to power in Bosnia, Croatia, Slovenia, and Macedonia.1763 Meanwhile, Milošević and his political allies asserted control in Kosovo, Vojvodina, and Montenegro, giving Serbia’s president de facto control over four of the eight votes in the federal state’s collective presidency. This and the consolidation of Serbian control over the Yugoslav People’s Army (YPA) heightened fears and played into ascendant nationalist feelings in other parts of the country. Declarations of independence by Croatia and Slovenia on June 25, 1991, brought matters to a head. Largely homogenous Slovenia succeeded in defending itself through a 10-day conflict that year against the Serb-dominated federal army, but Milošević was more determined to contest the independence of republics with sizeable ethnic Serb populations.
    [Show full text]
  • Constitutional Court
    THE BULLETIN The Belgian Court of Arbitration holding the presidency of the 12th Conference of the European Constitutional Courts (Brussels, 13-16 May 2002) has asked the European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission) to provide a working document on the relations between constitutional courts and other national courts, including the interference in this area of the action of the European courts. Following its presentation at the Conference, an amended version of this working document now becomes part of the collection of Special Bulletins on Leading Cases of the Commission as has been the case with the issue on freedom of religion and beliefs, requested by the Constitutional Tribunal of Poland for the 11th Conference of the European Constitutional Courts in Warsaw on 16-20 May 1999. The aim of this Special Bulletin is to provide a presentation of the case-law of constitutional courts in this area, following the usual design and layout of the Bulletin on Constitutional Case-Law, which is published by the Venice Commis- sion. The boundaries of action of constitutional courts and other national courts may sometimes be tested, in particular in countries where constitutional jurisdiction is relatively new and where it may take time for the constitutional court to assert its rightful position within the legal system. Co-operation between constitutional courts or courts of equivalent jurisdiction and other national courts is thus important, especially in the field of human rights protection where it is essential that the same standards be applied by all courts in a given country. In this regard, it is particularly interesting to note the influence of the European Court of Human Rights in member states of the Council of Europe and the Court of Justice of the European Communi- ties in member states of the European Union and to measure the extent to which it serves as a unifying factor.
    [Show full text]
  • Councils for the Judiciary in EU Countries
    Councils for the Judiciary in EU Countries Prof. Wim Voermans and Dr Pim Albers _____ L/Archief/Intern/Middelen/Documentatie/Organisaties en Instellingen-Councils of Justice in Europe def.version March 2003 Preface This report reflects an explorative comparative study conducted in the Netherlands in 1998 and 1999, which had been commissioned by the Ministry of Justice in preparation for the establishment of a council for the judiciary in the Netherlands. In January 1999, the TAIEX Bureau of the European Commission asked whether the report could be used as basic material for a project in support of the Czech Republic’s entry into the European Union. As a result of this request, the report was translated into English and a chapter about the Czech Republic and the plans for a council for the judiciary developed in that country was added. The research reported on was completed in January 1999 (and − as far as the Czech part is concerned − in May1999). After that, it was sent to contact persons in the countries that had been the subject of the research, who were requested to make comments. Various contacts sent in comments in the course of 1999 and 2000, and these were incorporated into the report. This means that the report is out of date in some respects, but we thought the material interesting enough to present in book form. This report could be a first step in the process leading to a broader evaluation and characterization of councils for the judiciary in Europe and in the world. In 2001, information was gathered about the Croatian Council for the Judiciary within the framework of a EU project concerning the administration of justice in Croatia.
    [Show full text]
  • Hrvatski Sabor
    CROATIAN PARLIAMENT 2900 Pursuant to article 88 of the Constitution of the Republic of Croatia, I issue DECREE ON THE PROMULGATION OF THE LAW ON AMENDMENTS TO THE LAW ON STATE JUDICIAL COUNCIL I promulgate the Law on Amendments to the Law on State Judicial Council, adopted by the Croatian Parliament at session held on 29th of November 2005. Number: 01-081-05/3529/2 Zagreb, 15 December 2005. President of Republic of Croatia Stjepan Mesić, in one's hand LAW ON AMENDMENTS TO THE LAW ON STATE JUDICIAL COUNCIL Article 1. Article 3 of the Law on State Judicial Council (»Official Journal«, No. 58/93., 49/99., 31/00., 107/00., 129/00. and 59/05.) shall be amended as follows: »(1) In a procedure for election of Council members the Justice Committee of the Croatian Parliament shall request that the President of the Supreme Court of Croatia, the President of Croatia Bar Association and the deans of the Law faculties initiate procedure for nomination of Council members. (2) The President of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Croatia shall request that the Courts nominate candidates from the ranks of judges. On the basis of collected proposals a Common session of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Croatia with participation of two representatives of the High Misdemeanor Court of the Republic of Croatia, the High Commercial Court of the Republic of Croatia, the Administrative Court of the Republic of Croatia, as well as with participation of one representative of each County Court shall identify candidates and shall submit its proposal to the Justice Committee of the Croatian Parliament.
    [Show full text]
  • Greco Eval IV Rep (2013) 7E H
    F O U R ‘[/ T Adoption: 20 June 2014 Public Publication: 25 June 2014 Greco Eval IV Rep (2013) 7E H E FOURTH EVALUATION ROUND V A L Corruption prevention in respect of members of U parliament, judges and prosecutors A T I EVALUATION REPORT O N CROATIA R O Adopted by GRECO at its 64th Plenary Meeting U (Strasbourg, 16-20 June 2014) N D 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................................... 4 I. INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................................... 5 II. CONTEXT .................................................................................................................................................. 7 III. CORRUPTION PREVENTION IN RESPECT OF MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT .................................................. 9 OVERVIEW OF THE PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM ................................................................................................................. 9 TRANSPARENCY OF THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS ............................................................................................................... 9 REMUNERATION AND ECONOMIC BENEFITS ................................................................................................................. 10 ETHICAL PRINCIPLES AND RULES OF CONDUCT .............................................................................................................. 11 CONFLICTS OF INTEREST .........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Recently Added Copyright Cases
    Recently added copyright cases Kluwer Copyright Blog September 16, 2014 Kluwer Copyright Blogger Please refer to this post as: Kluwer Copyright Blogger, ‘Recently added copyright cases’, Kluwer Copyright Blog, September 16 2014, http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2014/09/16/recently-added-copyright-cases-3/ The KluwerCopyrightBlog is part of Kluwer’s IP Law portfolio. Whereas the blog serves as a platform where scholars and practioners can share their informed opinions on specific aspects of IP law and jurisprudence, the related Kluwer Copyright Cases Database aims to accumulate important (new and older) case law in the field of copyright in one database. To satisfy the increasing curiosity about what is happening in the copyright courts of other EU member states, we regularly publish short overviews of cases that were recently added to the database. The selection of this month includes recently submitted cases from Denmark, France, Belgium and Croatia: Denmark: music fragment enjoys copyright protection Maritime and commercial court of Denmark, 18 August 2014, V-0035-13, Silverbullit and BliGlad v. CO + Høgh A/S & Oister Hi3G Denmark. A group of singing oysters. The defendants were sentenced to pay a fair remuneration for the use of the works Oister taletid reggae and Oister reggae bølge, which the defendants had used after the termination of the agreed license period. The case also concerned the fundamental question whether or not a small fragment enjoyed copyright protection, in this case a fragment of the song Oister Oi. Said fragment was used by the defendants in another song, composed by a third party and meant to replace the song composed by the claimants for the TV-commercial of the defendants (the commercial featured a group of singing oysters).
    [Show full text]
  • Croatia AIR 2011
    Amnesty International | Working to Protect Human Rights Page 1 of 4 Croatia Background Head of state Ivo Josipovi ć (replaced Stjepan Mesi ć in Justice system – crimes under February) international law Head of government Jadranka Kosor International justice Death penalty abolitionist for all crimes Freedom of assembly Population 4.4 million Discrimination Life expectancy 76.7 years Amnesty International Reports Under-5 mortality (m/f) 8/7 per 1,000 Amnesty International Visits Adult literacy 98.7 per cent Despite pressure from the international community, progress prosecuting crimes committed during the 1991-1995 war continued to be slow. Many crimes allegedly committed by members of the Croatian Army and police forces remained unaddressed. Some political efforts were undertaken by the President to deal with the wartime past. However, both the government and the judicial authorities failed to take targeted action to resolve the issue of war crimes. Discrimination against Roma, Croatian Serbs and LGBT people continued. Background Accession negotiations with the EU progressed and several negotiation chapters were successfully closed. In June, negotiations on justice and fundamental rights were opened and specific benchmarks were set by the EU. In the December report to the UN Security Council, the Chief Prosecutor for the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (the Tribunal) stated that Croatia continued to fail to submit all outstanding military documents related to “Operation Storm”, a large-scale military operation conducted by the Croatian Army in 1995. Top of page Justice system – crimes under international law Progress prosecuting crimes committed during the 1991-1995 war continued to be slow.
    [Show full text]
  • Negligent Rape in Croatian Criminal Law: Was Legal Reform Necessary?
    review of central and east european law 45 (2020) 126-160 brill.com/rela Negligent Rape in Croatian Criminal Law: Was Legal Reform Necessary? Marin Mrčela Vice-President of the Supreme Court of Croatia [email protected] Igor Vuletić Faculty of Law, University of Osijek, Osijek, Croatia [email protected] Goran Livazović Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Osijek, Osijek, Croatia [email protected] Abstract This paper discusses the issue of negligent rape and liability for unreasonable belief in the victim`s consent in the context of Croatian criminal law. Modern rape law presents many challenges to both lawmakers and judges, with criminalizing negligence being only one of those challenges. This became more interesting in Croatia after amend- ments to the Criminal Code in 2011 (in effect since 2013), that criminalized unreason- able mistake of facts in the crime of rape. Croatian rape law has undergone significant changes related to these amendments. However, this paper focuses only on the aspect of unreasonable mistake of consent, this being both the most controversial and of great practical importance. The first section describes the elements of rape according to the Croatian Criminal Code along with an interpretation of those elements in the jurisprudence of the Croatian Supreme Court. Special attention is placed on the prob- lem of mens rea and (un)reasonable belief in consent. The discussion also identifies the reasons for reform and the impact of the Sexual Offences Act of England and Wales (2003), which served as a model for Croatian legislators. The second section analyzes the results of research conducted by Croatian judges on the relevant status of the mis- take of facts defense, as well as the importance of the victim`s resistance in terms of achieving a conviction, with special regard to the rate of rape convictions in Croatian © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2020 | doi:10.1163/15730352-bja10002 <UN> Negligent Rape in Croatian Criminal Law 127 law.
    [Show full text]
  • Law on the State Judiciary Council Which Were Published in Official Gazette No 49/1999, 129/2000 and 150/2005
    Please note that the translation provided below is only provisional translation and therefore does NOT represent an offical document of the Republic of Croatia. It confers no rights and imposes no obligations separate from does conferred or imposed by the legislation formally adopted and published in Croatian language. Please note that this version does not include the latest changes and amendmends to the Law on the State Judiciary Council which were published in Official Gazette no 49/1999, 129/2000 and 150/2005 . Law on the State Judiciary Council (Official Gazette no. 58/1993) I GENERAL DECLARATIONS Article 1 In this law, we hereby stipulate the conditions for election of the President and Members of the Judiciary Council and for termination of their duties; the procedure for nomination and impeachemnt of the Justices and State Attorneys; procedure for establishing the duties and responsibilities of their offices and the violation thereof; and other issues relating to the work of the State Judiciary Council. Article 2 The symbol of the State Judiciary Council is its seal, containing within the name of the said Council, as well as the name and the emblem of the Republic of Croatia. II PROCEDURE FOR THE ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT AND THE MEMBERS OF THE STATE JUDICIARY COUNCIL AND THE MEMBERS OF THE STATE JUDICIARY COUNCIL AND FOR THE TERMINATION OF THEIR DUTIES 1. Election procedure Article 3 The nomination of the candidates for the presidency and membership of the Council is the responsibility of the upper Legislative House of the Republic of Croatia. In consideration of the candidates up for nomination, the members of the Upper House of the Republic of Croatia shall ask the Supreme Court of Croatia, the Minister of Justice, Attorney General of Croatia, the Chamber of Law of Croatia, and noted scholars of jurisprudence for recommendation of individuals deemed worthy of the office of presidency and the membership in the council.
    [Show full text]
  • Croatia Public Administration Profile
    REPUBLIC OF CCRROOAATTIIAA Public Administration Country Profile Division for Public Administration and Development Management (DPADM) Department for Economic and Social Affairs (DESA) United Nations April 2005 All papers, statistics and materials contained in the Country Profiles express entirely the opinion of the mentioned authors. They should not, unless otherwise mentioned, be attributed to the Secretariat of the United Nations. The designations employed and the presentation of material on maps in the Country Profiles do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Table of Contents Table of Contents........................................................................................... 1 Croatia ......................................................................................................... 2 1. General Information ................................................................................... 3 1.1 People.................................................................................................. 3 1.2 Economy .............................................................................................. 3 1.3 Public Spending ..................................................................................... 4 1.4 Public Sector Employment and Wages......................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 101 Hrctte Croatia Follow up to Concluding
    CROATIA BRIEFING TO THE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE ON FOLLOW-UP TO THE CONCLUDING OBSERVATIONS ON CROATIA Amnesty International Publications First published in 2011by Amnesty International Publications International Secretariat Peter Benenson House 1 Easton Street London WC1X 0DW United Kingdom www.amnesty.org Copyright Amnesty International Publications 2011 Index: EUR 64/006/2011 Original Language: English Printed by Amnesty International, International Secretariat, United Kingdom All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without the prior permission of the publishers. Amnesty International is a global movement of 2.2 million people in more than 150 countries and territories, who campaign on human rights. Our vision is for every person to enjoy all the rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international human rights instruments. We research, campaign, advocate and mobilize to end abuses of human rights. Amnesty International is independent of any government, political ideology, economic interest or religion. Our work is largely financed by contributions from our membership and donations CONTENTS 1. Introduction .............................................................................................................5 2. Failure to identify the total number of war crimes cases ................................................6 3. Failure to prosecute
    [Show full text]