Europska komisija stala na stranu Slovenaca: "Očekujemo provedbu presude"

Podrška Briselu u discpliniranju čardaka

nekad je sve bilo jednostavnije

Čekamo presicu Premijera...hehehehehehehehehehehehehe

kic wrote:RTFM dude!

Predmet arbitraže nije sporan! Vaš premijer Račan je čak išao i dalje od toga, a gđa Kosor se s njime složila.
Pacta sunt servanda, dude.

Eroo wrote:

kic wrote:RTFM dude!

Predmet arbitraže nije sporan! Vaš premijer Račan je čak išao i dalje od toga, a gđa Kosor se s njime složila.
Pacta sunt servanda, dude.

A ne...Nikad nije zaživio...

@Ero Slovenac, kad ćeš nam na more doći?

Nažalost, neke stvari su me "prišarafile" za mjesto...U najboljem slučaju u rujnu.

Eroo wrote:Nažalost, neke stvari su me "prišarafile" za mjesto...U najboljem slučaju u rujnu.

Ostani u svojoj Sloveniji...Dobro ti je tamo.

red wolf wrote:

Eroo wrote:

kic wrote:RTFM dude!

Predmet arbitraže nije sporan! Vaš premijer Račan je čak išao i dalje od toga, a gđa Kosor se s njime složila.
Pacta sunt servanda, dude.

A ne...Nikad nije zaživio...

Govorim o "predmetu", taj je bio dogovoren i podpisan.
Osim vas presudom nije zadovoljna ni druga strana, što mi
daje za pravo misliti da zna bit da je pravedna.

Eroo wrote:

red wolf wrote:

Eroo wrote:

kic wrote:RTFM dude!

Predmet arbitraže nije sporan! Vaš premijer Račan je čak išao i dalje od toga, a gđa Kosor se s njime složila.
Pacta sunt servanda, dude.

A ne...Nikad nije zaživio...

Govorim o "predmetu", taj je bio dogovoren i podpisan.
Osim vas presudom nije zadovoljna ni druga strana, što mi
daje za pravo misliti da zna bit da je pravedna.

Pacta sunt servanda se odnosi na važeće ugovore...Ovdje mu nije mjesto...

Eroo wrote:Govorim o "predmetu", taj je bio dogovoren i podpisan.

Ako govoriš o sporazumu Račan-Drnovšek, samo je parafiran.
Ako govoriš o ovoj arbitraži, Hrvarska je po članu 60 Bečke konvencije izašla iz nje, dakle, u skladu sa međunarodnim pravom i svako inzistiranje na pravovaljanosti iste predstavlja kršenje međunarodnog prava.

Eroo wrote:Osim vas presudom nije zadovoljna ni druga strana, što mi
daje za pravo misliti da zna bit da je pravedna.

Po toj logici je i Z4 bio pravedan jer sa tim planom nisu bile zadovoljne ni hrvatska ni srpska strana.

debotoijusto wrote:http://www.index.hr/vijesti/clanak/europska-komisija-stala-na-stranu-slovenaca-quotocekujemo-provedbu-presudequot/980780.aspx

 Još jedan uspjeh premijera i predsjednice. Tak će to prezentirat HTV a Čardak popušit.

In its Partial Award, with respect to events that caused Croatia’s withdrawal from the arbitration process, the Arbitral Tribunal ruled that Slovenia has violated the provisions of the Arbitration Agreement. It concluded, at the same time, that the Arbitration Agreement remains in force. The contents of the Partial Award clearly shows that having ignored Croatia’s objections, the Arbitral Tribunal falsely claims that no doubts have been expressed as to independence and impartiality of arbitrators who are now part of the Arbitral Tribunal. Accordingly, the Arbitral Tribunal decided to continue the arbitral proceedings and return to examining the merits of the dispute between the two states, with the aim of delivering a final award on the course of the boundary on land and at sea. The Arbitral Tribunal’s Partial Award is available here and their press release here. 

http://www.mvep.hr/en/other/termination-of-the-arbitration-process/


The Tribunal’s Partial Award 

At the outset, the Tribunal affirms its jurisdiction, under the provisions of the Arbitration Agreement and the applicable rules of procedure, to decide whether Croatia was entitled to terminate the Arbitration Agreement pursuant to Article 60 of the Vienna Convention. The Tribunal also finds that it has inherent jurisdiction to decide whether the “arbitral process has been compromised to such an extent that … the arbitration process cannot continue”. 

Referring to decisions of the International Court of Justice, the Tribunal clarifies that termination of a treaty due to a material breach under Article 60, paragraph 1 of the Vienna Convention “is warranted only if the breach defeats the object and purpose of the treaty”. The decisive question is therefore whether the violations of the Arbitration Agreement by Slovenia rendered the accomplishment of its object and purpose impossible. The Tribunal accordingly examines whether Slovenia’s breaches have tainted the proceedings in such a way that the proceedings cannot go further. 

In this regard, the Tribunal observes that Dr. Sekolec, the arbitrator implicated in ex parte communications, has since resigned from the Tribunal, and that no doubt has been expressed as to the independence or impartiality of the recomposed Tribunal. The Tribunal has carefully reviewed its records and communicated to the Parties the only two documents circulated by Dr. Sekolec during past deliberations. Those documents do not contain any facts or arguments that were not already presented in the Parties’ pleadings. 

Moreover, the Tribunal notes that, since Dr. Sekolec has resigned as arbitrator, the views expressed by him in prior deliberation meetings are of no relevance for the work of the Tribunal in its current composition. In any event, the Tribunal would be ready, after consultation with the Parties, to consider reopening the oral phase of the case and to give each Party a further opportunity to express its views concerning what it regards as the most important facts and arguments. 

Accordingly, in view of the remedial action taken, the Tribunal determines that the breaches of the Arbitration Agreement by Slovenia do not render the continuation of the proceedings impossible and, therefore, do not defeat the object and purpose of the Agreement. There is no obstacle to the continuation of the proceedings under the Arbitration Agreement. 

Finally, the Tribunal notes that the arbitration was intended to resolve the Parties’ long-standing dispute, peacefully and definitively, and in accordance with “the rules and principles of international law” as well as “equity and the principle of good neighbourly relations”, reflecting their “vital interests”. If the Tribunal had any hesitation that the present process can achieve these goals, it would conclude that the proceedings must be terminated. However, the Tribunal has found no reason to consider that any aspect of its future decision on the merits would be affected by past events, for which none of its current members was responsible. In this situation, the Tribunal recalls that it is its duty to protect the procedural rights of both Parties. Procedural fairness includes the right to an impartial and independent judge, but also the right to a timely decision in respect of the matters consigned to the Tribunal under the Arbitration Agreement. As long as an impartial and independent decision-making process can be guaranteed, procedural fairness requires that the process be continued, rather than put on hold with uncertain consequences for the ultimate resolution of the Parties’ dispute. 

The Tribunal indicates that it will now consider how to proceed, in its present composition, to a de novo consideration of all aspects of the case. The Tribunal shall review the Parties’ written and oral pleadings, as well as the various cartographic and documentary annexes submitted by the Parties. Once it has done so, the Tribunal shall consult with the Parties in respect of any further procedural steps before rendering its final award. The text of the Partial Award will be published on the PCA Case Repository (https://pcacases.com/web/view/3) on Friday, 1 July 2016, at approximately 11:00 am.

https://pcacases.com/web/sendAttach/1785

slidingdoorsoperator wrote:

Eroo wrote:Osim vas presudom nije zadovoljna ni druga strana, što mi
daje za pravo misliti da zna bit da je pravedna.

Po toj logici je i Z4 bio pravedan jer sa tim planom nisu bile zadovoljne ni hrvatska ni srpska strana.

Jednostavno je biti dosljedan  i pravičan istovremeno, ali nije uvijek i razumno.
Oči različitih promatrača ne vide uvijek isto, zapravo nikad...

Samo trollaj.

Izvinjavame se, mlogo se izvinjavame...

Patetičan si.

debotoijusto wrote:

"Radi se o sporu koji traje više od dva desetljeća. Mi smo uvijek zagovarali mirno rješenje sporova, a ovdje smo djelovali u smjeru podrške i olakšavanja samog procesa te smo pomogli pri njegovom uspostavljanju.
Presuda je sada ovdje. Komisija ju je uzela u obzir, i mi očekujemo od obje strane da je implementiraju. Pozdravljamo i najavljeni susret hrvatskog i slovenskog premijera. Nećemo nalagati kako se presuda treba implementirati, ali ćemo opet ponuditi pomoć u njezinoj implementaciji. Radi se o bilateralnom pitanju, potrebni su razgovori", rekao je Timmermans.

"Dat ćemo sve od sebe da pomognemo objema stranama te da se presuda implementira na što pošteniji način", zaključio je.

ocekivano
srecom da su slovenci izgubili i HDZ na vlasti

Gluposti Režinski Bilten Hanze kaže da su slovenci potučeni arbitražom, a mi ju ne priznajemo

Čardak ima svoje adute:



Zdravko Belancic
Ovaj sud se bavi necim sto nije nadlezan,kriminalce pusta na slobodu a postene gradjane omalovazava otimanjem njihovog morskog i zemljovidnog prava.U pravi cas pravi covjek na vrhu hrvatske vlade,ako nesto neko ima protiv premijera Plenkovica onda to zasigurno nije ovaj argument,ovo je odgovor slovencima tezi jer znaju da ni milimetar nece naprijed.Cestitka A. Plenkovic za ova strozi odgovor.
Sviđa mi se · Odgovor · 1 sat

..pa dobro realno nije to neka pobjeda slovenaca..izgubli su neka sela uz kopnenu granicu i svetu geru..sad trebaju objasniti svojim slovencima da se presele u sloveniju ostave svoja imanja,kuce a naselit ce one od hrvata u sloveniji koji ce kao nezeljeno tijelo dobit sup kartu pa nece janezi valjda biti na ulici..