Search

Search Results

• The special requirements applicable to the management of national assets, with a special respect to the requirement of transparency

  85-96.

  Zóra Zsófia Lehoczki

  Views:

  150

  The Fundamental Law of Hungary states that the property of the Hungarian State and of municipal governments shall be considered national assets. National assets shall be managed and protected for the purpose of serving the public interest, satisfying common needs and preserving natural resources, taking also into account the needs of future generations. Economic operators – such as companies - owned by the State or municipal governments shall conduct business prudently and independently, in accordance with the relevant legislation, under the requirements of legality, efficiency and effectiveness. The special requirements regarding the management and safeguarding are laid down in Act CXCVI of 2011 on National Assets (hereinafter: National Assets Act) and Act CVI of 2007 on State Property (hereinafter: State Property Act) also contains a few requirements in its preamble.

  Based on the above, national assets shall be managed and protected in a special way, compared to privately owned assets. Publicly owned enterprises play a very important role in the national economy, since they provide a significant amount of GDP, they employ numerous people, they usually provide public services and last but not least they manage public funds. As a consequence, these companies shall also manage their assets with respect to the special requirements. In our article, we introduce these requirements by examining their content and also their relationship towards each other.

  One of the most important requirements is transparency, since these enterprises manage public funds and according to the Fundamental Law, every organization managing public funds shall publicly account for the management of those funds. Public funds and national assets shall be managed according to the principles of transparency and of corruption-free public life. Data relating to public funds or to national assets shall be recognized as data of public interest. We lay a special emphasis on transparency by introducing the relating regulation and also by summarizing the most prominent statements of court decisions from the last few years. In their judgements the courts interpreted the requirement of transparency in connection with state-owned enterprises and the relationship between transparency and the protection of business secrets and business interests of the companies.

• A nemzetközi kereskedelem hatékonyságának növelése: A Blockhain technológia akkreditívre gyakorolt hatásának vizsgálata a jelenlegi jogi keretek tükrében

  5-25

  Laya Aminizadeh

  Views:

  57

  Az akkreditív egy fontos dokumentum az nemzetközi kereskedelemben, elsősorban fizetési célokra használják, és ennek következtében jogokat és felelősségeket ró az érintett felekre. A fizetés és az kötelezettségek teljesítése az összes szerződés legfontosabb szempontjai közé tartoznak. Nemzetközi tranzakciók esetén az érintett feleket számos kérdés foglalkoztatja, beleértve a tevékenységükkel kapcsolatba hozható más országok jogi, politikai és gazdasági tényezőinek jobb megértésére irányuló igényt. A nemzetközi tranzakciók fizetési módjai közül az akkreditív kiemelkedik, mint a legmegbízhatóbb és legjelentősebb módszer sajátos jellemzői miatt. Az akkreditív bevonásával a bankok megfelelően képesek garantálni a vevő és az eladó érdekeit, csökkentve ezáltal a tranzakcióból eredő bizonytalanságokat. A nemzetközi kereskedelem fejlődése következtében fontos azonban figyelembe venni az újonnan megjelenő technológiák hatását a nemzetközi üzleti kapcsolatok fizetési módjaira. Jelen tanulmány célja, hogy feltárja a blokklánc-alapú akkreditív felhasználására vonatkozó legújabb kutatási eredményeket, és átfogó elemzést nyújtson a szabályozási keretekről ezen a területen. Az akkreditív blokklánc-szerkezetének részletes leírása és az okos akkreditív felhasználási lehetőségeinek vizsgálata után a tanulmány arra a következtetésre jut, hogy a meglévő jogi keretek, például az UCP, az eUCP, az ISP98 és az ENSZ akkreditív egyezmény, azok szükséges módosításaival együtt, megfelelő alapot nyújthatnak a blokklánc-alapú akkreditívek kezeléséhez. A blokklánc technológia integrálásával és ezeknek a kereteknek a kihasználásával a kereskedelmi finanszírozás hatékonysága javulhat, az átláthatóság és a biztonság megőrzése mellett.

• Collisions of fundamental rights in the legislative background of criminal procedure particularly regarding the sector-specific confidentiality

  Kata Németh

  Views:

  98

  The right to a fair trial by an independent and impartial tribunal is a fundamental right everybody is entitled to. Through such right, transparency and publicity becomes an important guarantee of the administration of justice, in a broader sense, and as a procedural principle of different court proceedings as well. The collision between the requirements of privacy protection and transparency impose challenges on the legislator, the legal practitioners and on the judicial practice as well, from many aspects. Beyond issues of data protection, these requirements influence the publicity of the courtroom, the publicity of proceedings to the press, and the protection of personality rights.

  In the general interpretation publicity is a safeguard which guarantees the indecency and impartiality of the court and it is also a significant instrument of social control. The study distinguishes between the different level of publicity in a criminal procedures such as “socially publicity”, “courtroom publicity” and “client publicity” and examines practicable problems like online-streaming during the criminal court proceeding.

  In order to ensure the transparency of courts, the information stored must be provided to the parties, other authorities, and the media, taking into account applicable legal provisions.

  When it comes to the operation of courts, one of the biggest problems with regard to the constitutionality of data processing is when the qualification of a particular data is changed several times in different procedural stages, and is – consequently – subject to different legal protection. Needless to say that the same data cannot be considered as both public and protected at the same time in the same procedure. However, this issue arises regularly, which is quite frankly a legal nonsense requiring an immediate and comprehensive solution.

  Finally the study mentions some de lege ferenda recommendations as well.