TFL Vsebine / Pravni letopis

Vprašanje je, ali je normativni okvir sodelovanja strokovne in druge zainteresirane javnosti v fazi priprave delovnih besedil in osnutkov kot delu zakonodajnega procesa zadosten. Menim namreč, da je normativni okvir zakonodajne dejavnosti predvsem v zakonodajnem postopku (torej v parlamentarni fazi) kot delu procesa sprejemanja zakonodaje, ki se odvija v Državnem zboru, zadosten in zagotavlja visoko stopnjo transparentnosti, kar pomeni, da tudi načelno izpolnjuje zahteve po transparentnosti. Seveda obstaja vprašanje primanjkljaja transparentnosti v predparlamentarni fazi, torej v fazi izdelave zakonodajnih predlogov oziroma delovnih besedil zakonodajnih predlogov, v kateri sodelujejo različna delovna telesa ter zainteresirana in druga strokovna javnost. Ob primanjkljaju transparentnosti v fazi sestave delovnih besedil zakonov, kar je posledica pomanjkljivosti normativnega okvira, je treba poudariti, da je formalno spodbudo transparentnosti v predparlamentarnem postopku zarisala že Resolucija o normativni dejavnosti. Na razkorak med temeljnimi opredelitvami iz Resolucije o normativni dejavnosti in dejanskim stanjem pa nasprotno kažejo številne odločitve Ustavnega sodišča Republike Slovenije, ki opozarjajo na primanjkljaj transparentnosti v določenih primerih normodajnega procesa.

The key question of this article is whether the regulatory framework defining the participation of stakeholders and the public in the preparatory phases of the legislative process is sufficient. In my view, the framework regulating the legislative activities within the parliamentary procedure as part of the process of law adoption in the National Assembly is adequate and grants a high level of transparency, therefore in principle fulfilling the demands for transparency. However, there is a lack of transparency in the pre-parliamentary phase, i.e. in the preparation of legislative proposals or drafts involving different working bodies, stakeholders and experts. It should be noted that the transparency deficit in the phase of law drafting as a consequence of the insufficient regulatory framework has been addressed by the Resolution on Legislative Regulation. However, the gap between the principal guidelines laid down in the Resolution on Legislative Regulation and the actual situation is indicated by many decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Slovenia that pointed out the lack of transparency in certain cases of the regulatory process.

Transparency in the context of preparing the drafts and legislative proposals