Revija Pravnik

5

Leta 2020 je zakonodajalec s sprejemom novele ZRLI uredil poseben postopek v zvezi z razpisom zakonodajnega referenduma v primeru zakonov o nujnih ukrepih za zagotovitev obrambe države, varnosti ali odprave posledic naravnih nesreč. Pri tem je s ciljem hitrejše uveljavitve zakonodaje pomanjkljivo uredil pristojnosti Državnega sveta, predvsem pristojnost vlaganja suspenzivnega veta. Avtorica v članku oriše nekatere ustavnopravne dileme, povezane z institutom suspenzivnega veta, ki so se pojavile po sprejemu 21.a člena ZRLI. Pri tem, opirajoč se na analogijo z omejitvijo zakonodajnega referenduma in primerjalno ureditvijo v drugih državah, ki imajo zgornje domove s pristojnostjo vlaganja suspenzivnega veta, ponuja možne rešitve glede ureditve instituta suspenzivnega veta v primeru teh zakonov, ki ne bi obravnavali le potrebe po zagotavljanju hitrejše promulgacije zakonov, temveč tudi potrebo po ustavni ureditvi posegov v institut suspenzivnega veta.

In 2020, the Slovenian legislator amended the Referendum and Popular Initiative Act to provide for a special procedure related to a call for a legislative referendum in the case of laws on urgent measures to ensure state defence, security, or the elimination of the consequences of natural disasters. Because the legislator main goal was to expedite the law implementation process it inadequately regulated the powers of the National Council, particularly the right to file a suspensive veto. The author discusses some of the constitutional dilemmas related to the institute of the suspensive veto which arose after the adoption of Article 21.a of the Referendum and Popular Initiative Act. Based on the analogy with the limitation of the legislative referendum and the com- parative analysis the author offers possible solutions for the arrangement of the institute of the suspensive veto in the case of such legislation. These solutions would address not only the need to ensure faster promulgation of legislation but also the need to constitutionally regulate the limitation of the suspensive veto of the National Council.

The Use of the Institute of Suspensive Veto in the Case of Laws on Urgent Measures to Ensure the Defence of the State, Security, or the Elimination of the Consequences of Natural Disasters