Globalization and the development of the global economy have also influenced the development of football in Europe and throughout the world. The paper deals with the relationship of the European Union Law and football. The European Union, as a specific legal structure, has been “eluding” precise definition of its legal nature since its inception, while the nature of football is changing, and in addition to the game, it is also becoming an important economic activity. The attitude of the Union towards football can be divided into two periods. First, before the Bosman case and after it. Both periods are marked by the activity of the European Court of Justice, and the connection of sports and football as a whole with economic activity, which was also confirmed in the Bosman case. However, there is one exception in relation to such a position of the Court, and that is the matches of representative selections. After posing the problem and briefly describing the practice of the Court, the authors try to figure out the motives that led to such reasoning of the Court.

No abstract

Globalization has also affected football. People are increasingly mobile, and football players often move to different countries. It happens that they also acquire the citizenship of a certain country or that after playing for one national selection they change their mind and want to play for another one, whose citizenship they have acquired or maybe they already had. Of course, it can also happen that a state ceases to exist, and that a new state or states are established on that territory. Certainly, these are very challenging questions, since the national teams are a matter of national pride. As a matter of fact, it is understandable why the rules are different comparing to club football. Simply, intention is to preserve the substrate of representative football, its essence. In the paper, the authors aim to provide, after the introductory considerations, an analysis of the provisions of the world umbrella football organization FIFA in this area. At the end, the authors summarize the results of the research and offer an appropriate conclusion.

In this paper, after the historical part, and the part concerning the acts of international public law in Europe, which concern this matter, the position of judicial councils in Poland and Estonia is examined. The aspect of the historical development of councils in these countries, as well as their composition and competences, is examined. In the paper, above all, the normative method is used. The scientific and social justification of the topic is found in the fact that in Serbia, a reform related to the independence of the judiciary is ongoing.

Comparatively speaking, if we take the European continent into consideration, one can notice that there are basically three approaches to the administration of justice: the model a judicial council, the judicial-managerial model, and the model of management through the ministry responsible for judiciary. In this sense, 20th century marks significant changes in the way how European countries understand the relationship between politics and the judicial system, because originally the management of the judiciary was mainly the responsibility of the executive power, and especially of the competent ministry responsible for the judiciary. However, after the end of the Second World War, concerns about judicial independence, judicial accountability, and better judicial performance began to shape particular changes, and ministries of justice lost their monopoly on the administration of justice. In many countries special bodies with the authority to deal with the career of judges or administration of justice were hence created. In other words, in order to free the judiciary from political pressure, in the first place from executive power, (in other words: to establish the principle of independent judiciary), judicial councils began to emerge as a symbol and herald of new institutions of democratic regimes. Historically speaking, the country where the first judicial council was created was France, in the nineteenth century. Of course, since then numerous reforms in this country took place, but the "seed" did not remain solely on the French territory - it had already spread across Europe. In the 20th century, France was once again the forerunner in this sense, when the High Council of Magistracy was established (Conseil Superieur de la Magistrature) in 1946. A few years later, Italy became the first country to have the council of the same name (Consiglio Superiore della Magistratura) - created in order to completely set the entire judiciary free from political control. This type of council later served as a model for justice systems of other countries, with the aim to provide another set of constitutional guarantees for the establishment and preservation of judiciary’s independence. Later, Spain and Portugal formed the same councils after breaking up with respective authoritarian regimes. That was an important constitutional guarantee for the rule of law, i.e., measure for strengthening of judiciary. After these initial steps, one can only “state that there is a European trend of establishing judicial councils in countries that have traditionally relied on ministerial management of courts and budget”, and the number of such countries increased many times during only a few decades. Especially since 1989 and the fall of the Berlin Wall, Europe has witnessed a true expansion of judicial councils. In this monography, by using the normative, exegetical, and comparative method, important aspects of the functioning of judicial councils are placed under analysis: the one that relates to their composition method of selection of their members, as well as jurisdiction. Twenty European countries are taken into consideration, and special reference was given to Serbia and the Constitutional Amendments of 2022.