Ustavna uređenja temeljnih prava u Hrvatskoj 1946.–1974.
THE CONSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENT OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS IN CROATIA, 1946-1974

Summary/Abstract: Using comparative methods the constitutional arrangement of human and civil rights is analyzed during two constitutional eras in socialist Croatia, with reference to Yugoslavia. The comparison is carried out on three levels: a synchronic comparison of the Federal constitution with the constitution of the Republic (the Constitution of the Federated Peoples’ Republics of Yugoslavia of 1946 with the Constitution of the People’s Republic of Croatia of 1947, the Constitution of the Socialist Federated Republics of Yugoslavia of 1963 with the Constitution of the Socialist Republic of Croatia of 1963), a diachronic comparison of the Constitution of the Federated Peoples’ Republics of Yugoslavia of 1946 with the Constitution of the Socialist Federated Republics of Yugoslavia of 1963, and a synchronic comparison of Yugoslavian constitutional arrangements with international documents concerning the protection of human and civil rights and freedoms. Prior to presenting the analysis the author theoretically defined the concepts of fundamental rights, human rights, civil rights and political rights, presented basic international documents concerning the protection of human rights and pointed to the character of the constitutional organization of socialist Yugoslavia, as well as Croatia during the period 1946-1974. It is concluded that the arrangement of the Republic’s (Croatia’s) constitution was a photocopy of the arrangement of the Federal constitution, that in the second constitutional period the rights of citizens in the constitutional texts were more precisely defined and in particular measures broadened, and that Yugoslavia in its constitutional arrangements did not entirely adhere to international acts concerning the protection of human and civil rights. Socialist Croatia, as a part of Yugoslavia, was part of a socialist legal entity in which the question of the protection of individual rights was a peripheral matter.

• Details
• Contents