LIABILITY FOR DAMAGES CAUSED BY TERRORIST ACTS, PUBLIC DEMONSTRATIONS OR MANIFESTATIONS IN THE REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA - ANOMALIES AND SOLUTIONS

Abstract

The world is currently going through a difficult period. Every day we hear news how the security system of developed countries has failed to prevent terrorist acts of individuals or groups that kill and cause harm to innocent people for unknown motives. Upon completion of such a crime begin its consequences. In order for such consequences, not to paralyze life in the social community, the state necessarily should take measures to restore these consequences as soon as possible and more fully. The responsibility for damage caused by terrorist acts, public demonstrations or manifestations is one of the special cases of liability, through which it is foreseen to rectify the consequences that result from the above actions by compensating for the damage suffered. Liability for damage caused by terrorist acts, public demonstrations or manifestations is an institution of the Тort law of the Republic of Macedonia, which is regulated by the Law on Obligations. This institute answers the question of who compensates the damage caused by terrorist acts, public demonstrations or manifestations, which damage is compensated and to what amount and who is entitled to claim compensation and who does not. The Institute liability for damage caused by terrorist acts, public demonstrations or manifestations in the Republic of Macedonia has been undertaken with very minor changes from the former Socialist Republic of Yugoslavia and has not suffered essential changes until today. The scientific and expert thought of the Republic of Macedonia lacks discussions, papers and research concerning this important institute of tort law. Such lack is even more surprising given that the institute liability for damage caused by terrorist acts, public demonstrations or manifestations was widely applied in the armed conflict in 2001. The aim of this paper is to clarify some of the anomalies that this institute has and to propose solutions in order to overcome them. While exploring the abovementioned anomalies and delivering solutions were used the analytical, normative and the comparative method. However, the synthetic and historical method appeared as necessary. The deductive and inductive are only used when making the conclusions and observations of the research. As an auxiliary, both the teleological, ontological and other methods are used. The author of this paper after the research came to the conclusion that the institution of liability for damage caused by terrorist acts, public demonstrations or manifestations must be altered. This institution, as regulated lat.De lege lata to a good extent, abounds with legal problems, and in part it is outdated conceptually and it is necessary to change it. The legal problems are different in their ontology, starting from gaps and inconsistencies until the contradiction of part of the provisions of this law with another law that regulates individual aspects of this institute. While part of this paper is obsolete, it is necessary to change it in order to meet today's challenges.