Socio-Epidemiological Aspects of Suicide in Sarajevo from 1992-1995

The project investigated the phenomenon of suicide in war-encircled Sarajevo, where the population was uninterruptedly exposed for four years to direct danger of life from constant shelling and sniper fire, as well as from the lack of essential food items, energy sources and water. It showed that in the pre-war peacetime year of 1991 the suicide rate was 8.36, which was almost 100% less than that in the first post-war peacetime year of 1996, when 16.13 suicides were recorded per 100,000 citizens. The first wartime year, 1992, was characterised by a fall in the number of suicides by almost 40% of the 1991 figure. It is indicative that not a single suicide was registered during the six months from May to October of that first wartime year. In 1993 there was 96.29% increase on 1992, with a total of 53 suicides, showing that the initial shock of danger to one's life from others had passed and that statistics on suicide had returned to "normal". In the following year, 1994, 47 suicides were recorded, and in 1995 the figure was 49. Data from the first post-war peacetime year clearly shows that the human tragedy of taking one's own life has continued, with the number of suicides increasing steadily, especially among demobilised soldiers ranging in age from 30 to 40. Most of them ended their lives by activating a bomb or other explosive device, choosing the place carefully so as to avoid any possible risk to other lives during the act of taking their own.

Legality and Human Rights: Administrative Justice in Russia 1862-1917

The question of how far pre-revolutionary Russia was from the ideal of a lawful state has received little academic attention, particularly as relates to the legal regulation of relations between person, society and state within the state administration. Pravilova explored the methods of settling disputes between individuals and the administration, and the emergence of legal controls of the administration, analysed projects for the organisation of administrative justice and studied the particular nature of concepts from Russian administrative justice. The idea of an organisation of special bodies examining complaints by private persons against the actions of officials and state bureaucratic organs first appeared in the early 1860s. In the 1870s-1890s various projects for the reform of administrative justice (reorganisation of the Senate and local administrative institutions) were proposed by the Ministries of Justice and Finance, but none of these was put into practice, largely due to resistance from the bureaucracy. At the same time, however, the rapid development of private enterprise, the activities of the zemstvo and self-government produced new norms and mechanisms for the regulation of authorities and social relations. Despite the lack of institutional conditions, the Senate did consider complaints from private persons against illegal actions by administrative officials, playing a role similar to that of the supreme administrative courts in France and Germany. The spread of concepts of a 'lawful state' aroused support for a system of administrative justice and the establishment of administrative tribunals was seen as a condition of legality and a guarantee of human rights. The government was forced to understand that measures to maintain legality were vital to preserve the stability of the system of state power, but plans for liberal reforms were pushed into the background by constitutional reforms. The idea of guarantees of human rights in relations with the authorities was in contradiction with the idea of the monarchy and it was only when the Provisional Government took power in 1917 that the liberal programme of legal reforms had any chance of being put into practice. A law passed in June 1917 ordained the organisation of local administrative justice bodies, but its implementation was hampered by the war, the shortage of qualified judges and the existing absolute legal illiteracy, and the few administrative courts that were set up were soon abolished by the new Soviet authorities. Pravilova concluded that the establishment of a lawful state in pre-revolutionary Russia was prevented by a number of factors, particularly the autocratic nature of the supreme authority, which was incompatible with the idea of administrative justice as a guarantee of the rights of citizens in their relations with the state.