Conflicts are an integral part of doing business and companies cannot avoid them. In a globalized and dynamic environment, there is a need to manage conflicts that occur within the company, in a productive and effective way. Conflict management styles are influenced by a number of factors, including the national culture of employees, who will have certain preferences in resolving conflicts in accordance with their culture. When it comes to multicultural environment, the knowledge of the national culture of the country in which the business is being done, as well as the company’s home country, national culture is extremely important for conflict management and creation of positive atmosphere in the company. Doing business in a foreign market additionally complicates the process of the creation of interpersonal conflicts. Thus, top management coming from the home country has a big task of understanding the values and customs which are the part of personality of each employee from another country, and at the same time, the understanding of the national culture of the country in which the business was internationalized. The aim of the research is to, based on theoretical and empirical research, examine the impact of Bosnian and Herzegovinian national culture on conflict resolution styles used in foreign companies doing business in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Research results show that the national culture is a significant factor in conflict management in a company, but also in conflicts in general. The level of harmonization of chosen styles and ways of managing them with the national culture of the employees will affect their business performance, positive atmosphere and communication, and more efficiency for achieving the company’s business goals.

Reason(s) for writing and research problem(s): Bosnia and Herzegovina offers a unique opportunity to examine how education is evolving and adapting in the context of state-building and the extent of efforts made in a still ethnically divided society. It seems very important to examine the role that politics have played in education in Bosnia and Herzegovina throughout history, and the consequences that certain attitudes have had on the current security situation in the country. Aims of the paper (scientific and/or social): This paper aims to determine the consequences of fostering the dominance of politics over education on current relations among citizens in post-conflict Bosnia and Herzegovina, and unveil the impacts of such relations on national security. Methodology/Design: The following methods were used: analytical-synthetic methods, hypothetical-deductive methods, and also axiomatic and comparative methods and, from the data collection perspective, the method of document content analysis, as well as the case study method. Research/paper limitations: The main limitation of this paper is the impossibility to provide a more detailed analysis for the period of 1992-1995. Namely, there are very few available materials that testify to the topic of education in this period. Results/Findings: The results show that all authorities in the observed periods were aware that the ease of their rule and the repetition and maintenance of the ruling relationship depend to a small extent on the character of education. As a result, they carefully selected and prepared curricula and designed educational programs according to their preferences, thus proving the direct impact of politics on education. General conclusion: The impact of politics on education in all three analysed periods of development of education in Bosnia and Herzegovina was confirmed. Given the persistent ethnic polarization, all countries in the region could make fair use of the Council of Europe's expertise, primarily in the areas of human rights, democratic citizenship and cultural diversity. 58 Criminal Justice Issues Year XX, Issue 5, 2020. Halilović-Kibrić – Security Aspects of Fostering the Dominance of Politics Over Education in Bosnia and Herzegovina Research/paper validity: In scientific terms, the research is justified by the need to point out the consequences that the politicized, segregated, fragmented and decentralized education system in Bosnia and Herzegovina has on security issues.

Debate whether legal persons can be criminally liable has been subject of academic interest and discussions for a long time. Led by Latin phrase “societas delinquere non potest”, the vast majority of legal systems did not accept criminal liability of legal persons for a long time. The key argument for this viewpoint was the lack of „mens rea” element (the “guilty mind” or intention of an individual). Yet, it would be unfair to say that legal persons were not responsible for breach of law in any other way. Legislation of the Former Republic of Yugoslavia recognized economic transgressions as a separate category of criminal offence. After the dissolution of the Former Republic of Yugoslavia, all member states showed commitment to European integration. In order to join the European Union, candidates for future membership had to harmonize national law with “acquis communautaire” and consequently introduced criminal liability of legal persons in criminal and criminal procedure codes. In the paper, besides the historical background, the author analyzes differences and similarities between criminal liability of legal persons in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia, focusing on specific features of criminal proceedings against legal persons. Both countries adopted a model of derived, subjective and cumulative liability. Author compares differences between specific matters of criminal procedure against legal persons. The issue that deserves special attention in the context of derived liability of legal persons is whether a natural person and a legal person can have joint defense. Besides specific features of a criminal procedure against legal persons, the paper also elaborates different regulation of sanctions, security measures and consequences of conviction for against a legal person. Finally, in the conclusion, the author advocates intervention in B&H legislation, following the solutions prescribed by the Law on the Liability of Legal Persons for Criminal Offenses regarding joint and mandatory defense, and, especially, for establishing of a public criminal register of convictions against legal persons. Public

This paper is the result of a mini empirical research on the duration of judicial and public prosecutorial investigations before the High Court in Novi Sad. A total of 100 cases were analyzed, of which 50 cases from 2008 and 50 cases from 2015 and 2016. The first 50 cases were conducted during the validity of the Criminal Procedure code from 2001, while the other 50 cases were conducted during the validity of the Criminal Procedure Code from 2011. In order for the result to be as comparable as possible, we tried to have the same structure of criminal acts represented in both groupes. The author came to the conclusion that a prosecutorial investigation is not faster than a judicial investigation. The search for the suspect, the search for the injured party, the impediment of the lawer, the strike of the lawers, the preoccupation of the public prosecutor, etc. contributed to the somewhat longer duration of the public prosecutorial investigation.

The paper highlights some of the deterioration of the defendant, s position in the 2011 Code of criminal procedure of Serbia. On the other hand, it points to some relatively new institutions that go behind the traditional role of the defendant, which is reflected in the opposition to the charges. These are three types of defendant, s agreement with the public prosecution. The first form is a diversionary model, which is applied in the pre-trial procedure. The second is the plea agreement. Both forms were introduced before the confluence to relieve criminal justice, but the defendant himself benefits. The third form is the conclusion of an agreement between the defendant and the sentenced person on testimony in other to successfully detect, prove or prevent the criminal acts referred to in article 162, paragraph 1, item 1 of the Code of criminal procedure.