unknown
oaioai:dk.um.si:IzpisGradiva.php?id=16813

FROM ADVERSARIAL TO CONSENSUAL

Abstract

Preobremenjenost sodišč in dolgotrajnost postopkov botrujejo spremembam slovenskega kazenskega postopka od kontradiktornega k konsenzualnemu modelu, zgledujoč se po angloameriških in modernih evropskih kontinentalnih modelih kazenskega postopka. V ospredju je učinkovitost kazenskopravnega sodstva in ekonomičnost postopka, ki pripelje k hitrejši in cenovno ugodnejši sprejeti sodni odločitvi. Konsenzualne oblike kazenskega postopka imajo za cilj rešitev spornih zadev v obliki sporazumnega skrajšanja, zaključka ali izognitvi kazenskega postopka. Konsenzualnost je prisotna v vseh oblikah kazenskih postopkov, tudi v naši kazensko procesni zakonodaji, kjer si je utirala pot skozi določene konsenzualne oblike kot so poravnava v predkazenskem postopku, pogojna odložitev kazenskega pregona, skrajšana oblika kazenskega postopka in postopek s kaznovalnim nalogom. Gre za izjeme od rednega kazenskega postopka, v katerem igrajo pomembno vlogo temeljna načela kazenskega postopka kot so: načelo legalitete, načelo kontradiktornosti, pravica do neodvisnega in nepristranskega sodstva, načelo pravičnega sojenja, domneva nedolžnosti, pravica do obrambe, načelo materialne resnice, načelo javnega in neposrednega sojenja, pravica do pravnih sredstev. Našteta načela zagotavljajo pravičen kazenski postopek in sledijo cilju kazenskega postopka, ugotovitvi dejanskega stanja kot podlage izreka o obdolženčevi krivdi in kazni. Kar je v nasprotju s konsenzualnimi postopki, katerih cilj je sporazumna rešitev spora med državo in obdolžencem, v zameno za določene ugodnosti pri izbiri in odmeri kazni, ob sporazumnem obdolženčevem priznanju krivde ali utemeljenosti obtožbe, ob pripravljenosti odpovedi temeljnim procesnim pravicam. Z omejenim prenosom konsenzualnih oblik iz adversarnega v mešan model kazenskega postopka, so konsenzualni postopki dobrodošli. Uvedba instituta plea bargaining-a, kot najbolj sporne konsenzualne oblike kazenskega postopka, je za naš mešan model kazenskega postopka nesprejemljiva tako z vidika doktrine varstva človekovih pravic kot cilja in družbene vloge mešanega kazenskega postopka.Overburdened courts and the lengthy procedures have caused a change in Slovenian criminal proceedings from adversarial to consensus as seen in the Anglo-American and modern European continental criminal proceedings. The efficiency and economy of criminal law judiciary that would lead to faster and cheaper judicial decision is taken into consideration. Consensual forms of criminal proceedings aim to tackle controversial issues in the form of reduction, conclusion or avoidance of criminal proceedings. Consensus is present in all forms of criminal proceedings, as well as in our criminal procedural law that was instituted through specific consensual forms, such as settlement of pre-trial proceedings, conditional suspension of prosecution, a shortened form of the criminal proceedings and proceedings with a punitive order. But these do not agree with the regular criminal proceedings, where an important role is played by the fundamental principles of criminal proceedings: the principle of legality, the adversarial principle, the right to an independent and impartial judiciary, the principle of a just trial, presumption of innocence, the right to defense, the principle of material truth, the principle of open court and direct trial and the right to seek redress. These principles provide an equitable criminal proceedings and aim to the final decision of criminal procedure and to the establishment of the facts that serve as the imposition of the defendant’s guilt and punishment. However, these contradict the consensual proceedings that aim to the amicable settlement between the state and the accused, where in return for consensual admission of guilt or the merits of the allegations certain privileges are taken into consideration at the determination of sentencing and the sentence itself. The consensual proceedings are welcomed with a limited transfer of consensual forms from the adversary to the mixed model of criminal proceedings. The introduction of the plea bargaining as one of the most controversial forms of the consensual criminal proceedings is not acceptable for our mixed model of criminal proceedings, both in terms of the doctrine of human rights protection and the social role of mixed criminal proceedings

Similar works

Full text

thumbnail-image

Digital library of University of Maribor

Provided a free PDF
oaioai:dk.um.si:IzpisGradiva.php?id=16813Last time updated on 11/18/2016View original full text link

This paper was published in Digital library of University of Maribor.

Having an issue?

Is data on this page outdated, violates copyrights or anything else? Report the problem now and we will take corresponding actions after reviewing your request.