SPORAZUM O PRIZNANjU KRIVICE U PRAVU EVROPSKIH ZEMALjA: PRIMJER ITALIJE

The author in this work elaborates about institute known as plea bargaining. Plea bargaining is the institute from the AngloAmerican legal law system which in the last 30-ish years taking a significant place in the Criminal Procedure Codes among the European countries, approaching on that way two different legal law systems. The first European country, who introduces in her legal system plea bargaining, was Italy. Through analyses provisions of the law, the author concludes that the plea bargaining is on the good way to be widely exerted. After Italy, every country in the Europe incorporated in her legal system plea bargaining, with more or less differences. The paper brings review of provisions of the new Italian Codice di Procedura Penale from the year of 1988. New Code was very revolutionary and bring much new in the law. The most important news was plea bargaining. The author concludes that plea bargaining is not in the enough use. The reasons for that we can search in the, for now, a small area of appliance.Sporazum o priznanju krivice je institut anglo-američkog pravnog sistema koji poslednjih trideset godina zauzima značajno mjesto i u krivično-procesnim zakonodavstvima evropskih zemalja, približavajući na taj način dva različita pravna sistema. Prva evropska država, koja je uvela u svoje zakonodavstvo sporazum o priznanju krivice, odnosno, dogovaranje o kazni, bila je Italija. To je učinila zbog porasta stope kriminaliteta i nemoći zakonodavnih rješenja da spriječe ili makar pospješe suzbijanje te pojave. Već 1981. godine, u još uvijek važeći Zakonik o krivičnom postupku, tzv. Rokov Zakonik o krivičnom postupku, pokusno je uvedeno dogovaranje o kazni, sa jako uskim poljem primjene. Međutim, godine 1988. u Italiji se donosi novi Zakonik o krivičnom postupku, u kojem je, između ostalog proširena oblast primjene sporazuma o priznanju krivice, poznatijeg kao patteggiamento. Nakon toga, došlo je do još jedne promjene odredbi Zakonika, 2003. godine, kojom je, za sada, dovršeno priširivanje primjene sporazuma o priznanju krivice. U ovom radu, ukratko ćemo se osvrnuti na zaokret evropskih zakonodavstava ka adverzijalnom modelu i usvajanje američkih rješenja u italijanskom zakonodavstvu, a detaljno ćemo obraditi institut sporazuma o priznanju krivice, odnosno, patteggiamento-a

UNFORESEEABILITY AND ABUSE OF CRIMINAL LAW DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC IN SERBIA

The author deals with the problem of criminal measures and sanctions in the legislation of the Republic of Serbia during the Covid-19 pandemic. The executive branch of the government declared a state of emergency in the Republic of Serbia in March 2020. At the same time the so-called Crisis Headquarter was established with the authority to impose measures of criminal-legal nature. During the two-month state of emergency, through the Crisis Headquarter, the executive branch of the government was changing criminal laws and sanctions at an almost daily basis. It is debatable whether such laws meet the rule of law and the European Court of Human Rights standards. Many citizens failed to adapt their behavior to the imposed measures. On the one hand, the courts have fallen into the trap of double punishment, both for a crime and for a misdemeanor. On the other hand, justifications of the courts’ decisions are also questionable, especially those containing references to statements made by members of the crisis team through the media. Furthermore, the Constitutional Court didn’t rule on any of the numerous requests for constitutional review, but in September it came out with the view that since the state of emergency was over, its decision was unnecessary. The paper is comprised of several units. In the first place, the author explains the process of legal changes by analyzing all the laws and rules that were passed by the end of 2020, as well as data related to the punishment of residents whose behavior was not in accordance with existing legal solutions. Bearing in mind the standards of the rule of law and the European Court of Human Rights, the author then explains that the measures implemented by the Serbian authorities do not meet the basic required criteria, primarily the foreseeability of the law, as well as that the laws were abused for the purpose of the election campaign. The special attention is paid to curfews and the complete ban on leaving homes for senior citizens well as ban of contacting with the family members, and then the lockdown of the rest of the population. The actions taken by the authorities during the epidemic resulted in violation of human rights of their citizens, and experience shows that the only court that citizens will be able to turn to will be the European Court of Human Rights. The author believes that with this understanding of the law and respect for its own citizens, the European Union can only be a distant idea.Publishe

MIGRANTS AND SAFETY IN SERBIA DURING AND AFTER CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC

The removal of internal borders and the establishment of freedom of movement are important aspects of the EU’s history, but they are not accompanied by a uniform legal system. The migrant dilemma isn’t going away, and the pattern and character of these movements have evolved dramatically over the previous six decades. The author of this article addresses the issue of migrants’ position in Serbia’s rural areas during the coronavirus pandemic. During the period of emergency, Serbia enacted policies that imprisoned migrants in detention centres, effectively depriving them of their liberty. According to the government’s reasoning, it was done to protect migrants’ health. Given the rising violence between migrants and the local people, the question is whether the state intended to safeguard migrants’ health or citizens from migrants in this manner. The author conducted a survey in these areas, explains the findings in depth, and draws a conclusion based on his findings. The paper is comprised of several units. In the first place, the author briefly explains the state of emergency in Serbia and gives an overview of migration centers in Serbia. The central part of this paper deals with the research between citizens in relation to migrants, both in their general attitude and in terms of the relationship between migrants and crime. Residents of migrants’ areas were surveyed, as the author believed thought that due to the location of migration centres, they would be most affected by waves of migrants and possibly, crimes committed by migrants. The author set two initial hypotheses and both were confirmed, and according to the research, the population has a negative attitude towards migrants. At the same time, most respondents show distrust of the state’s claim that migrants are imprisoned for their health. The author believes that this move by the state at that time was a hasty reaction in order to prevent the uncontrolled movement of migrants and the potential spread of the infectious coronavirus disease. In the same time, the author tries to answer to the question about the migrants’ position today and in the near future.Publishe

Globalization of the Plea Bargaining: Lessons From Countries With Unlimited System

Plea bargaining is a global phenomenon among legal transplants of the criminal procedural law. It originated on the American continent, but become popular in the last 30 years around the world. Legislators, faced with the overloaded courts, found solutions in the comparative law that could solve this problem. Plea bargaining is far away from the perfect system of the solving criminal cases, since many critics follow this transplant. However, its positive sides are numerous, so it comes to life in every country where it is introduced. Of course, some states started from the beginning with rapid changes in legislations, completely turning its legal system to the Anglo- American. Others moved with significantly more caution, limiting plea bargaining on certain crimes. The author in this work deals with the agreement in countries with unlimited system of plea bargaining: Germany, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Serbia.Publishe

Euthanasia: Murder or Not: A Comparative Approach

Background: Euthanasia is one of the most intriguing ethical, medical and law issues that marked whole XX entury and beginning of the XXI century, sharply dividing scientific and unscientific public to its supporters and opponents. It also appears as one of the points where all three major religions (Catholic, Orthodox, and Islamic) have the same view. They are strongly against legalizing mercy killing, emphasizing the holiness of life as a primary criterion by which the countries should start in their considerations. Studying criminal justice systems in the world, the authors concluded that the issue of deprivation of life from compassion is solved on three ways. On the first place, we have countries where euthanasia is murder like any other murder from the criminal codes. Second, the most numerous are states where euthanasia is murder committed under privilege circumstances. On the third place, in the Western Europe we have countries where euthanasia is a legal medical procedure, under requirements prescribed by the law. In this paper, authors have made a brief comparison of the solutions that exist in some Islamic countries, where euthanasia is a murder, with Western countries, where it represents completely decriminalized medical procedure.Publishe

UNFORESEEABILITY AND ABUSE OF CRIMINAL LAW DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC IN SERBIA

The author deals with the problem of criminal measures and sanctions in the legislation of the Republic of Serbia during the Covid-19 pandemic. The executive branch of the government declared a state of emergency in the Republic of Serbia in March 2020. At the same time the so-called Crisis Headquarter was established with the authority to impose measures of criminal-legal nature. During the two-month state of emergency, through the Crisis Headquarter, the executive branch of the government was changing criminal laws and sanctions at an almost daily basis. It is debatable whether such laws meet the rule of law and the European Court of Human Rights standards. Many citizens failed to adapt their behavior to the imposed measures. On the one hand, the courts have fallen into the trap of double punishment, both for a crime and for a misdemeanor. On the other hand, justifications of the courts’ decisions are also questionable, especially those containing references to statements made by members of the crisis team through the media. Furthermore, the Constitutional Court didn’t rule on any of the numerous requests for constitutional review, but in September it came out with the view that since the state of emergency was over, its decision was unnecessary. The paper is comprised of several units. In the first place, the author explains the process of legal changes by analyzing all the laws and rules that were passed by the end of 2020, as well as data related to the punishment of residents whose behavior was not in accordance with existing legal solutions. Bearing in mind the standards of the rule of law and the European Court of Human Rights, the author then explains that the measures implemented by the Serbian authorities do not meet the basic required criteria, primarily the foreseeability of the law, as well as that the laws were abused for the purpose of the election campaign. The special attention is paid to curfews and the complete ban on leaving homes for senior citizens well as ban of contacting with the family members, and then the lockdown of the rest of the population. The actions taken by the authorities during the epidemic resulted in violation of human rights of their citizens, and experience shows that the only court that citizens will be able to turn to will be the European Court of Human Rights. The author believes that with this understanding of the law and respect for its own citizens, the European Union can only be a distant idea.Publishe

Saradnja javnog tužioca i policije u Republici Srbiji

Contemporary trends in criminal procedure legislation are deliberately looking for efficiency as well as the instruments of implementation of international standards both in its quantitative and qualitative aspects. Doctrinal considerations find their footing in the decades-long reform of criminal procedural legislation of the Serbia, whereas the question that has always represented one of the most significant characteristics of criminal procedural legislation in general is the correlation between the public prosecutor and the police and its contribution to the efficiency of criminal proceedings. Serbia adopted new Criminal Procedure Code in 2011, which entered into the force during the 2013. According to the abovementioned, the authors pay special attention to the following issues: first, the notion of the police and the police functions; secondly, the correlation of the public prosecutor and the police as a factor in the efficiency of criminal proceedings; thirdly, empirical research and proposals de lege ferenda.Savremeni trendovi u krivičnoprocesnom zakonodavstvu tendenciozno tragaju za instrumentima realizacije efikasnosti kao međunarodni standard i to u svom kvantitativnom i kvalitativnom aspektu. Doktrinarna razmatranja svoje uporište pronalaze u višedecenijskoj reformi krivičnoprocesnog zakonodavstva Srbije, a pitanje koje je oduvek predstavljalo jedno od značajnijih obeležja krivičnoprocesnog zakonodavstva uopšte je i korelacija javnog tužioca i policije i njen doprinos efikasnosti krivičnog postupka. U skladu sa navedenim, autori posebnu pažnju posvećuju sledećim pitanjima: prvo, pojam policije i policijske funkcije; drugo, korelacija javnog tužioca i policije kao faktor efikasnosti krivičnog postupka; treće, empirijsko istraživanje i predlozi de lege ferenda

ПРАВО МАЛОЛЕТНИКА НА СЛОБОДУ И БЕЗБЕДНОСТ У ПРАКСИ ЕВРОПСКОГ СУДА ЗА ЉУДСКА ПРАВА - ПРИВИЛЕГОВАНИ ИЛИ ЈЕДНАКИ?

According to the provisions of The European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR), everyone has the right to liberty and security of person. Article 5 of ECHR specifically enumerates the grounds which can lawfully justify a deprivation of liberty. However, apart from the detention after conviction by a competent court, detention after arrest or detention in order to preserve public safety, minors can also be detained for the purpose of educational supervision and for the purpose of bringing a minor before the competent legal authority. The aim of this paper is to analyze case-law of the European Court of Human Rights, in order to point out to special circumstances that enable the lawful detention of a juvenile and, also, in order to compare the position of juveniles with the position of adults in reference to the protection of the right to liberty. Also, it is questionable if minors are entitled to a better protection against the deprivation of liberty than adults. Nevertheless, it is also questionable if, in reference to educational supervision, there is a possibility of detaining a minor under extensively defined grounds, although, over the last several decades, there bas been an internationally established notion that a minor should be detained only as a last resort and for the shortest appropriate period of time.Право на слободуибезбедност припадасвимаи загарантовано jе чланом 5. Европске конвенције о заштити људских права и основних слобода, при чему се у истом члану таксативно набрајају основи по којима је, у изузетним случајевима, могуће законито лишавање од овог права. Но, када су у питању малолетници, основима лишавања слободе као што су извршење пресуде, извршење мере притвора и предузимање мера у циљу заштите опште безбедности, придружује се још један специфичан основ - лишавање слободе ради вршења васпитног надзора или привођења надлежној власти. Циљ рада је да се анализом случајева из праксе Европског суда за људска права укаже на околности под којима се специфично лишавање слободе малолетног лица има сматрати дозвољеним, али и да се упореди положај малолетних и пунолетних лица при заштити права на слободу. У том смислу, са једне стране, посебно треба одговорити на питање да ли, у одређеним случајевима, малолетници уживају бољу заштиту но одрасла лица. Са друге стране, поставља се питање да ли малолетници над којима се врши васпитни надзор могу бити лишени слободе под условима који се тумаче на екстензиван начин, иако се већ деценијама инсистира на томе да се затварање малолетника може користити само као последње средство и у што краћем трајању

Sporazum o priznanju krivičnog dela u praksi Tribunala za bivšu Jugoslaviju

The authors in the work deal with the plea agreement in the international law - before the Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. International law, which is glorified from the one side, and criticized for the other, gradually developed in the field of criminal procedure. This development is, however, largely influenced by political factors, which can be best seen in the proceedings before the Tribunal, where the individual rules are created during the criminal proceedings and particular amendments, followed by implementation of American legal solutions, despite all critics of the same rules in that system, as well as different opinions of the trial judges in the Tribunal. After the introductory remarks, the authors explain the legal basis of the plea bargaining. Then, they explain the majority of criminal cases in which occurred guilty plea. Through these cases, the authors came to the conclusion that, although in the national legal systems plea negotiation and plea agreement contributes to the efficiency of the criminal proceedings, briefly prescribed legal rules for its conclusion and application before the Tribunal once again proved a distinct selectivity in the delivering of justice in this area of international law.Autori u radu obrađuju sporazum o priznanju krivičnog dela u međunarodnom pravu, i to pred Tribunalom za bivšu Jugoslaviju. Međunarodno pravo, koje se sa jedne strane glorifikuje, a sa druge kritikuje, postepeno se razvilo i u domenu krivičnog procesnog zakonodavstva. Ovaj razvoj je, ipak, pretežno bio uslovljen političkim faktorima, što se najbolje može videti u postupcima pred Tribunalom, pred kojim su pojedina pravila postupka krojena za vreme trajanja krivičnog postupka, praćena implementiranjem zakonskih rešenja iz američkog prava uprkos svim kritikama upućenim istim pravilima u ovom sistemu, kao i različitim mišljenjima sudija u Tribunalu. Nakon uvodnih razmatranja, autori su objasnili zakonske osnove zaključenja sporazuma o priznanju krivičnog dela, a potom obrazložili većinu krivičnih predmeta u kojima je došlo do priznanja krivice. Kroz te krivične postupke autori su došli do zaključka da, iako u nacionalnim pravnim sistemima pregovaranje o priznanju krivice i zaključenje nagodbe doprinosi efikasnosti krivičnog postupka, šturo propisivanje pravila njenog zaključenja, a potom i njihova primena, još jednom su dokazali izrazitu selektivnost u deljenju pravde pred Tribunalom

Struktura sudskih veća u krivičnim sudovima

The composition of a criminal court stands as one of the most interesting issues in the comparative law. Different viewpoints when it comes to the need of including non-professional citizens in the contemporary criminal procedure have contributed to interesting approaches related to regulating this issue. First of all, there are original jury systems that are a feature related mainly to the Anglo-American legal systems, but whose ideas have found their place in the European legislature as well. Furthermore, there are countries where the trial body stands as a separate authority, which consists of professional judges and lay judges, whereas some of the countries have both professional judges and lay judges, the first being in charge of resolving legal issues, and the second ones being in charge of factual issues. There are many articles devoted to the jury systems in the world, but in a very small proportion of them we could find solutions from the mixed court of the Balkan countries. Mixed court is one of the features continental countries. The authors compare Balkan countries, where Slovenia and Croatia being the European Union Members, whereas the rest of them are in the process of accession. Thereby, some of the countries strive to get their courts become more professional by leaving out citizens non-professional from the composition of trial chamber, while some of them have kept them, whereby the scope of their jurisdiction varies from one country to another. Today, it is a great question whether a mixed court will survive legislative changes, due to the criticism of the jurists and non-jurists.Sastav sudećih veća jedno je od najinteresantnijih pitanja današ­njice, pogotovo u vremenu velikih reformskih poduhvata. Različita shvatanja potrebe za učešćem građana-laika u savremenom krivičnom postupku doprinela su zanimljivim pristupima u regulisanju tog pitanja. Na prvom mestu, postoje pravi porotni sistemi, koji su odlika prevashodno angloameričkog pravnog sistema, ali su njegove ideje našle mesto i u evropskim zakonodavstvima. Postoje i države u kojima sudeće veće predstavlja jedno telo, sastavljeno od sudija profesionalaca i sudija porotnika, dok u pojedinim imamo, takođe, i sudije profesionalce i porotnike, ali su prvi zaduženi za rešavanje pravnih, a drugi za rešavanje činjeničnih pitanja. Autori u radu porede strukturu sudskih veća u krivičnim postupcima za punoletna lica u pojedinim balkanskim zemljama, od kojih su, primera radi, Slovenija i Hrvatska članice Evropske unije, dok su druge u procesu pridruživanja. Neke od njih teže profesionalizaciji sudstva, izbacujući građane-laike iz sastava sudskog veća, dok su ih druge zadržale, pri čemu obim njihove nadležnosti varira od države do države