Rad obrađuje oduzimanje i osiguranje oduzimanja imovinske koristi ostvarene kaznenim djelom kao institute važne za ostvarenje jednog od osnovnih načela kaznenog postupka – da nitko ne može zadržati korist stečenu kaznenim djelom. Nakon više godina disperziranosti, pa i nesuglasja postupovnih odredbi koje u Republici Hrvatskoj uređuju taj institut 2017. godine donesen je Zakon o izmjenama i dopunama Zakona o kaznenom postupku i transponirana je Direktiva 2014/42/EU o zamrzavanju i oduzimanju predmeta i imovinske koristi ostvarene kaznenim djelima u Europskoj uniji te su odredbe ujedinjene u jednom propisu. Problematika primjene i određivanja privremenih mjera osiguranja u praksi i dalje postoji. Trajanje istrage i potvrđivanja optužnice u složenim predmetima, posebice u predmetima USKOK-a, u odnosu na propisane rokove trajanja privremenih mjera u pojedinim slučajevima dovodi do njihova ukidanja. Čak i uz mogućnost njihova ponovnog određivanja, svaki i najmanji vremenski okvir otvara mogućnost počiniteljima da imovinsku korist stečenu kaznenim djelom sakriju, unište ili prenesu. Zaštita prava na pošteno suđenje, jednakost oružja, kao i razmjernost tih mjera nužna je, ali bez novih rješenja primjena tog instituta gubit će na efi kasnosti.This paper discusses the content and signifi cance of the confi scation of proceeds of crime
and temporary measures to secure such confi scation in the theory and practice of the Republic
of Croatia. Property gain is the basic motive for perpetrating many criminal offences, primarily
property offences, economic and organised crime, as well as criminal offences of corruption.
Effective repression, which seeks to achieve the prevention and suppression of these criminal
offences committed with the aim of acquiring material gain, cannot be achieved only by imposing
penalties for the committed criminal offence. It is also necessary to confi scate the proceeds
of crime from the perpetrator. Experience to date has shown that confi scation of the proceeds
affects criminal perpetrators much more strongly than any other punishment. The confi scation
of property ensures compliance with the principle of fairness in criminal proceedings and the
principle that no one can retain the proceeds of crime.
The paper discusses the confi scation of illegally acquired assets, with special reference
to temporary measures to ensure the confi scation of proceeds of crime, and its functioning in
practice. The fi rst part of the paper reviews the current international and domestic legal sources
governing the matter in question and briefl y overviews the general concept of confi scation of
property in the Republic of Croatia. The paper then discusses the case law of the European
Court of Human Rights, with special focus on the case of Džinić v. Croatia. In the third part,
the focus moves to the procedural aspects of confi scation and the temporary measures to secure
proceeds of crime. The paper fi nally considers the current functionality of the institute of confi
scation of illegally obtained property as well as the temporary measures to ensure the potential
future practice and implementation of confi scation undertaken by the State Attorney’s Offi ce
and the Offi ce for the Suppression of Corruption and Organised Crime
