Statute of limitations in cases of war profiteering and crimes in ownership transformation and privatisation and controversies following the decision rendered by the Constitutional Court in the HYPO case
| Autor: | Josipović, Ivo |
|---|---|
| Jazyk: | chorvatština |
| Rok vydání: | 2018 |
| Předmět: | |
| Zdroj: | Hrvatski ljetopis za kaznene znanosti i praksu Volume 25 Issue 2 |
| ISSN: | 2670-9996 2459-6531 |
| Popis: | Autor opisuje genezu promjene Ustava Republike Hrvatske u odnosu na članak 31. i uvođenje nezastarijevanja kaznenih djela iz pretvorbe i privatizacije te ratnog profiterstva. Referira se na Odluku Ustavnog suda Republike Hrvatske broj: U-III-4149/2014 od 24. srpnja 2015. (NN, 89/15), u kojoj, pored ostalih pravnih pitanja, Ustavni sud interpretira odredbu članka 31. stavka 4. Ustava Republike Hrvatske o nezastarijevanju tih kaznenih djela. Interpretacija cit. ustavne norme koju je dao Ustavni sud, po ocjeni autora, ne samo što je društveno i moralno štetna već je i pravno potpuno pogrešna. Takvu ocjenu temelji na analizi same norme (gramatičko tumačenje), koja se razlikuje od one Ustavnog suda, na teleološkom i povijesnom tumačenju navedene ustavne odredbe te na kritici argumentacije Ustavnog suda. Naime Ustavni sud u svojoj odluci polazi od određenih pogrešnih premisa, priklanja se zastarjelom shvaćanju zastare suprotnom odlukama Europskog suda u Luxembourgu i Europskog suda za ljudska prava te pogrešno interpretira presude visokih međunarodnih sudišta, ali i domaćih sudova. Ne ulazeći u pitanje krivnje okrivljenika u kaznenom predmetu čija je pravomoćna presuda bila povod odlučivanja Ustavnog suda, autor se zadržava na načelnom pravnom pitanju interpretacije cit. odredbe Ustava te smatra da će štetne implikacije Odluke dugoročno utjecati na hrvatski pravni i ekonomski sustav, s ozbiljnim političkim i moralnim posljedicama za društvo u cjelini. The author describes the genesis of changes to the Constitution of the Republic of Croatia in relation to Article 31 and the introduction of the exemption of the statute of limitations for criminal offences in ownership transformation and privatisation, as well as war profiteering. Reference is made to the decision rendered by the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Croatia, No. U-III-4149/2014 of 24 July 2015 (Official Gazette 89/15), in which the Constitutional Court interprets, along with other legal issues, the provision of Article 31(4) of the Constitution of the Republic Croatia regarding the exemption of the statute of limitations for such criminal offences. The interpretation of the cited constitutional norm issued by the Constitutional Court is, in the author’s opinion, not only socially and morally harmful, but also legally entirely incorrect. The author’s assessment is based on an analysis of the provision itself (grammatical interpretation) that differs from the analysis performed by the Constitutional Court, on the teleological and historical interpretation of the relevant constitutional provision, and criticism of the Constitutional Court’s arguments. The Constitutional Court’s decision is based on certain inaccurate premises, inclining towards an outdated perception of the statute of limitations contrary to the decisions rendered by the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg and the European Court of Human Rights and incorrectly interpreting judgments rendered by both high international courts and domestic courts. Without prejudice to the issue of the guilt of the defendant in a criminal case whose final judgement led to the decision of the Constitutional Court, the author focuses on the principle of the legal issue of the interpretation of the cited provision of the Constitution, believing that the harmful implications of the decision will have a long-term effect on the Croatian legal and economic system with serious political and moral consequences for society as a whole. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|