Criminal proceedings of the Republic of Slovenia in the spirit of the adversarial model
| Autor: | Horvat, Miha |
|---|---|
| Přispěvatelé: | Dežman, Zlatko |
| Jazyk: | slovinština |
| Rok vydání: | 2020 |
| Předmět: |
criminal procedure in Slovenia
učinkovita obramba in pošten postopek effective defense and fair trial udc:343.1(043.3) adversarni model kazenskega postopka equality of arms adversarial model of criminal procedure role of subjects of criminal procedure enakost orožij kazenski postopek v Sloveniji vloga subjektov kazenskega postopka |
| Zdroj: | Maribor |
| Popis: | Kazenski postopek je mogoče poimenovati kot pravno urejen proces izpodbijanja domneve nedolžnosti obdolženca. Domneva nedolžnosti se izpodbija s pomočjo dokazov, ki so bili v postopku pridobljeni zakonito in z gotovostjo izkazujejo dejstva o (ne)krivdi obdolženca. V magistrski nalogi sem se osredotočil predvsem na vlogo državnega tožilca, obrambe in sodišča v različnih fazah adversarnega modela kazenskega procesa, s poudarkom na dokaznem postopku. Pri tem sem sproti opozarjal na ureditev slovenskega kazenskega postopka in izpostavil vprašanja, na katera bo zakonodajalec moral odgovoriti pri uvajanju morebitnih sprememb v slovenskem kazenskem procesu. Na začetku naloge sem predstavil najpomembnejša načela kazenskega postopka. Nato sem se dotaknil vprašanj glede vloge in pristojnosti subjektov (državnega tožilca, obdolženca, zagovornika, sodišča), ki nastopajo v različnih korakih ugotavljanja krivde obdolžencev. Nadaljeval sem s primerjalno pravno ureditvijo kazenskega procesnega prava, kot ga poznajo države, ki imajo podobno kazenskopravno zgodovino kot Slovenija ali predstavljajo tipičen primer modela kazenskega postopka. V zaključku sem povzel pomembne ugotovitve magistrske naloge in se opredelil do hipotez, ki sem (si) jih postavil pred pripravo naloge. The criminal proceedings are to be understood as legally regulated process to challenge the defendant's presumption of innocence. The presumption of innocence is disputed by lawfully obtained evidence in the proceedings and with certainty the facts of (not)guilt of the accused are proved. In my master's thesis, I focused primarily on the role of the public prosecutor, defense and the court at various stages of the adversarial model of criminal proceedings. In doing so, I pointed out the regulation of the Slovenian criminal procedure and highlighted the questions that the legislature will have to answer when introducing any changes to the Slovenian criminal process. At the beginning of the thesis, I outlined the most important principles of criminal procedure. I then touched upon important questions regarding the role and jurisdiction of the entities (Attorney General, Defendant, Advocate and Court) involved in the various steps of establishing the guilt of the accused. Following that is the comparative regulation of criminal procedural law, with an emphasis on the evidentiary procedure as known by countries with a similar criminal law history as Slovenia, or as a typical example of a particular model of criminal procedure. In conclusion, I summarized the important findings of the master's thesis and identified the hypotheses I had made before preparing the thesis |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|