Pritožbeni mehanizmi in strokovni nadzor organov s prisilnimi pooblastili

doktorska disertacija

Gregor Hudrič (Author), Miroslav Žaberl (Mentor), Andrej Anžič (Co-mentor)

Abstract

Izvajanje nalog policije in drugih represivnih državnih organov terja uporabo različnih prisilnih pooblastil, s katerimi ti posegajo v človekove pravice in temeljne svoboščine posameznika. Uporaba prisilnih pooblastil omogoča učinkovito izvajanje njihovih nalog, hkrati pa predstavlja neprestano nevarnost njihove zlorabe. Te se kažejo v neupravičenih ali nesorazmernih posegih v osebno celovitost posameznika, lahko pa tudi v obliki vplivov vladajoče politike na operativno avtonomnost represivnih organov. Zato morajo biti nad delovanjem organov, ki udejanjajo državno prisilo, vzpostavljeni ustrezni nadzorstveni in pritožbeni mehanizmi, ki zlasti v primerih zatrjevanj ali zaznav domnevnih najhujših deviacij, ko zaradi izvajanja njihove dejavnosti pride do hudih telesnih poškodb ali smrti osebe, omogočajo njihovo učinkovito in neodvisno preiskavo, ki bi privedla do identifikacije in sankcioniranja odgovornih. Upoštevajoč sodno prakso Evropskega sodišča za človekove pravice, ki se nanaša na domnevne kršitve 2. in 3. člena Evropske konvencije o varstvu človekovih pravic in temeljnih svoboščin (pravica do življenja in prepoved mučenja), se je razvila pozitivna dolžnost držav po učinkovitem preiskovanju takih primerov. V regiji so bila izoblikovana temeljna načela obravnave pritožb posameznikov zoper delo represivnih organov in učinkovite preiskave grobih posegov v človekove pravice, ki mora biti neodvisna, primerna, hitra, podvržena javnemu nadzoru in mora zagotavljati zadostno mero vključevanja žrtve v preiskavo. Pričujoča doktorska disertacija ponuja pregled najpomembnejših mednarodnih predpisov, organov in organizacij, ki imajo v regiji največji vpliv na vrednotenje delovanja in razvoj nadzorstvenih in pritožbenih mehanizmov zoper organe s prisilnimi pooblastili. Sodna praksa Evropskega sodišča za človekove pravice, mnenja in priporočila mednarodnih organizacij, izkustvena spoznanja in dosedanje znanstvene razprave kažejo na to, da sta korektna obravnava pritožb zoper delo organov s prisilnimi pooblastili in učinkovito preiskovanje zatrjevanih ali zaznanih najhujših oblik njihovih deviacij v največji meri uresničljiva v obliki tako imenovanega državljanskega nadzora represivnih organov. Na podlagi podrobne analize delovanja organov s prisilnimi pooblastili, njihovih pristojnosti in obstoječih pritožbenih in nadzorstvenih mehanizmov ugotavljamo, da je v Republiki Sloveniji več organov, ki smejo za učinkovito izvedbo svojih nalog uporabiti različna prisilna pooblastila, vključno s smrtonosno silo. Poleg policije v to kategorijo uvrščamo vsaj še vojaško policijo, pravosodne policiste, uslužbence Finančne uprave Republike Slovenije, uslužbence varnostnega sektorja Obveščevalno varnostne službe Ministrstva za obrambo ter mestne in občinske redarje. Dvom v ustreznost sedanje ureditve nadzorstvene dejavnosti omenjenih organov na normativni in izvedbeni ravni temelji na ugotovitvah, (i) da obstoječi nadzorni in pritožbeni mehanizmi ne zagotavljajo enake obravnave pripadnikov teh organov, osumljenih domnevnih deviacij in enakega pravnega varstva domnevno oškodovanih posameznikov, (ii) da je najbolje dodelan sistem reševanja pritožb zoper delo policije, vendar je tudi ta zaradi institucionalne in hierarhične povezanosti s policijo podvržen kritikam o pristranski obravnavi pritožb, (iii) da obstoječi sistem ne zagotavlja učinkovite preiskave najhujših posegov v človekove pravice, ko ti nujno ne pomenijo kaznivega dejanja, ali jih storijo organi, ki ne sodijo v personalno pristojnost Specializiranega državnega tožilstva Republike Slovenije, ter (iv) da obstoječi sistem ne zagotavlja ustreznega varstva operativne avtonomnosti represivnih organov. Za potrebe oblikovanja najprimernejše oblike nadzora organov s prisilnimi pooblastili v Republiki Sloveniji, ki bi glede na vse okoliščine sodila v prostor in čas, so bili podrobno proučeni modeli nadzora in reševanja pritožb zoper organe s prisilnimi pooblastili, ki delujejo v svetu. Prepoznane so tri osnovne oblike tako imenovanega državljanskega nadzora represivnih organov z različnimi stopnjami participacije javnosti pri izvajanju nadzora. Sodobni znanstveni raziskovalci kot najprimernejšo obliko nadzora vidijo v samostojni, neodvisni instituciji, izvzeti iz izvršilne veje oblasti, ki ima poleg pristojnosti za reševanje in celovito spremljanje pritožb posameznikov tudi široka pooblastila za preiskovanje najbolj grobih posegov represivnih organov v človekove pravice in temeljne svoboščine. Pričujoča doktorska disertacija, upoštevajoč znanstvena teoretična izhodišča, dosedanjo tujo prakso in lastna prakseološka dognanja ponuja kritično in konstruktivno oceno dosedanje normativne in izvedbene rešitve nadzorstva represivnih organov. Državljanski nadzor organov s prisilnimi pooblastili opredeljuje kot imperativ časa in hkrati ponuja ustrezne organizacijske in funkcionalne rešitve k oblikovanju nadzorstvenega sistema, ki bi poleg učinkovitega izvajanja nalog organov s prisilnimi pooblastili zagotavljal visoko in v demokratični družbi pričakovano raven spoštovanja človekovih pravic in temeljnih svoboščin.

Keywords

policija;policijska preiskava;prisilna pooblastila;policijska pooblastila;človekove pravice;državni nadzor;Slovenija;disertacije;

Data

Language:	Slovenian
Year of publishing:	2017
Typology:	2.08 - Doctoral Dissertation
Organization:	FDŠ
Publisher:	[G. Hudrič]
UDC:	351.74:342.7(497.4)(043.3)
COBISS:	1024580193
Views:	4156
Downloads:	354
Average score:	0 (0 votes)
Metadata:

Other data

Secondary language:	English
Secondary abstract:	In the execution of their duties, members of the police and other government law enforcement agencies may have to resort to various means of repressive powers, with which they curtail basic human rights and fundamental freedoms of individuals. The use of repressive powers ensures efficient execution of duties, however there is also a constant threat of abuse, ranging from unreasonable or disproportionate infringement upon an individual's integrity to government influence on the operational autonomy of law enforcement agencies. That is why proper supervisory and appeal mechanisms are required to monitor the operation of government law enforcement agencies and facilitate efficient and independent investigations leading to the identification and sanctioning of those responsible. This is especially relevant in cases of alleged or perceived severe forms of deviance, where the execution of law enforcement duties causes grievous bodily harm or even death. Considering the existing case law of the European Court of Human Rights regarding alleged breaches of Articles 2 and 3 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (the right to life and the prohibition of torture), a positive obligation of the states has evolved to provide an efficient means of solving such cases. The states in the region have established fundamental principles regarding dealing with complaints against the work of law enforcement agencies and efficient investigation of severe violations of human rights, which needs to be independent, adequate, prompt, subject to public scrutiny and offer sufficient victim involvement. This doctoral dissertation presents an outline of the most important international acts and regulations and an overview of authorities and organizations in the region that have the most influence on performance evaluation of government law enforcement agencies and on the development of supervisory and appeal mechanisms against them. European Human Rights Court case law, opinions and recommendations of international organizations, experiential knowledge and scientific discussions indicate that fair handling of complaints against the work of law enforcement agencies and efficient investigation of alleged or perceived severe forms of deviance is largely realizable in the form of the so-called civilian oversight of law enforcement. On the basis of a detailed analysis of law enforcement agencies' work, their authorities and existing appeals and oversight mechanisms, we can recognize that the Republic of Slovenia has several government agencies whose officials are authorized to use different repressive powers up to and including lethal force. Apart from the police force, this group also includes military police, judicial police officers, officials of the Financial Administration of the Republic of Slovenia, officials of the protection sector of the Intelligence and Security Service of the Ministry of Defense as well as city and municipal wardens amongst others. The adequacy of the current supervision of the above mentioned agencies on a normative and operational level has been called under question due to the following observations: (i) The existing supervisory and appeal mechanisms do not ensure equal treatment of the members of such agencies who are suspected of alleged deviations, and do not ensure equal legal protection of allegedly wronged individuals; (ii) The system of handling complaints against members of the police is the most refined, but due to the institutional and hierarchical connections with the police it has been criticized for not being impartial in dealing with appeals; (iii) The current system does not allow for an efficient investigation into the most severe violations of human rights that may not be classified as crimes, or are committed by law enforcement officials not under the personal jurisdiction of the Specialized Office of the State Prosecutor of the Republic of Slovenia; (iv) The current system does not properly safeguard the operative autonomy of government law enforcement agencies. In order to develop the most appropriate form of government law enforcement agency oversight pertinent to the current situation in the Republic of Slovenia, a detailed analysis of relevant monitoring, oversight and appeal systems used around the world was made. Three basic forms of the so-called civilian oversight of law enforcement were recognized, differing in the level of public participation. Contemporary scientific research postulates that the most efficient oversight system consists of an independent and autonomous institution outside the executive branch of the government, which does not only have the authority to solve and oversee appeals of individuals, but also a wider authority to investigate the most severe forms of human rights and fundamental freedoms violations committed by members of law enforcement agencies. Taking into consideration scientific theoretical postulates, existing practice from other countries and own praxeological conclusions, this doctoral dissertation offers a critical and constructive evaluation of existing normative and implementing solutions on law enforcement oversight. It defines civilian oversight of law enforcement as an imperative of time and at the same time proposes suitable organizational and functional solutions for the development of an oversight system that would ensure not only an efficient execution of law enforcement duties, but also a high level of respect of human rights and fundamental freedoms, as expected in a democratic society.
Type (COBISS):	Doctoral dissertation
Thesis comment:	Fak. za državne in evropske študije, Kranj
Pages:	X, 229 str., [1] f. pril.
ID:	11007676