diplomsko delo
Klemen Wagner (Author), Aljoša Dežman (Mentor)

Abstract

Zakon o odvzemu premoženja nezakonitega izvora je bil sprejet z namenom onemogočanja materialnega okoriščanja posameznikov s protipravno dejavnostjo in preprečevanja investiranja premoženja nezakonitega izvora v nadaljnjo dejavnost. Premoženje je nezakonitega izvora, če je podano očitno nesorazmerje med njegovim obsegom in dohodki, zmanjšanimi za davke in prispevke, ki jih je oseba, zoper katero teče postopek po ZOPNI, plačala v obdobju, v katerem je bilo premoženje pridobljeno. To je povsem nov pravni termin, ki se je pojavil šele s sprejetjem ZOPNI leta 2011. Z njim je zakonodajalec pravzaprav na novo opredelil kršitev in nanjo navezal novi pravni posledici - omejitev razpolaganja s premoženjem in odvzem premoženja. V okvir nezakonito pridobljenega premoženja, ki se ugotavlja v fazi finančne preiskave, spadajo stvari in pravice, ki so lahko predmet izvršbe (omejevalna funkcija) kot tudi premoženje, ki neposredno ali posredno izhaja iz takega premoženja, v katero je spremenjeno ali s katerim je pomešano (razširitvena funkcija). Sodišče s sodbo odvzame premoženje, ki ga je pridobitelj nezakonito pridobil v obdobju petih let pred storitvijo kataloškega kaznivega dejanja do vključno enega leta in pol po storitvi le-tega, kolikor lahko najdlje traja finančna preiskava. Premoženje je lahko odvzeto tako primarnim kot tudi sekundarnim subjektom. S pomočjo opisne oziroma deskriptivne metode sem želel skozi raziskovanje ugotoviti, ali je ZOPNI v skladu z ustavnimi procesnimi jamstvi. Moja ugotovitev je, da je ZOPNI v neskladju z 22, 23, 25, 27 in 28 členom Ustave. V zvezi z 31. členom Ustave pa, da iz ZOPNI izhaja protipravna ustavna praznina.

Keywords

No keyword data available

Data

Language: Slovenian
Year of publishing:
Typology: 2.11 - Undergraduate Thesis
Organization: EVRO-PF - European Faculty of Law, Nova Gorica
Publisher: [K. Wagner]
UDC: 347.234(043.2)
COBISS: 2053333174 Link will open in a new window
Views: 7
Downloads: 2
Average score: 0 (0 votes)
Metadata: JSON JSON-RDF JSON-LD TURTLE N-TRIPLES XML RDFA MICRODATA DC-XML DC-RDF RDF

Other data

Secondary language: English
Secondary abstract: The Confiscation of Proceeds of Crime Act (CPCA) was passed to prevent the material capitalization of individuals by means of illegal activity or to prevent the investment of proceeds of crime into subsequent activities. Assets are considered proceeds of crime if there is a significant disproportion between their scope and the income reduced by taxes and contributions paid by the acquirer whom the CPCA proceedings are conducted against during the acquisition of such assets. It is a novel legal term which was coined as late as the passing of the CPCA in 2011. It has allowed the legislator to redefine such violations and design new legal consequences - the restriction on the distribution of such assets and the confiscation of assets. Proceeds of crime, which are determined during financial investigation, include such property and rights that can be subject to enforcement (i.e. restrictive function) as well as assets directly or indirectly derived from assets that have been changed or intermixed (i.e. enlargement function). The court delivers a judgement to confiscate the assets which the acquirer has obtained illegally in a period of five years prior to and one and a half year after the commission of a catalogue offence, as a financial investigation can last no more than one and a half years. Assets can be confiscated from both primary and secondary subjects alike. Using the descriptive research method, I wanted to determine whether the CPCA is in accordance with the constitutional procedural guarantees. I have concluded that the CPCA is in discordance with Articles 22, 23, 25, 27 and 28 of the Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia. Additionally, I found an unlawful constitutional gap stemming from the CPCA in relation to Article 31 of the Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia.
Secondary keywords: Premoženje;Diplomske naloge;
Type (COBISS): Final reflection paper
Thesis comment: Evropska pravna fak.
Source comment: Dipl. delo 1. stopnje bolonjskega študija; Nasl. z nasl. zaslona; Opis vira z dne 28. 06. 2019;
Pages: [VII], 33 str.
ID: 11165091