Izločitev nedovoljenih dokazov v kazenski teoriji in slovenski sodni praksi

magistrsko delo

Nastja Mavsar (Author), Miha Šepec (Mentor)

Abstract

Izločitev dokazov je institut, ki preprečuje državi, da bi zoper obdolženega uporabila dokaze, ki so zbrani na nezakonit oziroma na protiustaven način, in sicer s kršitvijo temeljnih človekovih pravic in svoboščin. Izločitveno pravilo je tako najradikalnejši primer procesnega sankcioniranja kršitev dokaznih prepovedi. Dokazne prepovedi (na primer pravica do molka, prepoved uporabe sile in grožnje ter podobno) so tako tiste pravne prepovedi v postopku dokazovanja, ki v kazenskem postopku državi prepovedujejo, da se izvede določen dokaz ali določeno ravnanje pri pridobivanju dokaza, ali pa prepovedujejo uporabo določenega že pridobljenega dokaza za dokazovanje določenega dejstva. Dokazne prepovedi, ki so v prvi meri namenjene izravnavanju moči med posameznikom ter državo, pa so seveda lahko učinkovite ter smiselne le, če je z zakonom zagotovljeno sankcioniranje njihovih kršitev. Obstajata dva načina sankcioniranja kršitev dokaznih prepovedi. Prvi način je materialnopravni in pomeni, da kaznujemo osebo ali organ, ki je prekršil neko dokazno pravilo. Drugi način sankcioniranja je procesnopravni. Izločitev nedovoljenih dokazov je procesnopravni način sankcioniranja kršitve dokaznih prepovedi, ki privede do tega, da jzaradi nezakonitosti ali nepravilnosti postopka pri pridobivanju nekega dokaza treba takšen dokaz izločiti, ne glede na obstoj dejstva, da gre pri tem verjetno za najbolj obremenilni ali pa celo za edini obremenilni dokaz, kar pomeni, da bo posledično obdolženec zaradi izločitve takšnega dokaza oproščen obtožbe. Glede na navedeno izločitev nedovoljenih dokazov tako daje prednost varovanju človekovih pravic ter temeljnih svoboščin pred iskanjem resnice, kar je značilnost akuzatornih kazenskih postopkov, v katerih se je ta institut tudi razvil.

Keywords

No keyword data available

Data

Language:	Slovenian
Year of publishing:	2020
Typology:	2.09 - Master's Thesis
Organization:	EVRO-PF - European Faculty of Law, Nova Gorica
Publisher:	[N. Mavsar Nosan]
UDC:	347.94(497.4)(043.2)
COBISS:	2048137444
Views:	7
Downloads:	3
Average score:	0 (0 votes)
Metadata:

Other data

Secondary language:	English
Secondary abstract:	The exclusion of evidence (exclusion) is an institution that prevents the state from using the evidence against the defendant that is collected in an illegal or unconstitutional manner, in violation of fundamental human rights and freedoms. The exclusionary rule is thus the most radical example of procedural sanctioning of violations of evidence prohibitions. Prohibitions (for example, the right to remain silent, the prohibition of the use of force and threats, and the like) are also those legal prohibitions in the procedure of proofing, which in the course of criminal proceedings prohibit a country from carrying out certain evidence or a certain practice in obtaining evidence or prohibiting the use of a particular the evidence obtained to prove a certain fact. Evidence prohibitions, which are primarily intended to compensate for power between individuals and the state, can, of course, be effective and meaningful only if the law provides for the sanctioning of their violations. There are two ways of sanctioning violations of the evidence ban. The first is material law and the latter means that we punish a person or body that has violated a certain rule of evidence. Another method of sanctioning is procedural law. The elimination of illicit evidence is both a procedural means of sanctioning a violation of the evidential prohibitions, which results in the exclusion of such proof solely because of the unlawfulness or irregularity of the procedure in obtaining some evidence, regardless of the fact that it is probably the most debilitating or, even the only burdensome evidence, which means that the consequently the accused will be released from the charge of the exclusion of such evidence from the charges. In view of the above, the elimination of illicit evidence thus gives priority to the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms before seeking the truth, which is a characteristic of the accusatory criminal proceedings in which this institute also developed.
Secondary keywords:	Dokazi;Magistrske naloge;Sodna praksa;Slovenija;
Type (COBISS):	Master's thesis/paper
Thesis comment:	Evropska pravna fak.
Source comment:	Mag. delo 2. stopnje bolonjskega študija; Nasl. z nasl. zaslona; Opis vira z dne 21. 4. 2020;
Pages:	VI, 66 str.
ID:	11569694