diplomsko delo
Špela Preložnik (Author), Zlatko Dežman (Mentor), Miha Šošić (Co-mentor)

Abstract

Pogajanja o priznanju krivde so institut, ki omogoča, da se tožilstvo in obdolženec dogovorita o načinu rešitve kazenske zadeve, običajno obdolženec v zameno za nižjo kazen ali milejšo obtožnico prizna krivdo. Stranki se tako izogneta vodenju celotnega kazenskega postopka. Obdolženec se s tem odpove nekaterim temeljnim pravicam, ki mu pripadajo v kazenskem postopku: pravici do molka, privilegiju zoper samoobtožbo, pravici do javnega sojenja in z njo povezanimi pravicami. Slovenski Zakon o kazenskem postopku je z novelo ZKP-K tudi slovenskim tožilcem in obdolžencem omogočil, da kazensko zadevo končajo s sklenitvijo sporazuma o priznanju krivde. Pogajanja o priznanju krivde pa nimajo posledic le v konkretnem kazenskem postopku, temveč učinkujejo na obstoječa normativna vrednostna izhodišča kazenskega prava in na obdolženčev položaj v njem. Ker pri tem institutu skladnost z obstoječim kazenskim postopkom ni povsem jasna, sta osrednja cilja te diplomske naloge ugotoviti, ali je reševanje kazenskih zadev s pogajanji o priznanju krivde v skladu z nekaterimi temeljnimi obdolženčevimi pravicami in kako pogajanja o priznanju krivde učinkujejo na nekatera temeljna načela kazenskega procesnega in materialnega prava, temeljna načela kaznovalne politike in končno na temeljne vrednote samega kazenskega prava. Diplomsko delo obravnava tudi pravne, psihološke in sociološke pomisleke, na katere so opozarjali procesni teoretiki ob uvajanju pogajanj o priznanju krivde v slovenski kazenski postopek in zaradi katerih obstaja resen dvom, ali so pogajanja sploh primeren način reševanja kazenskih zadev. S pogajanji o priznanju krivde se kazenske zadeve rešujejo mnogo hitreje kot v sodnem postopku, zato se privarčuje pri virih vseh udeležencev v kazenskem postopku. Ekonomičnost in učinkovitost pogajalskega načina reševanja kazenskih zadev se navajata kot glavna razloga za uvajanje pogajanj o priznanju krivde v države s kontinentalnim pravnim sistemom in njihovo hitro širjenje. Diplomsko delo zato skuša odgovoriti na vprašanje, ali manj časa in denarja za odločitev v posamični zadevi pomeni tudi nižjo kakovost končne odločitve in manj pravične rezultate.

Keywords

kazensko pravo;pogajanja o priznanju krivde;sporazum o priznanju krivde;novela ZKP-K;učinkovitost sodnih postopkov;pravice obdolženca;temeljna načela kazenskega prava;vrednote kazenskega prava;diplomska dela;

Data

Language: Slovenian
Year of publishing:
Typology: 2.11 - Undergraduate Thesis
Organization: UM PF - Faculty of Law
Publisher: [Š. Preložnik]
UDC: 343.3/.7(043.2)
COBISS: 4728107 Link will open in a new window
Views: 2072
Downloads: 475
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 title: PROTECTION OF DEFENDANT'S POSITION IN CRIMINAL PROCESS IN RELATION TO PLEA BARGAINING AND GUILTY PLEA AGREEMENT
Secondary abstract: Plea bargaining is an institute which enables the prosecution and the indictee to reach an agreement concerning the manner of resolving a criminal matter, whereby the indictee usually admits guilt in exchange for a less severe penalty or indictment. The parties thus avoid carrying out the entire criminal proceedings. The indictee waives some fundamental rights which he is entitled to in criminal proceedings: the right to remain silent, the privilege against self-incrimination, the right to a public trial, and other related rights. By means of the amending act ZKP-K, the Slovene Criminal Procedure Act also enables Slovene prosecutors and indictees to conclude a criminal matter by means of reaching a plea bargain. Plea bargaining does not have any consequences in the criminal proceedings at hand, however it may affect the already existing regulatory value premises of criminal law and the indictee's standing within it. Because this is an institute the compliance of which with the existing criminal proceedings is not quite clear, the main objective of this undergraduate thesis is to determine whether resolving criminal matters by means of plea bargaining is in accordance with some fundamental rights of the indictee, and how plea bargaining may affect some fundamental principles within the criminal adjective and substantive law, the fundamental principles of punitive policies, and also the fundamental values of criminal law itself. The thesis also discusses the legal, psychological, and sociological reservations brought up by some theoreticians dealing with adjective/procedural law regarding the implementation of plea bargaining into Slovene criminal proceedings and due to which a serious question is posed whether bargaining is even a suitable manner of resolving criminal matters. Criminal matters are resolved by means of plea bargaining much quicker than during litigation, so all participants in criminal proceedings benefit from saving their resources. The efficiency and effectiveness of resolving criminal matters by means of bargaining are stated as the main reasons for the adoption of plea bargaining in countries with continental legal systems and their rapid expansion. For this reason, this undergraduate thesis attempts to answer the question whether less time and money used to reach a decision in a particular matter also means that the quality of the final decision suffers and whether the results are less just.
Secondary keywords: plea bargaining;plea bargain (or agreement);guilty plea agreement;the amending act ZKP-K;the effectiveness of court proceedings;the rights of the indictee in criminal proceedings;fundamental principles of criminal law;values of criminal law.;
URN: URN:SI:UM:
Type (COBISS): Undergraduate thesis
Thesis comment: Univ. v Mariboru, Pravna fak.
Pages: 88 f.
ID: 8729693