Repository of colleges and higher education institutions

Show document
A+ | A- | Help | SLO | ENG

Title:Ekskluzija v kazenskem postopku : magistrsko delo
Authors:ID Tomažič, Polona (Author)
ID Erbežnik, Anže (Mentor) More about this mentor... New window
Files:.pdf RAZ_Tomazic_Polona_i2016.pdf (1,13 MB)
MD5: B7B2B66E9C49F5F45C94083D1B756AC3
 
Language:Slovenian
Work type:Master's thesis/paper
Typology:2.09 - Master's Thesis
Organization:EVRO-PF - Nova Univerza - European Faculty of Law
Abstract:Človekove pravice in temeljne svoboščine predstavljajo temelj vsake moderne demokratične pravne države. Spoštovati jih je potrebno tudi v kazenskem postopku. Da bi varovali pravice posameznika pred nezakonitimi posegi države v kazenskem postopku na učinkovit način, poznamo institut izločitve nedovoljenih dokazov. Kot nedovoljene dokaze opredeljujemo dokaze, ki jih je država pridobila s posegom v pravice posameznika, ki jih je pri tem kršila na način, ki ni predviden z zakonom, ustavo ali drugim mednarodnim aktom. Institut izločitve dokazov ali ekskluzija izvira iz anglosaškega, akuzatornega sistema kazenskega postopka, iz Združenih držav Amerike. Tamkajšnje Vrhovno sodišče je z bogato sodno prakso dobro razvilo institut ekskluzije ter izjeme od le-te. Sistem izločitev nedopustnih dokazov iz kazenskega postopka smo prevzeli tudi v Sloveniji. To velja tako za postopke, ki nimajo posebnih tujih elementov, kot za te, ki ga imajo. Včasih se pokaže potreba po tem, da se v postopku, ki poteka v Republiki Sloveniji, uporabi dokaze, ki so bili pridobljeni v tujini. Ker slovenska zakonodaj izrecnih pravil za tovrstne dokaze nima, obstaja vprašanje obravnave in dopustnosti takih dokazov v slovenskem kazenskem postopku. Za primere z mednarodnim elementom je na ravni Evropske Unije več uredb in direktiv, ki bolj ali manj dobro urejajo področji kot sta pridobivanje dokazov in varovanje pravic posameznika v postopku. Največja ovira pri učinkoviti uporabi teh aktov tudi v praksi je predvsem razlika v standardih varovanja človekovih pravic in kavtelami med različnimi državami članicami. Ko govorimo o varstvu človekovih pravic, ne moremo mimo Evropskega sodišča za človekove pravice. Ta s svojo sodno prakso skrbi, da so na podlagi Evropske konvencije človekovih pravic te v postopkih spoštovane. Konvencija pa je tudi minimum za interpretacijo Listine EU o temeljnih pravicah.
Keywords:človekove pravice, kazenski postopek, ekskluzija, magistrske naloge, bolonjski program
Place of publishing:Nova Gorica
Place of performance:Nova Gorica
Publisher:[P. Tomažič]
Year of publishing:2016
Year of performance:2016
Number of pages:V, 126 str.
PID:20.500.12556/ReVIS-5473 New window
COBISS.SI-ID:2053181110 New window
UDC:342.7:343.11(043.2)
Note:Mag. delo 2. stopnje bolonjskega študija; magistrski študijski program Pravo II. stopnje;
Publication date in ReVIS:04.02.2019
Views:6066
Downloads:183
Metadata:XML DC-XML DC-RDF
:
Copy citation
  
Share:Bookmark and Share


Hover the mouse pointer over a document title to show the abstract or click on the title to get all document metadata.

Secondary language

Language:English
Abstract:Human rights and fundamental freedoms are the foundation of the rule of law. It is necessary to respect them also in the framework of a criminal procedure. In order to protect the rights of an individual from unwarranted interference by the state, the criminal procedure provides for the exclusion of illegal evidence (the exclusionary rule). Illegal evidence is the evidence acquired by the state in breach of human rights, in a way that is not foreseen by the law, the constitution or any other international act. The exclusionary rule as well as all the exeptions to the rule originate from the United States. The Supreme Court through its rich case-law developed the exclusionary rule and some exemptions to it. The system of exclusion of inadmissible evidence from criminal proceedings was taken over in Slovenia. This applies both to procedures which do not have specific foreign elements, as well as to those who have it. However, sometimes it is necessary to use evidence acquired abroad in a procedure taking place in Slovenia. Given the fact that the Slovenian legislation does not have explicit rules for this kind of evidence, the question of admissibility of such evidence in the framework of Slovenian criminal procedure remains open. At the level of the European Union in cases with an international element there are several regulations and directives, which, more or less satisfying, govern areas such as obtaining of evidence and protection of the rights of the individual in the process. The biggest obstacle to the effective use of such instruments in practice is mainly the difference in standards of protecting human rights between the different Member States. When we talk about human rights, we can not ignore the European Court of Human Rights and its case-law based on the European Convention on Human Rights. The Convention is also the minimum as regards the interpretation of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights.


Back