Show document

A+ | A- | SLO | ENG

Title: Medijsko poročanje v kazenskih postopkih, meje svobode izražanja in domneva nedolžnosti Authors: Mitrović, Danijela (Author) Erbežnik, Anže (Mentor) More about this co-author... Language: Slovenian Work type: Final reflection paper Tipology: 2.11 - Undergraduate Thesis Organization: EVRO-PF - Nova Univerza - European Faculty of Law Abstract: Brez svobode izražanja in svobodnih medijev ni demokracije. Naloga medijev je informirati javnost. Javnost pa ima pravico biti obveščena. Svoboda izražanja je ena najpomembnejših osebnostnih pravic. Pri tej pomembni ustavni pravici pa pogosto prihaja do kolizije z ravno tako pomembno pravico, pravico do zasebnosti in temeljno predpostavko poštenega sojenja domneve nedolžnosti. Ustavno načelo "In dubio pro reo" pravi, da vsakdo velja za nedolžnega, dokler njegova krivda ni ugotovljena s pravnomočno sodbo. Obdolženec pa je lahko pasiven in ga nihče ne sili k izpovedi zoper sebe. Domneva nedolžnosti torej lahko "pade" šele s pravnomočno odločitvijo. Mediji pogosto poročajo o kazenskih zadevah že v predkazenskem postopku. Obveščajo javnost o kaznivem dejanju in obdolžencu, pravzaprav že takrat, ko še nihče ni obsojen. Pomembno pa je dejstvo, da je oseba v postopku še vedno obdolženec in še vedno velja domneva nedolžnosti, torej je še vedno nedolžna. Med naslovi in pasicami novic pa tudi med vrsticami in načinu poročanja novinarjev javnost pogosto ne razume, da je oseba o kateri novinar poroča še vedno nedolžna, dokler ji krivda ni dokazana. Javnosti je obdolženec pogosto predstavljen kot bi bil že obsojen, torej je v očeh javnosti kriv. Še več, poročanju novinarja velikokrat sledi še število let, ki jih bo "obsojeni" moral "odsedeti". Javnost običajno takšno poročanje razume, kot "kriv je" in "kaznovan bo". Tudi kamere pogosto posnamejo hišne preiskave, kjer je obdolženec vklenjen v lisice. Ti posnetki pa se predvajajo v najbolj odmevnih informativnih oddajah z visoko gledanostjo. Keywords: svoboda izražanja, mediji, javnost, osebnostne pravice, domneva nedolžnosti Year of publishing: 2020 Publisher: [D. Mitrović] Source: Ljubljana COBISS_ID: 44426755  UDC: 343.1:366.636(043.2) Note: Dipl. delo 1. stopnje bolonjskega študija; Views: 1053 Downloads: 0 Files: This document has no files. This document may have a phisical copy in the library of the organization, check the status via COBISS.    Metadata:

Average score: (0 votes) Your score: Voting is allowed only for logged in users. 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
Title:	Uporaba otrok-vojakov v luči mednarodnega prava
Abstract:	There is no democracy without freedom of expression and without free media. The task of the media is to inform the public. And the public has the right to be informed. Freedom of expression is one of the most important personality rights. However, this important constitutional right often comes into conflict with an equally important right, the right to privacy and the fundamental premise of a fair trial - the presumption of innocence. The constitutional principle of in dubio pro reo states that everyone is presumed innocent until convicted by a court by final judgement. However, the accused may be passive and no one may force them to provide testimony against themself. The presumption of innocence is therefore refuted only by a final decision. The media often report on criminal matters already in pre-trial proceedings. They inform the public about the crime and the accused, even when no one has been convicted yet. What is important, however, is the fact that the person in proceedings is still only accused and the presumption of innocence still applies; therefore, the person is still innocent. Among news headlines and banners, as well from journalists' reports and reporting methods, the public often does not understand that the person the journalist is reporting on is still innocent until proven guilty. The accused is often presented to the public as if they had already been convicted - so they are guilty in the eyes of the public. Moreover, the journalist's report is often followed by the number of years that the "convicted person" will have to "serve". The public generally interprets such reporting as "they are guilty" and "they will be punished". Cameras also often capture house searches where the accused is handcuffed. Such videos are then shown in the most high-profile news programmes with high viewing figures.

Back