PRAVNA SREDSTVA PROTIV ODLUKE O PRITVORU SA OSVRTOM NA PRAKSU VRHOVNOG SUDA

Joko Dragojlović; Jovana Stojanović Jandrić; Teodor Čavić

doi:10.51738/Kpolisa2024.21.2r.176dsjc

Authors

Joko Dragojlović Faculty of Law for Commerce and Judiciary, Novi Sad https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4713-1855
Jovana Stojanović Jandrić Faculty of Law for Commerce and Judiciary, Novi Sad https://orcid.org/0009-0006-4563-6127
Teodor Čavić Faculty of Law for Commerce and Judiciary, Novi Sad https://orcid.org/0009-0004-7083-9917

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51738/Kpolisa2024.21.2r.176dsjc

Keywords:

detention, personal freedom, appeal, case-law, Supreme Court

Abstract

Personal freedom represents one of the basic human rights in modern civilized and democratic societies, a value that is strongly protected by both national and supranational legal instruments, such as the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. This right is certainly not of an absolute nature, and international instruments, as well as domestic regulations, allow this right to be limited. It is precisely the order on pre-trial detention in criminal proceedings, as one of the measures to ensure the presence of the accused, that represents a limitation of this freedom. As it is about restricting one of the basic freedoms, strict conditions have been set that must be met in order for such a restriction to be socially and legally acceptable. Thus, the Code of Criminal Procedure defines the conditions for ordering detention, the purpose of which is to achieve a balance between the individual's right to freedom and the state's interest in the orderly conduct of criminal proceedings. In addition to those conditions, and based on the constitutional guarantees in the case of deprivation of liberty and the right to a legal remedy, the Code of Criminal Procedure provides for and ensures the right to appeal against the first-instance detention decision, which appeal is decided by the Chamber referred to in Article 21, paragraph 4 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, whose decision, as a second instance, is final and legally binding. This paper analyses the positive legal rules on the determination of detention and the right to appeal against such a decision, especially analysing the judgment of the Supreme Court, which, following a request for the protection of legality, had to take on the creative role of a legislator and resolve the issue unsettled by the positive law – the admissibility of a legal remedy against a second-instance decision on detention, and the consequences of this position of the Supreme Court.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Ananian-Welsh, R. (2015). Preventive Detention Orders and the Separation of Judicial Power, University of New South Wales Law Journal, 38 (2), 756-791.

Bjelajac, Ž. (2008). Korupcija kao vid organizovanog kriminala [Corruption as a form of organized crime]. Pravo – teorija i praksa, 25(3-4): 47–54.

Bjelajac, Ž. (2013). Organizovani kriminalitet – imperija zla [Organized crime – an evil empire]. Novi Sad: Pravni fakultet za privredu i pravosuđe

Bjelajac, Ž. (2015). Politika suzbijanja kriminaliteta [Crime prevention policy]. Novi Sad: Pravni fakultet za privredu i pravosuđe.

Bjelajac, Ž. (2015). Korupcija kao izazov savremenog demokratskog društva [Corruption as a challenge of modern democratic society]. Kultura polisa 12(26): 43–57.

Bjelajac, Ž. (2017). Bezbednosna kultura umeće življenja [Safety culture - the art of living]. Novi Sad: Pravni fakultet za privredu i pravosuđe,

Council of Europe, (1950). Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, [ECHR].

Dragojlović, J. & Stamenković, M. (2016). Pritvor prema maloletnim učiniocima krivičnih dela [Custody against juvenile criminal offenders]. Kultura polisa, 13 (29), 239-249.

Inić Drecun, M. (2003). Obligatoran – ex lege pritvor [Mandatory – ex lege detention]. Bilten sudske prakse Vrhovnog suda Srbije, 3, 51–55.

Majić, M. (2008). Neposredna primena međunarodnog krivičnog prava u domaćem krivičnom zakonodavstvu [Direct application of international criminal law in domestic criminal legislation]. In Usaglašavanje krivičnog zakonodavstva sa Ustavom Srbije (pp. 187-212.). Beograd: Udruženje za krivično pravo Srbije.

Matijašević-Obradović, J. & Zarubica, S. (2018). Opasnost od bekstva kao razlog za određivanje pritvora– legislativni tretman i primeri iz sudske prakse [The Threat of Escape as a Reason for the Determination of Detention – a Legislative Treatment and the Examples From Judicial Practice]. Pravo teorija i praksa, 35 (4- 6), 1-16.

Matijašević-Obradović, J. (2016). Krivično procesno pravo – opšti deo [Criminal procedural law – general part]. Novi Sad, Pravni fakultet za privredu i pravosuđe.

McBride, J., Macovei, M. (2004). The right to freedom and security of the person, a guide to the application of Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights, Belgrade: Council of Europe.

Memedović, N., (2006). Mere lišenja slobode u krivičnom postupku [Measures of deprivation of liberty in criminal proceedings]. Pravni život, 55(9), 825-834.

Narodna skupština Republike Srbije [Narodna skupština]. (2006). Ustav Republike Srbije [Constitution of the Republic of Serbia]. (Službeni glasnik Republike Srbije, br. 98/06, 115/2021)

Narodna skupština Republike Srbije [Narodna skupština]. (2011). Zakonik o krivičnom postupku [Code on Criminal Procedure], "Sl. glasnik RS", br. 72/2011, 101/2011, 121/2012, 32/2013, 45/2013, 55/2014, 35/2019, 27/2021 - odluka US i 62/2021 - odluka US

Narodna skupština Republike Srbije [Narodna skupština]. (2023). Zakon o uređenju sudova [Law on Organization of Courts], "Sl. glasnik RS", br. 10/2023“

Narodna skupština Republike Srbije [Narodna skupština]. (2003). Zakon o ratifikaciji Evropske konvencije za zaštitu ljudskih prava i osnovnih sloboda [Law on Ratification of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms], "Sl. list SCG – Međunarodni ugovori", br. 9/2003, 5/2005 i 7/2005 – ispr. i "Sl. glasnik RS – Međunarodni ugovori", br. 12/2010 i 10/2015)

Trešnjev, A. (2016). Mere za obezbeđenje prisustva okrivljenog i za nesmetano vođenje krivičnog postupka [Measures for ensuring the presence of the accused and for the orderly conduct of criminal proceedings] – doctoral dissertation Beograd: Pravni fakultet.

Presuda Vrhovnog suda [VS] [Judgement of the Supreme Court], Presuda Kzz 1052/23 od 17.10.2023. godine