Search

The paper contains an analysis of judgments based on agreement of the parties, a Croatian model of plea bargaining, drawing on the experiences of three groups of practitioners: judges, state attorneys, and defence counsels. Previously conducted comparative legal analysis, as well as analysis of the Croatian normative framework and jurisprudence, was not able to provide answers to a number of questions about the motivation of the parties to negotiate, on the negotiation procedure which is not recorded in the protocol, about the real and the ideal role of the court, and about the real position of the parties and the victim. Hence, these issues were researched through semi-structured interviews with 60 practitioners and then further discussed in four focus groups. Some of the findings uncovered systemic inconsistencies in everyday legal practice in a number of areas. For instance, judgment based on agreement of the parties is more readily used in cases of serious offences, while other consensual forms of proceedings tend to be used for less serious offences. Informal negotiations at all stages of the criminal procedure have proven to be very popular with practitioners and sometimes even encouraged by judges. Yet, the issue of judicial control of the plea agreement divided the respondents, even though the right to judicial review of criminal prosecution is a fundamental principle of Croatian criminal procedure, which covers not only the fundamental issues of legality and voluntariness of the concluded agreement, but also the purposefulness of the proposed sanction. The victim's position in the plea-bargaining procedure is considered to be adequate, at least as long as the victim is involved, and there is a tendency to consult the victim even in cases when his or her consent is not required by law. Finally, although it is generally considered that defence rights are well protected, there are problematic issues, namely tariffs or the 'take it or leave it' offer, as well as the wide discretion of the state attorney when deciding to enter into negotiations and reach agreement. The qualitative analysis of the findings, which is presented in this paper, should contribute to drafting specific proposals for improvements in the legislation and practice of the judgment based on agreement of the parties in Croatian law. Many of these findings may also be relevant for other legal systems, especially those of the continental European legal tradition, since they may face the same problems and questions related to plea bargaining as a global phenomenon. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper considers judgments based on agreement of the parties in Croatian law, more precisely particular aspects of this consensual form which previous studies have assessed to be potentially problematic. These aspects include the objectives of reaching agreement, the gravity of criminal offences subject to agreement, the role of the court, and the legal position of the defence and that of the victim. These aspects are analysed primarily from a comparative-law perspective, since the Croatian version of plea bargaining, just like specific models adopted in some other European countries, was inspired by the same American model. Besides American law, the research includes Italian, French, Swiss, German and Austrian law. The goal of the comparative research is to find out whether the Croatian model contains some specific features which perhaps differ from positive comparative European legal solutions, but also result in theoretical and practical problems. The study will also include analysis of the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Croatia concerning primarily the issue of judicial control over the agreement of the parties, which has been most disputed in domestic literature and in judicial practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Act on Amendments to the Criminal Procedure Act (NN 70/2017) introduced, into the Croatian legal system, the Directive 2013/48/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 on the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings and European arrest warrant proceedings as well as the right to have a third party informed upon deprivation of liberty and to communicate with third persons and with consular authorities while deprived of liberty. This paper contains the analysis of the nomotechnical solutions after the implementation of the Directive 2013/48/EU in the Republic of Croatia. In addition, particular attention has been given to the new substantive term of the suspect and its practical implications in different stages of the Croatian criminal procedure with special reference to effects and perception of the implementation of the Directive 2013/48/EU in Croatian criminal procedure. The paper criticizes some domestic legal solutions and offer different approach, with respect to the trends that have been noticed after amendment of the Croatian Criminal Procedure Act. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the improvement in the development of the procedural rights of the victim of crimes at European Union level in Article 11 of Directive 2012/29/EU and an assessment of its transposition in Germany, Italy and others with topics include legal systems of continental Europe.

Another very decisive step was taken by the Law on Criminal Procedure of 2008 towards classic plea bargaining of the parties on guilt and sanctions in our criminal procedure whereby a legislator indicated clear dedication to the idea of accelerating the procedure i.e. to implement the principle of efficiency but to the detriment of up to now indisputable principles of the procedure. The paper deals mostly with a detailed comparative analysis of plea bargaining in the USA, Germany and Italy. By the US example the paper clearly shows reasons for success of this institute in its original environment and dangers in the plea bargaining system dominated by a strong plaintiff, whereas German and Italian examples of bargaining systems emphasize the analysis of court position, more or less involved in the particular bargaining procedure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

On 30 October 1854 the Criminal Procedure Act of 29 July 1853 (furtheron: the 1853 ZKP) came into force in Croatia and Slavonia. Although this was a strikingly reactive law, having emerged in the era of open absolutism i.e the Bach regime, the act played an important role in the development of Croatian criminal procedure law. Until the time when the 1853 ZKP entered into force Croatia had no systematically regulated criminal procedure act and criminal procedure had been regulated by customary law. This fact speaks for the significance of this act. Although it was an act in the form of inquisitory criminal procedure and as such considered as a step backwards when compared to the Criminal Procedure Act of 1850, which was passed on the pattern of the 1808 French Law on criminal investigation it was at the same time quite progressive when compared to the then customary law. The author gives a short historical review of criminal procedure development in Croatia and Slavonia until 1850, focusing on the important work by Ivan Kitoniæ: Metodièna uputa u sudbeni postupak po obièajnom pravu slavnog Ugarskog kraljevstva. The article deals with issues of particular acts applicable in the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy and finally deals with the central issue i.e. criminal procedure for the Austrian Empire of 29 July 1853.Furtheron, the author extensively reviews on the course of criminal procedure laid by regulations of the 1853 ZKP reflecting on all crucial institutes and emphasizing the prior procedure, adversarial procedure and oral final discussion with delivering and awarding judgement. Finally, the author considers the way the 1853 ZKP influenced development of Croatian criminal procedure law by connecting herein the basic institutes of the 1853 ZKP with crucial institutes of the 1997 Criminal Procedure Act and the 2008 Criminal Procedure Act. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this study was to assess relationship between law students' attitudes toward the criminal legal system and their beliefs in a just world, personal experiences with criminal legal system, self reported rule violating behavior and some socio demographic characteristics. In the study 3rd and 4th year law students (N=362) from the faculties of law in Osijek, Split and Zagreb participated. The results showed that law students have moderately negative attitude toward the criminal legal system. They are most critical toward police, and have most favorable opinions about public attorneys and judges. The differences among students from different law faculties are not significant. The students assessed that their legal education and the media hade significantly higher impact on their attitudes toward the criminal legal system than their personal experiences. The attitudes toward criminal legal system is significantly correlated with gender (male students have more favorable attitudes), assessment of education (r=0.11; p<0.05), media (r =-0.20; p<0.01) and personal experience (r = -0.16; p < 0.01), and general beliefs in a just world (r=0.33; p<0.01). The results are discussed with the view of improving education of law students. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]