Plea bargain

Dne, 15. maja 2012 je začela veljati sistemsko najpomembnejša novela Zakona o kazenskem postopku (v nadaljevanju ZKP), in sicer novela ZKP-K. Z njo sta bila v slovenski kazenski postopek uvedeni dve novosti, ki sta pomembno spremenili zasnovo in naravo našega, v izhodišču kontinentalnega kazenskega postopka, in sprožili konceptualni premik k adversarnemu kazenskemu postopku. Gre za institut sporazuma o priznanju krivde in predobravnavnega naroka, ki sta spremenila dotedanjo paradigmo reševanja kazenskih zadev. Glavni cilj tega konceptualnega premika k adversarnem postopku je poenostavitev in skrajšanje kazenskih postopkov. Med drugim tudi tako, da se obdolženca z obljubo nagrade spodbudi k sodelovanju s tožilcem. Z uvedbo instituta se spreminja koncept slovenskega kazenskega postopka, s tem pa tudi ključna vloga akterjev v postopku – tožilca, obdolženca, njegovega zagovornika in sodišča. Relativno mlada sprememba ustaljene paradigme odločanja o kazenski obtožbi v slovenskem kazenskoprocesnem sistemu nujno tudi implicira, da obstajajo določena vprašanja glede instituta pogajanj v praksi in teoriji še vedno nedorečena. V diplomski nalogi sem ravno s ciljem ta vprašanja identificirati poskušal vseskozi kritično analizirati slovensko ureditev pogajanj o priznanju krivde. Odraz mojega kritičnega razmišljanja so tudi poskusi odgovoriti na vprašanja, ki so bila dosedaj v kazenskoprocesni teoriji in praksi bodisi zanemarjena, bodisi se sploh niso pojavljala. Na nekaterih mestih sem se tudi zavzemal za razlago naklonjeno varstvu obdolženčevih pravic, ki je sicer v nasprotju z nekaterimi prevladujočimi stališči v slovenski procesni doktrini. Brez pričakovanja, da bi moja stališča predstavljala dokončen odgovor na sporna vprašanja, sem želel podati vsaj majhen prispevek k obstoječi pravni znanosti glede instituta pogajanj o priznanju krivde.On 15 of May 2012, the systematic most important amendments to the Criminal Procedure Act (hereinafter: ZKP) came into force, namely the amendments of the ZKP-K. With it, two novelties were introduced into the Slovenian criminal procedure, which significantly changed the design and nature of our, at the outset of the continental criminal procedure, and initiated a conceptual shift to the adversarial criminal procedure. It is the institute of a plea agreement and a pre-trial hearing, which changed the previous paradigm of dealing with criminal matters. The main objective of this conceptual shift to the adversarial procedure is the simplification and reduction of criminal proceedings. Among other things, by encouraging the defendant to cooperate with the prosecutor, he is promised with the prize. With the introduction of the institute, the concept of the Slovenian criminal procedure is changing, and thus the key role of the actors in the procedure - the prosecutor, the defendant, his advocate and the court. A relatively young change in the established paradigm of decision-making on criminal charges in the Slovenian criminal justice system necessarily implies that there are certain issues regarding the institute of negotiations in practice and theory still unspecified. In my graduation thesis, I tried to identify these issues with the goal of constantly critically analyzing the Slovene regime of plea bargaining. The reflection of my critical thinking is also attempts to answer questions that have either been ignored in criminal theory or practice, or they did not even occur at all. In some places, I also advocated an interpretation favorable to the protection of the defendant\u27s rights, which is contrary to some of the prevailing positions in the Slovenian procedural doctrine. Without the expectation that my views would be a definitive answer to the controversial issues, I wanted to make at least a small contribution to the existing legal science regarding the institute of plea bargaining