Searches of a law firm

Vsak obdolženec v kazenskem postopku ima legitimen interes, da je njegov odnos z zagovornikom zaupen in da pravni red zagotavlja tudi ustrezno varstvo tega zaupnega razmerja. Temeljna predpostavka za učinkovito uresničevanje pravic v kazenskem postopku predstavlja možnost obdolženca, da se zanese na pravno varovan položaj, da so podatki, ki jih posreduje svojemu zagovorniku, varovani kot poklicna tajnost. Posamezniku, ki išče pravni nasvet, mora biti zagotovljeno, da odvetnik informacij, ki jih pridobi, ko se stranka z njim posvetuje o svojih pravicah ali obveznostih, praviloma ne bo razkril in jih niti ne bo prisiljen razkriti tretjim, ter da ti podatki ne bodo uporabljeni zoper stranko. Ker so v odvetniški pisarni in drugih enako varovanih prostorih, ki so povezani z opravljanjem odvetniškega poklica, zbrane zaupne informacije odvetniške zasebnosti, je po naravi stvari treba urediti poseben način njihovega preiskovanja. Utemeljeno se lahko iščejo bodisi posamezna listina bodisi posamezni podatki, ki se nahajajo v obsežni listinski dokumentaciji in elektronskih napravah pri odvetniku, zato je logično, da mora zakon natančneje urediti tudi sámo izvedbo sicer ustrezno sodno odrejenega posega v odvetniško zasebnost, saj drugače prihaja do nedopustnih posegov v odvetniško zasebnost in posledično pravice odvetnikovih strank. V diplomskem delu so predstavljene ključne pomanjkljivosti trenutne zakonodajne ureditve preiskovalnih posegov v zaupnost razmerja med zagovornikom in stranko v luči odločbe Ustavnega sodišča RS U-I-115/14-28, Up-218/14-45 z dne 21. 1. 2016 in sodne prakse ESČP. Ob opiranju na nemško pravno ureditev so prikazana temeljna vprašanja, na katera mora biti zakonodajalec pri morebitnem prihodnjem normiranju te problematike pozoren v luči temeljnih procesnih varovalk, ki predstavljajo minimum spoštovanja ustavnopravno varovanih jamstev obdolženca v kontekstu razmerja z njegovim odvetnikom.Every defendant in criminal proceedings has a legitimate interest that his relationship with the defence counsel is confidential and that the legal order provides for the appropriate protection of this confidential relationship. A fundamental premise for the effective exercise of rights in criminal proceedings is that the defendant can feel free to disclose any information to his counsel while knowing that the information provided to his counsel is protected as a professional secrecy. A person seeking legal advice should be assured, when discussing his rights or obligations with a lawyer that the latter will not disclose to third parties the information provided and that this information will not be used against them. Since the lawyer\u27s office and other protected areas related to the performance of the lawyer\u27s profession represent a sphere in which the confidential information is concentrated, investigation of such premises shall be regulated in a special way. Since it can be justified to search for either a single document or individual data that is "hidden" in a wide range of documentation and electronic devices within a lawyer\u27s office, it is logical that the law should also regulate the mere implementation of otherwise appropriately ordered investigation of a lawyer\u27s office. Otherwise, there is inadmissible interference with lawyer\u27s privacy and consequently the rights of lawyers\u27 clients. The diploma thesis presents the key shortcomings of the current legislative regulation of investigative measures into the confidentiality of the relationship between a defendant and a lawyer in the light of the decision of the Constitutional Court of Slovenia U-I-115/ 14-28, Up-218 / 14-45 of 21 January 2016 and the ECtHR case law. Relying onto the German legal system, the fundamental issues on which the legislator must pay attention are presented in the light of constitutional procedural safeguards of a defendant regarding his relationship with a lawyer