A Look Inside Misdemeanor Law Through the Prism of Culpability: A New Concept on the Way?

Prekršajno pravo ubrajamo u pravne grane koje su najviše zastupljene u svakodnevnom životu građana. Ipak, rasprave o izazovima njegova uređenja, a osobito općeg dijela, već su tradicionalno zanemarene u hrvatskom pravnoznanstvenom diskursu. Ovaj rad bavi se istraživanjem prikladnosti oblikovanja krivnje u prekršajnom pravu Republike Hrvatske. U traganju za odgovorima, postavili smo tri hipoteze. Prva je pripadnost prekršajnog prava kaznenom pravu, zatim da je subjektivna odgovornost prikladan oblik odgovornosti te, u konačnici, da koncept krivnje u prekršajnom pravu može biti unaprijeđen. S tim u vezi raspravljali smo o najvažnijim potrebnim pitanjima te potvrdili sve tri hipoteze. U dvojbi pripada li prekršajno pravo upravnom pravu ili kaznenom, prevladavajući je stav da pripada kaznenom pravu u širem smislu, što ujedno znači nužnost udovoljavanja njegovim temeljnim postulatima. Objektivna odgovornost označena je kao nefunkcionalan izbor te se priklanjamo subjektivnoj, kao suvremenom obliku odgovornosti koji bolje odgovara represivnim mehanizmima pravnog sustava. Krivnju, njezino načelo i sadržaj u prekršajnom pravu analizirali smo i kroz usporedbu s novijim dosezima kaznenopravne dogmatike te odabranim rješenjima poredbenog prava, a upozorili smo i na nedostatke trenutačnog rješenja i naznačili prostor za unapređenje. To se primarno odnosi na nužnost preoblikovanja načela krivnje, preciziranje uređenja vezanog uz neubrojive osobe te potencijalno uvođenje prekršajnopravne isprike.Misdemeanor law belongs to legal branches that are most prevalent in the daily lives of citizens. However, discussions on the challenges of the misdemeanor legal system, especially the general part, have traditionally been neglected in the Croatian legal scientific discourse. This paper deals with an analysis of appropriateness of the determination of culpability in the misdemeanor law of the Republic of Croatia. In search for answers, we have put forward three hypotheses. The first is the affiliation of misdemeanor law to criminal law, the second is the presumption that subjective liability is an appropriate form of liability, and, finally, the third is that the concept of culpability in misdemeanor law can be improved. In this regard, we discussed the most important issues and confirmed all three hypotheses. In deciding whether misdemeanor law belongs to administrative law or criminal law, the prevailing view is that it belongs to criminal law in a broader sense, which implies the need to comply with its fundamental postulates. Strict liability is marked as a non-functional choice, and we adhere to subjective liability, as a contemporary form of liability that better suits the repressive mechanisms of the legal system. Culpability, its principle, and content in misdemeanor law were analyzed through a comparison with recent achievements of criminal law as well as selected solutions of comparative law, and we pointed out the shortcomings of the current solution, indicating points for improvement. This primarily refers to the necessity of reformulating the culpability principle and the potential introduction of misdemeanor reasons for excuse