Transposition of admission of guilt to Slovenian law from perspective of comparative law

Prenos prava med pravnimi redi držav predstavlja razširjen in pogosto uporabljen način pravnega razvoja v posamezni državi. Naloga se posveča pravnemu prenosu oz. problemu pravnega presajanja, in sicer instituta pogajanj o priznanju krivde, pri čemer se omejujem na priznanje krivde, sprejeto v okviru formalnih pogajanj o priznanju krivde, ki je bilo zakonsko urejeno v poglavju XXXVI.a novele ZKP-K (Sporazum o priznanju krivde). Slednjega je Republika Slovenija, kot država z mešano pravno tradicijo, prenesla iz anglosaške pravne tradicije. Začetni del naloge je namenjen vprašanju pravnega prenosa oz. pravnega presajanja, in sicer kaj pravni prenos je in zakaj se države pri spreminjanju lastnega prava poslužujejo njegove uporabe. Na kratko se v nalogi posvetim tudi razumevanju pravnega prenosa in vplivom nanj, kot so ga razumeli Alan Watson, Montesquieu, Otto Kahn-Freund in Pierre Legrand, ki je obstoj in tako možnost pravnega prenosa zanikal. Temu sledi poudarek na institutu pogajanj o priznanju krivde kot pravnemu transplantatu, ki je v okviru pravnega prenosa tako pogost, da lahko govorimo že o globalnem pojavu. V drugem delu sta predstavljeni ureditvi instituta pogajanj o priznanju krivde v Republiki Sloveniji in v Združenih državah Amerike in s tega vidika krajša primerjava adversarnega modela, iz katerega pravni institut izvira in inkvizitornega oz. na njegovi podlagi izhajajočega mešanega modela, kot ga ima tudi Republika Slovenija, kjer je poudarek na razlikah med modeloma, ki lahko pomembno vplivajo na pravni prenos navedenega pravnega instituta. Za zaključek se dotaknem še vprašanja globalizacije pravnega instituta in ali prenos slednjega v več evropskih držav predstavlja amerikanizacijo pravnih redov slednjih.Transposition of law to legal orders of countries is a widespread and frequently used type of legal development in individual countries. This paper focuses on legal transposition or legal transplant, namely of the plea bargaining, where I limit my research to the admission of guilt accepted in the context of formal plea bargaining, which is regulated in Chapter XXXVI.a of the K-amendment to the Criminal Procedure Act (Plea Agreement). The institute was transplanted by the Republic of Slovenia, a country with a mixed legal tradition, from the Anglo-Saxon legal tradition. The initial part of the paper addresses legal transposition, namely what this institute is and why countries use it when modifying their law. I briefly describe the understanding of legal transposition and what affects it, as understood by Alan Watson, Montesquieu, Otto Kahn-Freund in Pierre Legrand, who denied the existence and hence the possibility of legal transposition. I then focus on plea bargaining as a legal transplant, which is so frequently used in the context of legal transposition that we can refer to it as a global phenomenon. The second part presents the regulation of plea bargaining in the Republic of Slovenia and the United States of America, briefly comparing the adversary model, where this legal institute originates from, and inquisitorial or mixed model originating from it, which applies also in the Republic of Slovenia. The comparison focuses on the differences between the models that can have an important impact on the legal transposition of the said legal institute. In the conclusion, I address globalisation of the legal institute and whether its transposition to several European countries presents a case of Americanisation of their legal orders