POLICE POWERS IN LEGAL REGULATION AND PRACTICE

Diplomska naloga govori o policijskih pooblastilih. Predstavili smo katera so temeljna načela za uporabo pooblastil ter podrobneje predstavili izbrana policijska pooblastila. Predstavili smo zakonodajo, ki ureja uporabo policijskih pooblastil, predvsem Zakon o nalogah in pooblastilih policije (2013), Zakon o kazenskem postopku (2014), Zakon o prekrških-1 (2011), Zakon o pravilih cestnega prometa (2013) in Zakon o nadzoru državne meje-2 (2010). Raziskali smo, katera so najpogosteje uporabljena policijska pooblastila med leti 2003 in 2014 ter kakšno je mnenje mladih glede policijskih postopkov in uporabe policijskih pooblastil. Postavili smo si prvo hipotezo - Število uporabljenih prisilnih sredstev od leta 2003 pada. Postavili smo še drugo in tretjo hipotezo in sicer, med izvajanjem kontrole prometa ima policist dovoljenje za pregled vozila in tretjo, uniformiran policist, se osebi zoper katero izvaja policijsko pooblastilo ni dolžan identificirati. Predstavili smo tudi dva primera iz prakse, kjer je šlo za prekoračitev policijskih pooblastil: Rehbock proti Sloveniji ter Matko proti Sloveniji. Pri obeh primerih gre za vložitev tožbe zoper kršitve človekovih pravic. Z raziskavo smo potrdili vse tri hipoteze. Ugotovili smo, da skupno število uporabljenih prisilnih sredstev policije med leti 2003 in 2014 pada. Z diplomsko nalogo smo torej potrdili tudi drugo hipotezo ter ugotovili, da ima policist med izvajanjem kontrole prometa dovoljenje za pregled vozila. Zadnjo hipotezo smo delno potrdili, saj smo ugotovili, da se mora uniformirani policist identificirati na zahtevo osebe, zoper katero izvaja policijsko pooblastilo. Uspeli smo potrditi tudi zadnjo hipotezo, torej to, da se uniformiran policist osebi, zoper katero izvaja policijsko pooblastilo ni dolžan identificirati. Z diplomsko nalogo smo dosegli cilj in namen, ki smo si ga postavili.The objective of the present thesis is police powers. Basic principles for the use of the powers are presented along with detailed presentation of selected police powers. We presented the legislation that regulates the use of police powers, especially the Police Tasks and Powers Act (2013), Criminal Procedure Act (2014), Minor Offences Act (2011), Road Traffic Safety Act (2013) and State Border Control Act (2010). We have explored which are the most commonly used police powers between 2003 and 2014, and what is the opinion of young people about police procedures and the use of police powers. We set the first hypothesis - the number of coercive measures since 2003 is falling. We formulated the second and third hypothesis – while performing traffic control the police officer has permission to inspect the vehicle and the third – a uniformed police officer is not obligated to identify himself to a person against whom the police powers are carried out. We also presented two practical examples where violation of police powers was involved: Rehbock against Slovenia and Matko against Slovenia. In both cases, filing a lawsuit against human rights violations was involved. The research confirmed all three hypotheses. We established that the total number of coercive measures of police between 2003 and 2014 is falling. The thesis also confirmed the second hypothesis with establishing that the police officer has permission to inspect the vehicle while performing traffic control. The third hypothesis was partially confirmed, as we established that the uniformed police officer needs to identify himself at the request of a person against whom police powers are carried out. We were able to confirm the last hypothesis, namely that the uniformed police officer is not obligated to identify himself to a person against whom the police powers are carried out. The thesis reached the objective and purpose that we have set