Article
Aug 31
Back

DISQUALIFICATION OF JUDGE AND OTHER PROCEDURAL PROBLEMS IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF PAROLE

Nikola Vuković

10.5937/AnaliPFB1602171V
ABSTRACT /

The work is thematically divided into two parts that are not strictly separated. The link between these is the institution of release on parole. The first part deals with the institution of disqualification of a judge from the panel which decides on the petition for release on parole. It was noted that this issue does not occupy the attention of science, nor practice. It is pointed why this neglect is unjustified. Specifically analyzed is the possibility of participation of judge in deciding on release on parole if he has already acted (had some role) in the same case before. The consequences that can be brought by insufficient attention on this issue are as follows: 1) substantive violation of the provisions of criminal procedure, and
2) the conduct of disciplinary proceedings against a judge who should have been disqualified.

The second part examines certain provisions of legal acts regulating the matter of conditional release. The enormous significance of parole is that the convict has the possibility to get out after 2/3 of served prison sentence. The scale of these opportunity is clearly visible on the long-term prison sentences. Despite the general tendency towards reducing the prison population, it appears that parole does not and can not achieve the role which it intends. The procedure for release on parole in the case law often acts as a „sideshow“ and the CPC opens the door to discussions about the quality of certain provisions of the procedure for release on parole.

DOWNLOAD COMPLETE ARTICLE /
Serbian (cyr)  
REFERENCES /
  • Arzt, G., Der befangene Strafrichter − Zugleich eine Kritik an der Beschränkung der Befangenheit auf die Parteilichkeit, Tübingen 1969.
  • Bayer, V., Jugoslavensko krivično procesno pravo I, Zagreb 1960.
  • Bayer, V., Zakon o krivičnom postupku Bilješke i komentar, Zagreb 1987.
  • Bertel, C., Venier, A., Strafprozessrecht, Wien 2016.
  • Beulke, W., Strafprozessrecht, C.F. Müller, Heidelberg 2016.
  • Brkić, S., Krivično procesno pravo I, Novi Sad 2014.
  • Čejović, B., Krivično pravo, Beograd 2006.
  • Dimitrijević, D., Krivično procesno pravo, Beograd 1965.
  • Dimitrijević, D., Krivično procesno pravo, Beograd 1971.
  • Grasnik, V., Ka novoj teoriji prava, 2001.
  • Gössel, K. H., Strafverfahrensrecht, Stuttgart 1977.
  • Grubač, M., Vasiljević, T., Komentar Zakonika o krivičnom postupku, Beograd 2014.
  • Grubač, M., Krivično procesno pravo, Beograd 2009.
  • Ignor, A., „Befangenheit im Prozess“, Zeitschrift für Internationale Strafrechtsdogmatik, 5/2012.
  • Ilić, P. G. et al., Komentar Zakonika o krivičnom postupku, Beograd 2013.
  • Ilić P. G. et al., Komentar Zakonika o krivičnom postupku, Beograd 2015.
  • Joachimski, J., Haummer C., Strafverfahrensrecht – Rechtssprechung¬orientierte Vorbereitung für die Zweite Staatsprüfung, 2015.
  • Lazarević, Lj., Komentar Krivičnog zakonika, Beograd 2011.
  • Lohsing, E., Serini E., Österreichisches Strafprozessrecht, Wien 1952.
  • Matić, M., Priručnik za primenu Zakonika o krivičnom postupku (ur. S. Bejatović, M. Škulić, G. Ilić), Beograd 2013.
  • Ogorelic, N., Kazneno procesualno pravo, Zagreb 1899.
  • Roxin, C., Schünemann B., Strafverfahrensrecht, München 2014.
  • Seiler, S., Strafprozessrecht, Wien 2015.
  • Soković, S., „Uslovni otpust – sporna pitanja i savremena normativna rešenja“, Crimen 1/2014.
  • Stojanović, Z., Komentar Krivičnog zakonika, Beograd 2012.
  • Stojanović, Z., Krivično pravo opšti deo, Beograd 2013.
  • Škulić, M., Krivično procesno pravo, Beograd 201
  • Vasiljević, T., Grubač, M., Komentar Zakona o krivičnom postupku, Beograd 1987.
  • Vasiljević, T., Grubač, M., Komentar Zakonika o krivičnom postupku, Beograd 2010.
  • Vitkauskas, D., Dikov, G., Zaštita prava na pravično suđenje prema Evropskoj konvenciji za zaštitu ljudskih prava, Savet Evrope, Strazbur 2013.
  • Vollkommer, G., Der ablehnbare Richter: Die Durchsetzung des verfassungsrechtlichen Gebots richterlicher Unparteilichkeit im Prozess, Tübingen 2001.
  • Zlatarić, B., Damaška M., Rječnik krivičnog prava i postupka, Zagreb 1966.