| Abstract | Diplomski rad obrađuje temu konvalidacije nezakonitih dokaza u kaznenom postupku Republike Hrvatske. Tako pribavljen nezakonit dokaz načelno ne može teretiti okrivljenika, osim u određenim slučajevima. Na početku rada, radi boljeg razumijevanja teme definirani su pojmovi činjenica, dokaza i nezakonitog dokaza. Obrađeno je načelo razmjernosti kako na zakonodavnoj razini tako i u primjeni tijela kaznenog progona i suda. Rad pruža kratak povijesni pregled nezakonitih dokaza od osamostaljenja RH do danas. Nadalje se razmatra pod kojim uvjetima dokazi pribavljeni na nezakonit način mogu konvalidirati, pruža kritika eventualnih manjkavosti i nude potencijalno bolja rješenja. Zbog mnogo pravnih propisa i autoriteta poput Europskog suda za ljudska prava, Vrhovnog suda RH i Ustavnog suda RH koji tumače pojmove pravnih vrednota čija povreda dovodi do nezakonitosti dokaza, može doći do preklapanja pojmova i nejasnoće pri kvalifikaciji u koju skupinu po kriteriju povrede dokaz spada. Stoga se u radu razgraničavaju povrede prava koje su derogabilne i koje nisu, odnosno zbog koje povrede nezakonit dokaz može konvalidirati i zbog koje ne može. Uz to razrađuju se pozitivne definicije pravnih vrednota čija povreda predstavljaju nezakonit dokaz koji može pod određenim uvjetima postati ozakonjen. |
| Abstract (english) | This thesis addresses the topic of illegal evidence in criminal proceedings, which can, under certain conditions, be validated (legalized) in the Republic of Croatia. These pieces of evidence may not incriminate the defendant due to defects, except under specific circumstances. In the beginning of the paper, concepts such as evidence, facts, and illegal evidence are explained to enhance understanding of the topic.Furthermore, the paper elaborates on the important principle of proportionality in the context of the legislator, executive bodies, and the court. Additionally, a historical overview of evidentiary law since the independence of the Republic of Croatia is provided. The paper also examines the conditions under which illegal evidence can be validated. It presents problems and offers suggestions for improvement. Due to the similarities
in definitions of legal values, it can sometimes be difficult to discern between derogable and non-derogable violations. This difficulty arises from the large number of legal regulations and decisions made by high courts, such as the European Court of Human Rights, the Croatian Supreme Court, and the Constitutional Court of Croatia. This thesis aims to provide a clear distinction between derogable and non-derogable violations, specifically identifying those pieces of illegal evidence that can become legal and those that cannot. Problems are presented, along with suggestions for improvement. After establishing a clear demarcation, the paper specifies the legal values whose violation results in evidence being declared illegal. However, under certain conditions, such evidence may become legal. Problems are discussed, and opportunities for improvement are offered. |
