REFORMA KRIVIČNOG PROCESNOG ZAKONODAVSTVA SRBIJE I INSTITUT SPORAZUMEVANJA JAVNOG TUŽIOCA I OKRIVLJENOG
AGREEMENTS BETWEEN PUBLIC PROSECUTOR AND THE ACCUSED AND NEW LAW ON CRIMINAL PROCEDURE OF THE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA

Summary/Abstract: This paper is dedicated to an expert critical analysis of the issues related to particular types of arrangements between public prosecutor and the accused as specific modalities of criminal procedure in accordance with new Law on Criminal Procedure of the Republic of Serbia. Observed from the aspect of its structure, the subject of its paper is analyzed within two groups of questions and concluding remarks. The first group of questions deals with general observations on the process of the reformation of Serbian criminal procedure legislation as well as on the place and role that the institute known as the agreement between public prosecutor and the accused has in the process of reformation. The key conclusion of the analysis of this group of questions is author’s standpoint according to which the “legalization” of such agreement through the process of reformation of Serbian legislation on criminal procedure appears to be fully acceptable. The second, i.e. central group of questions refers to the analysis of normative regulation for all three types of agreement between public prosecutor and the accused that are prescribed by new Law on Criminal Procedure. The conclusion of the analysis of this group of questions is author’s opinion that the questions related to normative aspects of such agreement (regardless of its type) in new Law on Criminal Procedure are, generally speaking, in accordance with the viewpoints of the majority of both – domestic as well as foreign experts. As such, these questions are also compatible with the essence and the reasons of criminal policy that contributed to the well – known status that such agreement has in contemporary criminal procedure legislation in general. However, regardless of this general assessment, the author claims that there still appears to be a significant number of issues related to normative regulation of this institute that do not fulfill the expected criteria. Some of them stand out among other questions of such character. They refer to: the possible scope of application of particular modalities of the agreement, the contents of the text of the agreement, the type and measure of criminal sanction prescribed by the agreement, the place and role of the injured party in the process of the creation of such agreement, the role of the attorney in the negotiation and court’s decision – making process, the moment when the court takes an active role in the process etc. Nevertheless, the author emphasizes that the necessity of the existence of this institute should not be questioned. On the contrary – in spite of negative remarks on some of its normative solutions, this institute is expected to play an even more important role in the field of crime oppression in Serbia and become one of the most important instruments contributing to the efficiency of crime oppression in this region as well.

• Details
• Contents