RECUSATIO IUDICUS: SERBIAN SCOPE, COMPARATIVE REVIEW AND PRACTICE OF EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The right of a party to exercise a judicial function in a case deciding its rights and obligations is impartial to a judge, which is determined by the obligation of the state to provide, first in a normative and then in a practical framework, the right to be upheld. Prima faciae, when it comes to the Serbian and legal frameworks of surrounding countries, it has been done nomotechnically in an impeccable way, but there are a number of essential shortcomings. The results we have obtained, using comparative legal review and analyzing practice of ECHR indicate that the Serbian, as well as the legislatures in the region, faces major problems in this area. As an anomaly we identified the possibility that a judge, although biased, in accordance with applicable regulations (in Serbian, Croatian and North Macedonian legal framework), could exercise judicial function in the case (because, there Criminal procedure codes stipulates that judge “can” be disqualified if there are doubts in his impartiality). Furthermore, very big problem in all legislatures (except Montenegrin) was that the injured party, although entitled to make a compensation claim (and this claim, within the meaning of Article 6(1) of the European Convention constitutes a civil claim), has no opportunity to seek a judicial excption/recusation. Finally, all analyzed legislation, except the Slovenian, allows a judge to take immediate action when it comes to an optional recusation. Disagreeing with this, we suggested that in the future they follow their Slovenian colleague who arranged it in a much better way.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
Abramson, W. L. 1994. Deciding Recusal Motions: Who Judges the Judges?. Valparaiso University Law Review, 28(2), pp. 543-561.
Barry, B. 1995. Justice as Impartiality. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Beširević, V. et al. 2017. Komentar Konvencije za zaštitu ljudskih prava i osnovnih sloboda. Beograd: JP „Službeni glasnik“.
Breneselović, L. 2007. Izuzeće sudije u krivičnom postupku. Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu, LV(1), pp. 173-194.
Delić, N. & Bajović, V. 2018. Priručnik za prekršajno pravo. Beograd: JP „Službeni glasnik”.
Grubač, M. & Vasiljević, T. 2014. Komentar Zakonika o krivičnom postupku, trinaesto izdanje – prema Zakoniku iz 2011. godine. Beograd: Projuris.
Ilić, P. G. 2012. O položaju oštećenog u krivičnom postupku. Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu, LX(1), pp. 137-158.
Jakšić, A. 2006. Evropska konvencija o ljudskim pravima – Komentar. Beograd: Pravni fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu.
Kilimnik, S. K. 1991. Recusal Standards for Judges in Pennsylvania: Cause for Concern. Villanova Law Review, 36(3), pp. 713-773.
MacKenzie, P. R. & Tomlinskon Druhan, L. 2010. Seeking a Recusal: Calling the Judge a Lizard Won’t Help Your Cause. The Alabama Lawyer, pp. 220-227.
McBride, J. 2009. Human rights and criminal procedure – The case law of the European court of human rights. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Milovanović, D. 2017. Pristrasnost kao razlog za izuzeće sudija u postupku pred Međunarodnim krivičnim sudom za bivšu Jugoslaviju. Strani pravni život, 1, pp. 183-192.
Pavlović, Š. 2014. Zakon o kaznenom postupku. 2. izdanje. Rijeka: „Libertin“ naklada. Pejović, K. 2018. Imovinskopravni zahtjev u sudskoj praksi. Crimen, 2, pp. 186-196. Radulović, D. 2009. Krivično procesno pravo, drugo izmijenjeno i dopunjeno izdanje. Podgorica: Pravni fakultet Univerziteta Crne Gore.
Shaman, M. J. 1996. The Impartial Judge: Detachment or Passion?. DePaul Law Review, 45(3), pp. 605-632.
Škulić, M. 2016. Krivično procesno pravo, deveto izmenjeno i dopunjeno izdanje. Beograd: Pravni fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu.
Vasiljević, T. 1981. Sistem krivičnog procesnog prava SFRJ. Treće izmenjeno i dopunjeno izdanje. Beograd: Savremena administracija.
Vitkausas, D. & Dikov, G. 2017. Protectiong the Right to a Fair Trial under the European Convention of Human Rights. 2nd Edition. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Vuković, N. R. 2016. Izuzeće sudije i drugi procesnopravni problemi u primeni uslovnog otpusta. Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu, LXIV(2), pp. 171-199.
Propisi
Krivični zakonik, Službeni glasnik RS, br. 85/2005, 88/2005 - ispr., 107/2005 - ispr., 72/2009, 111/2009, 121/2012, 104/2013, 108/2014, 94/2016 i 35/2019.
Zakon o kazenskem postopku Slovenije, Uradni list RS, št. 32/2012 – uradno prečiščeno besedilo, 472013, 87/2014, 8/2016 – odl. US, 64/2016 – odl. US, 65/2016 – odl. US, 66/2017 – ORZKP153,154 in 22/2019.
Zakon o kaznenom postupku Republike Hrvatske, Narodne novine RH, br. 152/2008, 76/2009, 80/2011, 121/2011, 91/2012, 143/2012, 56/2013, 145/2013, 152/2014, 70/2017, 126/2019, 126/2019.
Zakon o krivičnom postupku Federacije Bosne i Hercegovine, Službene novine Federacije BiH, br. 35/2003, 37/2003, 56/2003, 78/2004, 28/2005, 55/2006, 27/2007, 53/2007, 9/2009, 12/2010, 8/2013 i 59/2014.
Zakon o prekršajima, Službeni glasnik RS, br. 65/2013, 13/2016 i 98/2016 – Odluka US. Zakon o ratifikaciji Evropske konvencije za zaštitu ljudskih prava i osnovnih sloboda, Službeni list SCG – Međunarodni ugovori, br. 9/2003, 5/2005 i 7/2005 – ispravka i Službeni glasnik RS – Međunarodni ugovori, br. 12/2010 i 10/2015.
Zakon o ratifikaciji Međunarodnog pakta o građanskim i političkim pravima, Službeni list SFRJ – Međunarodni ugovori, br. 7/1971.
Zakon o sudijama, Službeni glasnik RS, br. 116/2008, 58/2009 – odluka US, 104/2009, 101/2010, 8/2012 – odluka US, 121/2012, 124/2012 – odluka US, 101/2013, 111/2014 – odluka US, 117/2014, 40/2015, 63/2015 – odluka US, 106/2015, 63/2016 – odluka US i 47/2017.
Zakon za krivičnata postapka na Severna Makedonija, Služben vesnik na RM, br. 150/2010 i 100/2012.
Zakonik o krivičnom postupku Crne Gore, Službeni list CG, br. 57/2009, 49/2010, 47/2014 - odluka US, 2/2015 - odluka US, 35/2015, 58/2015 - dr. zakon i 28/2018 - odluka US. Zakonik o krivičnom postupku, Službeni glasnik RS, br. 72/2011, 101/2011, 121/2012, 32/2013, 45/2013, 55/2014 i 35/2019.
Praksa Evropskog suda za ljudska prava
Daktaras v. Lithuania, predstavka br. 42095/98 od 10. oktobra 2000. godine. De Cubber v. Beglium, predstavka br. 9186/80 od 26. oktobra 1984. godine. Hauschildt v. Denmark, predstavka br. 10486/83 od 24. maja 1989. godine. Kreuz v. Poland, predstavka br. 28249/95 od 19. juna 2001. godine.
Kyprianou v. Cyprus, predstavka br. 73797/01 od 15. decembra 2005. godine. McGonell v. The United Kingdom, predstavka br. 28488/95 od 8. februara 2000. godine. Mežnarić v. Hrvatske, predstavka br. 71615/01 od 15. jula 2005. godine.
Olujić v. Hrvatske, predstavka br. 22330/05 od 5. februara 2009. godine.
Parlov-Tkalčić v. Hrvatske, predstavka broj 24810/06 od 22. decembra 2009. godine.
Perez v. France, predstavka br. 47287/99 od 12. februara 2004. godine.
Piersak v. Belgium, predstavka br. 8692/79 od 1. oktobra 1982. godine.