Unacceptable procedural condition in field of expert examination as evidentiary action shaped by CPC and court practice
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5937/crimen1901037VKeywords:
Expert examination; Refusal of expert examination; Expert recusal; Defense and expert examination;Abstract
The structure of paper deviates from the usual. The questions brought up in paper are elaborated in form of "one by one certain article analysis" relating expert examination matter in Criminal Procedure Code (of the Republic of Serbia). In particular, the author points out that the provisions of the CPC regulating the expert examination have become completely unnecessary because of two reasons. The first one is that the provisions themselves are mutually dramatically uncoordinated almost to the extent that one excludes the other. The first reason has the important incentive in ignorance of the meaning of the terms that the CPC uses. In other words, a lawmaker considers synonyms the terms that are certainly not and thus unconsciously points to a far deeper problem. The second reason is that the provisions that have proved to be valid in the nomotechnical sense are profiled as meaningless because they can be violated without any procedural sanction. This refers primarily to the "false" existence of a set of defense rights for which there are no means of enforcing the organ of authority to respect them or at least sanctioning the organ for such disrespect. In this paper, a review is made of certain solutions from the Criminal Procedure Codes of the Federal Republic of Germany and Republic of Austria, as well as the leading positions in German and Austrian criminal procedural law literature.
Downloads
References
Basdorf, Clemens. 2017. "Gebotene psychiatrische Begutachtung in Fällen auffälliger Besonderheiten in der Tat und/oder bei dem Täter." Onlinezeitschrift für Höchstrichterliche Rechtsprechung zum Strafrecht 1.
Bayer, Vladimir. 1987. Zakon o krivičnom postupku Bilješke i komentar. Zagreb: Informator.
Beulke, Werner. 2016. Strafprozessrecht. Heidelberg: C.F. Müller.
Bertel, Christian, and Andreas Venier. 2016. Strafprozessrecht. Wien: MANZ Verlag.
Brkić, Snežana. 2014. Krivično procesno pravo I. Novi Sad.
Brkić, Snežana. 2013. Krivično procesno pravo II. Novi Sad.
Dimitrejvić, Dragoljub. 1965. Krivično procesno pravo. Beograd.
Dimitrijević, Dragoljub. 1971. Krivično procesno pravo. Beograd.
Fischer, Thomas. 2015. Strafgesetzbuch mit Nebengesetzen, Beck’sche Kurz-Kommentare Band 10. München: C.H. Beck.
Grubač, Momčilo, and Tihomir Vasiljević. 2014. Komentar Zakonika o krivičnom postupku. Beograd: PROJURIS.
Grubač, Momčilo. 2015. "Veštačenje u krivičnim stvarima prema novom Zakoniku o krivičnom postupku." Glasnik Advokatske komore Vojvodine 2.
Grubač, Momčilo. 2009. Krivično procesno pravo. Beograd: Pravni fakultet Univerziteta Union u Beogradu and Službeni glasnik.
Gundelach, Lasse. 2017. "Die Abgrenzung des Sachverständigen vom sachverständigen Zeugen im Strafprozessrecht anhand des Beispiels des Kriegsreporters." Onlinezeitschrift für Höchstrichterliche Rechtsprechung zum Strafrecht 1.
Ilić, Goran P., et al. 2015. Komentar Zakonika o krivičnom postupku. Beograd: Službeni glasnik.
Ilić, Goran P., et al. 2013. Komentar Zakonika o krivičnom postupku. Beograd: Službeni glasnik.
Joachimski, Jupp, and Christine Haummer. 2015. Strafverfahrensrecht – Rechtssprechungorientierte Vorbereitung für die Zweite Staatsprüfung. Stuttgart: Richard Boorberg Verlag.
Kramer, Bernhard. 2009. Grundbegriffe des Strafverfahrensrechts: Ermittlung und Verfahren. Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer Verlag.
Meyer-Goßner, Lutz. 2013. Strafprozessordnung mit GVG und Nebengesetzen, Beck’sche Kurz-Kommentare Band 6. München: C.H. Beck.
Roxin, Claus, and Bernd Schünemann. 2014. Strafverfahrensrecht. München: C.H. Beck.
Rieß, Peter, ed. 2004. Löwe/Rosenberg. Die Strafprozeßordnung und das Gerichtsverfassungsgesetz: Teil: Band 2, §§ 72–136a. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Rüping, Hinrich. 2018. "Zur Rolle des Sachverständigen im Strafverfahren." Accessed April 25, 2018. http://www.pknds.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Dokumente/Sonstiges/Berichte/Herr_Prof._Dr._Hinrich_Rueping_2.pdf.
Seiler, Stefan. 2015. Strafprozessrecht. Wien: Facultas Verlag.
Stevanović, Čedomir. 1980. "Položaj stručnog lica u krivičnom postupku." Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta u Nišu.
Soković, Snežana. Veštačenje kao dokaz u krivičnom postupku. Doctoral dissertation.
Stojanović, Zoran. 2012. Komentar Krivičnog zakonika. Beograd.
Vasiljević, Tihomir, and Momčilo Grubač. 2003. Komentar Zakonika o krivičnom postupku. Beograd.
Škulić, Milan. 2012. Krivično procesno pravo. Beograd.
Zlatarić, Bogdan, and Mirjan Damaška. 1966. Rječnik krivičnog prava i krivičnog postupka. Zagreb.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2019 Nikola Vuković
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication, allowing others to share the work with proper attribution to the authors and acknowledgment of its original publication in this journal.