| | SLO | ENG | Cookies and privacy

Bigger font | Smaller font
First page > Show document

Show document Help

Title:Normativna ureditev sodnega izvedenstva v kazenskih postopkih : diplomsko delo visokošolskega študijskega programa Varnost in policijsko delo
Authors:ID Gorjup, Gal (Author)
ID Žaberl, Miroslav (Mentor) More about this mentor... New window
Files:.pdf VS_Gorjup_Gal_2020.pdf (467,46 KB)
MD5: 010143973A07045309DEB67C94A63213
PID: 20.500.12556/dkum/7cb0bb13-0f81-4a51-88af-0ce5e52d1801
 
Language:Slovenian
Work type:Bachelor thesis/paper
Typology:2.11 - Undergraduate Thesis
Organization:FVV - Faculty of Criminal Justice and Security
Abstract:V diplomski nalogi smo obravnavali ureditev sodnega izvedenstva in vlogo sodnega izvedenca v kazenskem postopku. V začetku diplomske naloge smo opredelili osnovne pojme, kot sta izvedenstvo in izvedenec, ter kdo je sploh lahko sodni izvedenec in kako lahko nekdo to postane. Nato smo se osredotočili na potek procesa izvedenstva ter spoznali, kdo odreja izvedenstvo, kako se določi predmet izvedenstva, kakšen je potek dela sodnega izvedenca in predstavili dva najpomembnejša izdelka sodnega izvedenca – izvedenski izvid in mnenje, ki imata na sodišču dokazno vrednost. Predstavili smo oblike oziroma vrste sodnega izvedenstva in vsako podrobneje spoznali ter se seznanili z oblikami, ki jih Zakon o kazenskem postopku navaja kot obvezne. Nato smo na kratko opisali še eno izmed problematičnih področij sodnega izvedenstva v kazenskem postopku, in sicer izvedenstvo na področju spolne zlorabe otrok. V zadnjem delu diplomske naloge pa smo opravili analizo sodbe Ustavnega sodišča U-I-132/95, ki je obravnavalo, ali je 2. odstavek 249. člena v sladu z Ustavo Republike Slovenije. Skozi diplomsko nalogo smo potrdili vse tri hipoteze, ki smo si jih zadali v uvodnem delu, in sicer prvo hipotezo, da sodišče ni strokovno usposobljeno za vsa področja in zato potrebuje pomoč sodnih izvedencev, ki sodišču pomagajo razumeti strokovna, ne pa pravna vprašanja. Druga potrjena hipoteza, da je sodni izvedenec v kazenskem postopku lahko vsak, ki je strokovnjak določenega področja, zato se mora na zahtevo kazenskega sodišča odzvati, ter tretja hipoteza, da je sodni izvedenec več kot zgolj priča v kazenskem postopku, zato mora biti nepristranski in morajo zanj veljati enaki pogoji izločitve, kot to veljajo za sodnika.
Keywords:diplomske naloge, sodni izvedenec, izvedenstvo, kazenski postopek, izvedensko mnenje
Place of publishing:Ljubljana
Place of performance:Ljubljana
Publisher:[G. Gorjup]
Year of publishing:2020
Year of performance:2020
Number of pages:V, 38 str.
PID:20.500.12556/DKUM-77057 New window
UDC:343.95(043.2)
COBISS.SI-ID:28280067 New window
NUK URN:URN:SI:UM:DK:7I7TAXDP
Publication date in DKUM:14.09.2020
Views:1215
Downloads:159
Metadata:XML DC-XML DC-RDF
Categories:FVV
:
GORJUP, Gal, 2020, Normativna ureditev sodnega izvedenstva v kazenskih postopkih : diplomsko delo visokošolskega študijskega programa Varnost in policijsko delo [online]. Bachelor’s thesis. Ljubljana : G. Gorjup. [Accessed 13 March 2025]. Retrieved from: https://dk.um.si/IzpisGradiva.php?lang=eng&id=77057
Copy citation
  
Average score:
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
(0 votes)
Your score:Voting is allowed only for logged in users.
Share:Bookmark and Share


Hover the mouse pointer over a document title to show the abstract or click on the title to get all document metadata.

Secondary language

Language:English
Title:Normative regulation of court expertise in criminal proceedings
Abstract:In this thesis, we discussed the regulation of court expertise and the role of the expert witness in a criminal procedure. In the begining of thesis, we defined the basic concepts, such as court expertise, the expert witness, who is allowed to be an expert witness, and how they can even become one. Then, we focused on the course of the expertise process and studied who orders expertise, how the subject of expertise is defined, what the workflow of an expert witness is like; and presented the two most imporant products of the expert witness – the expert report and expert opinion, which both have a probative value in court. We presented the different types of court expertise and got to know each of them better, determining which types are mandatory according to the Criminal Procedure Act. Then, we focused on one of the problematic areas of court expertise in criminal procedures, namely expertise in the area of child sexual abuse. In the last part of thesis, we conducted an analysis of judgment of the Constitutional Court U-I-132/95, which discussed the second pragraph of the 249th article, aiming to determine whether it is in line with the Slovenian constitution. Through the thesis we confirmed all three hypotheses, which were defined in the introductory part. The first hypotheis was that the court is not professionally trained for all subject fields and requires the help of the expert witnesses in order to be able understand all the tehnical questions, but not the legal questions. The second confirmed hypothesis is that anybody who is an expert in some field can be an expert witness, which is why they have to respond on request of the court. The third hypothesis was that in a criminal procedure the expert witness is more than a regular witness, which is why they must be impartial and the same exclusion conditions that apply to the judges must apply to them.
Keywords:expert witness, expertise, criminal proceedings, expert opinion


Comments

Leave comment

You must log in to leave a comment.

Comments (0)
0 - 0 / 0
 
There are no comments!

Back
Logos of partners University of Maribor University of Ljubljana University of Primorska University of Nova Gorica