The master's thesis presents the institute of suspended prosecution, which ensures fast and effective completion of criminal cases, but also focuses on some questions that arise when the institute is used in practice. Disunited use of suspended prosecution among different District State Prosecutor's Offices has been a problem since the introduction of the institute. It may result in one suspect being subject to court procedure, while the criminal complaint against the other suspect will be rejected after he pays a certain financial contribution and the two cases were essentially similar. I noticed considerable discrepancies regarding the largeness of imposed tasks, because it differs in similar cases if the prosecutor only aims at recovery of damages and chooses a task from the lower limit of the range, or is more inclined to cumulate tasks. The tasks are generally determined with the suspect's financial conditions in mind, however in practice, the injured party sometimes agrees with suspended prosecution only, under the condition, that the suspect pays a certain large amount of damages, which is troublesome, because suspended prosecution should not be a shortcut to achieving any amount of damage that the injured party can think of. Analysis of criminal cases at the District State Prosecutor's Office in Ljubljana showed that prosecutors use suspended prosecution in appropriate cases, as they rarely need to press charges afterwards, and dismiss most complaints after the suspect completes the task, or end the case when the injured party decides to drop the complaint.
|
