20.500.12556/RUL-140557 Razpravna sposobnost obdolženca v kazenskem postopku The defendant's capacity to stand trial in criminal procedure Problem razpravne sposobnosti obdolženca v kazenskem postopku je v slovenskem pravu že dolgo zanemarjeno vprašanje. Četudi sodišča redoma odločajo o obdolženčevi razpravni sposobnosti, pravila, ki jim sledijo, niso jasna. Zakonske podlage ni, prav tako ne teoretične obravnave problema. Prispevek poskuša zapolniti to praznino s primerjalnopravno analizo teoretičnih stališč in sodne prakse. The issue of the defendant's capacity to stand trial has long been neglected in the Slovenian law of criminal procedure. Although courts regularly decide on this issue, the rules are far from clear, given the lack of statutory basis and a lack of a systematic theoretical analysis. This paper attempts to fill the latter void by analysing rules on the capacity to stand trial from a comparative perspective, using theory and relevant case-law. For a start, it is necessary to distinguish two types of legal consequences in cases where a defendant lacks capacity to stand trial. First, incapacity to stand trial may be caused by such a defendant's mental or physical deficiencies that preclude any possibility of conducting criminal proceedings against him. This will be the case when criminal procedure itself would seriously jeopardize the defendant's life or health, causing (or threatening to cause) long-term, irreparable damage. Even though a criminal prosecution is aimed at securing common, fundamental goods enjoyed by members of a given society, the state must balance against this any serious danger which criminal procedure may present to the defendant. In any specific case, courts must undertake a balancing test and decide which of the constitutionally protected goods should enjoy protection. Secondly, capacity to stand trial will function as a legal prerequisite ensuring that the acts a defendant takes in a criminal procedure have proper legal effect. A defendant will be deemed capable of standing trial when he is able to hear and to follow the proceedings. More precisely, he must possess a basic understanding of what is at stake in a criminal procedure (the nature of criminal procedure and criminal sanction) and must be able to communicate his views, at least to his defence lawyer. If deficiencies on the part of the defendant prevent him from gaining such a basic understanding or prevent him from communicating his views on the matter, he will not be able to exercise his procedural rights in an intelligent and reasonable manner. In such a case, the rationale behind the rules on the defendant's capacity to stand trial is to secure an active role for the defendant in communication with other participants in a criminal procedure. If criminal prosecution continues against a defendant who is not able to participate effectively, he is deprived of acting on any relevant information gathered during criminal procedure that may be used in support of a favourable judgement. Any procedural acts (or omissions of such acts) in such a case will result in a breach of the defendant’s right to fair trial, specifically right to defend himself. In specific cases, when a defendant incapable of standing trial will waive his procedural rights, any evidence collected as a consequence of such a waiver may be rendered inadmissible due to the lack of any legal effect such a waiver may have. The present paper explores two further means of compensating for a defendant's deficiencies. The first option is mandatory defence by a lawyer. This option must be rejected, since a defendant incapable of standing trial will also be incapable of communicating with his lawyer. Capability to stand trial is an expression of a defendant's right to defend himself and may not be resolved by the court appointing a mandatory defence lawyer. The second possibility is the application of rules of in absentia procedures. These appear applicable in cases of self-inflicted incapacity to stand trial. Yet as Slovenian law stands, such an alternative is not likely, given the lack of any statutory basis for such a measure. kazensko pravo kazenski postopek obdolženci razpravna sposobnost pravica do obrambe criminal procedure defendant capacity to stand trial right to defend oneself true false true Slovenski jezik Angleški jezik Licenca CC BY-ND 4.0 je navedena na notranji naslovni strani serijske publikacije (https://www.pf.uni-lj.si/media/zzr2011_gorkic.pdf) in na pristajalni strani posameznega letnika (https://www.pf.uni-lj.si/zalozba/zzr-33178/arhiv-33185/letnik-71-2011/). (Datum opombe: 3. 10. 2022) Članek v reviji 2022-09-15 15:21:47 2022-09-15 15:21:47 2022-10-14 14:44:03 0000-00-00 00:00:00 2011 0 0 Str. 93-116 Letn. 71 2011 0000-00-00 Zaloznikova Objavljeno NiDoloceno 0000-00-00 0000-00-00 0000-00-00 343.13:343.121 1854-3839 11930705 Razpravna_URN_NBN_SI_DOC-1JYZT7MA.pdf Razpravna_URN_NBN_SI_DOC-1JYZT7MA.pdf 1 4D55C912B4620D6314234ADAC49BA2BC 605d4466600dea199b1a888b9a597e74bb3bf993bb2f1c691104b56eee30ebb6 64346708-34f9-11ed-92af-00155dcfd717 https://repozitorij.uni-lj.si/Dokument.php?lang=slv&id=161309 https://www.pf.uni-lj.si/zalozba/zzr-33178/arhiv-33185/letnik-71-2011/ 0 98080932-42ee-11ed-9c94-00155dcfd717 https://repozitorij.uni-lj.si/Dokument.php?lang=slv&id=162722 Pravna fakulteta Zbornik znanstvenih razprav 0 0 0