Delo malog značaja i stvarno kajanje u krivičnom zakoniku

Abstract

Autor u radu razmatra odnos između instituta delo malog značaja i stvarnog kajanja, odnosno pitanje mogućnosti da se kod posledičnih krivičnih dela u slučaju stvarnog kajanja učinioca smatra da je ispunjen uslov za primenu instituta delo malog značaja koji se sastoji u tome da su posledice krivičnog dela neznatne. U datom kontekstu, prvo su analizirani uslovi za primenu dela malog značaja i konstatovano je da je u pitanju institut čija primena je opravdana isključivo u slučaju tzv. bagatelnih krivičnih dela. Nakon toga, institut stvarnog kajanja razmatran je kako sa materijalno-pravnog, tako i sa procesno-pravnog aspekta, koji u suštini predstavlja primenu načela oportuniteta krivičnog gonjenja. Potom je ukazano na sličnosti koje na planu regulisanja ovog instituta postoje između rešenja u srpskom i nemačkom zakonodavstvu. Zaključeno je da pitanje konkurencije materijalno-pravnih i procesno-pravnih instituta kojima se ostvaruje ista svrha - rasterećenje krivičnog pravosuđa, a s obzirom na prirodu njihove funkcionale veze, uvek treba rešavati u korist primene odredaba materijalnog krivičnog prava. Međutim, ukoliko, kao u slučaju dela malog značaja, za tako nešto postoji kriminalno-političko opravdanje, onda po uzoru na druga evropska krivična zakonodavstva, treba razmišljati u pravcu ukidanja datog instituta krivičnog prava i potpunijeg afirmisanja odgovarajućih, tzv. diverzionih procesno-pravnih mehanizama.

This paper discusses the relationship between the institute of the act of minor significance and genuine remorse, i.e. the possibility of deeming consequential criminal offenses followed by the offender's genuine remorse as a fulfilled condition for the application of the institute of act of minor significance since the consequences of the criminal offense are considered insignificant. In such a context, the analysis primarily focused on the conditions for the application of the act of minor significance. It has been concluded that the application of the institute in question is justified only in the case of the so-called minor criminal offenses. After that, the analysis focused on the institute of genuine remorse from both the substantive-law and procedural-law aspects, which basically represents the application of the principle of opportunism prosecution. Next, the paper points to the existing similarities regarding the regulation of this institute between the solutions in the respective Serbian and German legislations. The conclusion is that the competition between the substantive-law and procedural-law institutes which serve the same purpose - the alleviation of criminal justice, particularly in view of the nature of their functional relationship, should always be resolved in favour of the substantive criminal law provisions application. However, if there is a criminal-political justification for it, as in the case of the acts of minor significance, then, following the examples of other European criminal laws, a repeal of the respective institute of criminal law is worth considering, as well as a better affirmation of the corresponding and so-called diversion procedural law mechanisms.