| | SLO | ENG | Cookies and privacy

Bigger font | Smaller font
First page > Show document

Show document Help

Title:PRITOŽBENI POSTOPEK NAD DELOM POLICISTOV
Authors:ID Jadrič, Igor (Author)
ID Grafenauer, Božo (Mentor) More about this mentor... New window
Files:.pdf UNI_Jadric_Igor_2009.pdf (527,05 KB)
MD5: 835FB9AF11F8DABBF32D923681C33674
PID: 20.500.12556/dkum/a43fd0b9-887e-440f-8bf2-7e7aefb0ab01
 
Language:Slovenian
Work type:Undergraduate thesis
Organization:PF - Faculty of Law
Abstract:Namen in cilj naloge je bralcu v celoti in razumljivo predstaviti sedanji pritožbeni postopek nad delom policistov, ga seznaniti z zgodovino pritožbenega postopka in ob tem na kratko opisati vse ostale oblike državljanskega nadzora nad delom policije. V nalogi so opisane oblike nadzora nad delom policije kot delom državljanskega nadzora nad tem področjem, vloga Varuha človekovih pravic (v nadaljevanju; Varuh) kot nadzornega organa, način nadzora s strani Ministrstva za notranje zadeve (v nadaljevanju: MNZ) ter oblike nevladnega nadzora. V zvezi s tem je na kratko predstavljen tudi nadzor nad delom policije v Veliki Britaniji, Italiji, Madžarski in Hrvaški. Temu sledi zgodovinski pregled ureditve načina reševanja pritožb nad postopki policistov v Republiki Sloveniji od leta 1967 dalje. Predvsem se mi je zdelo pomembno opisati in pojasniti trenutno veljaven postopek reševanja pritožb na prvi in drugi stopnji, ter vzporedne postopke, ko pogoji za reševanje pritožbe po Zakonu o policiji niso izpolnjeni. V zvezi s tem sledi natančen opis aktualnega pritožbenega postopka z osvetlitvijo pravnih problemov. Tu so opisane tudi vse ostale oblike reševanja »reklamacij« nad delom policistov. Predstavljen je Pravilnik o reševanju pritožb ter njegove kasnejše spremembe in dopolnitve. Za lažje razumevanje postopka reševanja pritožb sta povzeta postopek reševanja pritožbe pri vodji organizacijske enote ter postopek reševanja pritožbe na senatu. Seveda naloga ne bi imela svoje vrednosti, če ob tem ne bi opozoril na napake sedanjega pritožbenega postopka in njegovo neustreznost oz. preobsežnost, predvsem zaradi nezdružljivosti pritožbenega postopka in obravnave kaznivih dejanj, prevelikega števila ljudi, ki sodelujejo pri obravnavi pritožb, nepotrebne administracije ter finančnih stroškov, ki nastajajo ob tem. Tu je še vedno dvomljiva nepristranskost reševanja pritožb, kljub temu, da je pristojnost reševanja pritožb prešla na MNZ. V zadnjem delu so zato z opisno in primerjalno metodo obdelane teme v zvezi smiselnosti reševanja pritožb na senatu, vrednosti ugotovitev poročevalcev ter ukrepov zoper policiste, ki nastanejo kot posledica pritožbenih postopkov. Tu so zapisane še ugotovitve v zvezi postavljenih hipotez in izpostavljena tako dejanska kot pravna vprašanja pritožbenega postopka. V zvezi trditve, da je bilo v vseh primerih, ko so bile hkrati z obravnavo pritožbe na senatu, iz katere izhaja sum storitve kaznivega dejanja, ki se preganja po uradni dolžnosti podane kazenske ovadbe, delo senata nepotrebno oz. neupravičeno, ugotavljam da je smotrna in zakonita obravnava pritožb na senatu le v primerih, ko senat nastopa kot druga stopnja, se pravi, ko pomiritev na prvi stopnji ne uspe. Nikakor, pa to ni sprejemljivo v primerih, ko iz pritožbe izhaja tako imenovani sum uradno pregonljivega kaznivega dejanja. Domneva, da vodje senatov iz MNZ sledijo ugotovitvam poročevalcem iz vrst policije, se je potrdila. Ocene poročevalcev s strani članov senata so v veliki večini potrjene tako, da lahko z gotovostjo trdimo, da člani senata v veliki meri sledijo ugotovitvam poročevalcev. Ugotovitev, da skladnost ali neskladnost policistovega ravnanja s predpisi oz. utemeljenost ali neutemeljenost pritožbe nima nobenega vpliva na delovnopravne ukrepe izrečene zoper policiste, si lahko razlagamo tako, da policija ne odreagira ustrezno na rezultate pritožbenih postopkov ali pa jih izvaja zgolj zaradi tega, ker jih pač mora.
Keywords:pritožba, pritožbeni postopek, policist, pomiritveni postopek, senat
Place of publishing:Maribor
Publisher:[I. Jadrič]
Year of publishing:2009
PID:20.500.12556/DKUM-12140 New window
UDC:34(043.2)
COBISS.SI-ID:3977259 New window
NUK URN:URN:SI:UM:DK:DXAS6IH4
Publication date in DKUM:15.12.2009
Views:3548
Downloads:407
Metadata:XML DC-XML DC-RDF
Categories:PF
:
Copy citation
  
Average score:(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:COMPLAINT PROCEDURE ABOVE THE WORK OF POLICE
Abstract:ABSTRACT The purpose and objective functions, the reader is fully and comprehensively present the current appeal of the work of the police, to acquaint him with the history of the appeal procedure and thus a brief description of all other forms of civic control over the police. In the task described above forms part of the police as part of civic control over these areas, the role of the Ombudsman (hereinafter, Guardian) as the supervisory body, the method of control by the Ministry of Home Affairs (hereinafter: Ministry of Internal Affairs) and non-governmental forms of surveillance. In this respect it is also a brief overview of the control over the police in Great Britain, Italy, Hungary and Croatia. This is followed by a historical review of the arrangements the way of resolving complaints against the police procedures in the Republic of Slovenia from 1967 onwards. In particular, thought it was important to describe and explain the current process of resolving complaints at the first and second stage, and parallel processes, where the conditions for the settlement of a complaint under the Police are not met. In this regard, followed by a detailed description of the current appeal, the light of legal problems. Here are described all the other forms of settlement of "claims" of police work. Represented by the rules concerning the settlement of complaints and any subsequent amendments and additions. To facilitate the understanding of processing of appeals summarized the process of resolving a complaint with the heads of organizational units and the process of resolving complaints at the senate. Of course, the task would have their value, while no attention to the mistakes the current appeal, and its inadequacy oz. toextension, mainly due to the incompatibility of the appeal procedure in the treatment of crime, too many people involved in dealing with complaints of unnecessary administrative and financial costs resulting from this. There is still doubtful impartiality of resolving complaints, however, that the power of resolving complaints passed to the Ministry of the Interior. In the last part are therefore of a descriptive and comparative method of treatment issues related to the meaningfulness of the Senate resolution of complaints, reporting of findings and actions against the police, which arise as a result of the appeal procedures. Here are recorded the findings regarding the hypotheses set and thus exposed to the actual legal issues as the appeal procedure. Regarding the argument that it was in all cases where they were at the same time as an appeal to the senate, in which the suspicion of an offense that is prosecuted ex officio given criminal denunciations, the work of the senate or unnecessary. right, note that the rational and legitimate deals with complaints on the senate only in cases where the Senate is acting as a second stage, that is, when the ease in the first instance fails. Absolutely, this is not acceptable in cases where the complaint arises from the so-called sum officially offence. The presumption that the Head of Chambers in the MIA follow the findings of the rapporteur from the ranks of the police, it was confirmed. Estimates of reporting by members of the Senate are in the vast majority of confirmed so that they can with certainty say that the members of the Senate largely followed the findings of the respondents. Recognizing that compliance or non-compliance with the rules of police conduct oz. the merits of the complaint unfounded or had no effect on the employment measures imposed against the police, you may be interpreted as meaning that police can odreagira appropriate to the results of complaint procedures, or by simply because they can not.
Keywords:complaint, complaint procedure, police officer, process of resolving a complaint with the heads of organizational units, senate


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