| Abstract | Posebne dokazne radnje uređene su Zakonom o kaznenom postupku, kao i Europskom konvencijom za zaštitu ljudskih prava i temeljnih sloboda, Ustavom Republike Hrvatske i Pravilnikom o načinu provođenja posebnih dokaznih radnji. Posebne dokazne radnje su dokazne radnje koje se po svojoj prirodi razlikuju od ostalih dokaznih radnji, između ostalog, po njihovoj intruzivnosti u temeljna ljudska prava građana te po njihovom položaju u postupku jer se one provode prije negoli je formalno započeo kazneni postupak, odnosno u stadiju izvida. One se također razlikuju od izvidnih radnji jer su pretpostavke za njihovo provođenje detaljno uređene Zakonom o kaznenom postupku. Posebne dokazne radnje izvršava policija. Prve dvije posebne dokazne radnje u ZKP-u su radnje telefonskog i računalnog nadzora. Tijekom njih, policija provodi nadzor i presretanje komunikacije u realnom vremenu. Spomenute posebne dokazne radnje imaju određene sličnosti, ali i razlike u pogledu predmeta i načina njihova izvođenja. Kako bi se mogle odrediti posebne dokazne radnje, potrebno je ispunjavanje određenih formalnih i materijalnih pretpostavki. Materijalne pretpostavke su postojanje osnova sumnje, činjenica da se radi o jednom od kataloško navedenih kaznenih djela iz ZKP-a te zahtjev nužnosti. Formalne pretpostavka je postojanje pisanog i detaljno obrazloženog sudskog naloga. Iznimno, ostavljena je mogućnost državnom odvjetniku da, ako ima razloga vjerovati da neće na vrijeme moći pribaviti nalog suca istrage, sam izda taj nalog. U tom slučaju nalog svejedno podliježe naknadnoj sudskoj kontroli jer posebne dokazne radnje na temelju tog naloga smiju trajati samo dvadeseti četiri sata te državni odvjetnik mora, unutar osam sati, nalog dostaviti sucu istrage koji odlučuje o njegovoj zakonitosti. Pitanje zakonitosti provođenja posebnih dokaznih radnji je također bila važna točka u predmetima protiv Republike Hrvatske pred Europskim sudom za ljudska prava. Europski sud za ljudska prava je u predmetima Dragojević, Bašić i Matanović utvrdio povredu čl. 8. Europske konvencije za zaštitu ljudskih prava zbog nedovoljno obrazloženog naloga istražnog suca. Navedene odluke su uvelike utjecale na daljnju praksu domaćih sudova kada se pred njima pojavilo pitanje zakonitosti sudskog naloga. |
| Abstract (english) | Special evidentiary actions are regulated by the Criminal Procedure Act, as well as the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the Constitution of the Republic of Croatia and the Rulebook on the Conduct of Special Evidence Actions. Special evidentiary actions are evidentiary actions that, by their nature, differ from other evidentiary actions, among other things, by their intrusiveness into the basic human rights of citizens and by their position in the procedure because they are carried out before the criminal procedure has formally begun, that is, at the investigation stage. They also differ from investigative actions because the prerequisites for their implementation are regulated in detail by the Criminal Procedure Act. Special evidentiary actions are carried out by the police. The first two special evidentiary actions in the CPA are actions of telephone and computer surveillance. During them, the police conduct surveillance and interception of communications in real time. The mentioned special evidentiary actions have certain similarities, but also differences in terms of the subject matter and the method of their execution. In order to be able to determine special evidentiary actions, it is necessary to fulfill certain formal and material requirements. The material requirements are the existence of grounds for suspicion, the fact that it is one of the cataloged criminal offenses from the CPA, and the requirement of necessity. The formal requirement is the existence of a written and detailed court warrant. Exceptionally, the state attorney is given the option, if he has reason to believe that he will not be able to obtain the order of the investigating judge in time, to issue that order himself. In that case, the order is still subject to subsequent judicial control, because special evidentiary actions based on that order may last only twenty-four hours, and the state attorney must, within eight hours, deliver the court warrant to the investigating judge, who decides on its legality. The question of the legality of conducting special evidentiary actions was also an important point in the cases against the Republic of Croatia before the European Court of Human Rights. In the Dragojević, Bašić and Matanović cases, the European Court of Human Rights found a violation of Art. 8 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights due to the insufficiently explained court warrant. The aforementioned decisions greatly influenced the further practice of domestic courts when the question of the legality of a court warrant arose before them. |
