Uobičajeni povijesni prikazi razvitka tzv. modernoga hrvatskog kaznenog zakonodavstva, neovisno o užoj tematici kojom se bave, započinju u pravilu raščlambom odredaba austrijskog Kaznenog zakona o zločinstvima, prijestupima i prekršajima iz 1852. te čuvenom Derenčinovom Osnovom iz 1879. Manje je poznato da su za vladavine Josipa II. Hrvatska i Slavonija zakratko imale kodificirano kazneno pravo u obliku Općeg zakona o zločinima i njihovom kažnjavanju iz 1787., koji je 1788. bio preveden na hrvatski jezik kao “Opchinska naredba od zlocsinstvah i njihovih pedepsah”. Cilj je rada prikaz i analiza sustava kazni i pravila o njihovom izricanju sadržanih u Opchinskoj naredbi od zlocsinstvah i njihovih pedepsah. U prvom dijelu rada sadržan je sažeti pregled sustava kazni koje su se primjenjivale u Hrvatskoj i Slavoniji do 18. stoljeća, koji je bio relativno kompatibilan s tadašnjom kaznenopravnom praksom u zapadnom dijelu Habsburške monarhije. U drugom dijelu rada izlažu se osnovna obilježja kaznenog zakonika Josipa II., kao i vrste kazni te pravila o njihovom izricanju. U posljednjem dijelu rada razmatra se pitanje ustavnosti uvođenja kaznenog zakonika Josipa II. u Hrvatsku i Slavoniju te problemi koji su se pojavili pri njegovoj primjeni, a ponajprije su se odnosili na nepostojanje nužnih objektivnih pretpostavki za njegovu provedbu.
The paper examines the process of the unification of substantive and procedural criminal law in the Yugoslav state during the interwar period. Despite its unitary and centralistic administrative organization, the Yugoslav state at the time was characterized by legal particularism. Among the territories that encompassed the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes there were substantially different legal systems, and hence, considerably diverse sources of law, since they had been parts of different political and territorial units prior to the unification. After the unification, there were six criminal codes and equally as many codes of criminal procedure in force in the territory of the Kingdom. Reformation and unification of substantive and procedural criminal law became an inevitable task, which was regarded as being urgent because achieving the standardization of the legal system was considered as a step forward, which would facilitate and solidify the unity and the proclaimed centralism that the state sought. Despite the initial efforts towards unification of criminal law that were begun by the beginning of 1919, the process was nevertheless turbulent, slow-going, and inefficient. Such circumstances were deeply conditioned by the permanent political instability, which emerged from continuous changes in the person of the Minister of Justice that always occurred in very short periods. The unification of criminal law was finally achieved only after the proclamation of the Dictatorship in 1929.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.